Biden To The Rescue

I apologize for the first line. That was uncalled for. But the point made in the rest of the post stands.

Students ARE the part of the population most affected by tax breaks for billionaires. And we ALL benefit from an educated population. So the closest thing we can do to being fair is to spread the expense of enjoying those benefits among the rest of us.

 

No the chumps were those begging for relief from the debt.

 

Chumps or not, they are winning. They get off without paying the debts they signed up to repay.

 

I agree. Voters appear to want corrupt government. It is a mind boggler to me.

 

Too many voters expect the Democrats to give them handouts too. That’s the big attraction to voting Democrat. “You deserve a handout from the government because those rich bastards, who don’t pay enough taxes, owe it to you.” The age old slogans for voting Democrat, “The Republicans make the rich man richer and the poor man poorer,” still applies. What is left out is how the Democrats make the poor man’s life better.

 

Governemnt workers, mostly leeches who can't cut it in the market, have become the most highly compensated lowest production employees this country has ever seen.

They are so out of touch with the private sector and comparative wages for similar jobs.

 

You really shouldn't rely on late night comedians to formulate your political views... though that does explain a lot.

 

LMAO.

Have Democrats EVER advocated for lowering taxes? Ever?

 

Just as politicians are self interested, so are voters. It is human nature. You can't legislate human nature. What you can do is keep government out of areas where it doesn't belong. The 10th amendment says federal government can't provide income for individuals unless they are employees. If it is unconstitutional for government to give handouts, and it is, we need to discipline government itself. You can't really blame the voters.

 

Well, I don't support the tax break this millionaire got.
For a few reasons;
First, she should be able to pay her debt.
Second, she's gotten special treatment because she's a "public employee"
Third, she's a millionaire. And got a break she didn't deserve.

Your attack on me about MILLIONAIRE tax breaks is ill placed.

 

Is it? Didn't you just say you don't support the tax break THIS millionaire got?

Myself, I have no idea who this person you mention is or under what conditions she got the loan. So I can't say.

 

You could research it.
She was a guest at brandons sotu, soc cearly brandon doesn't see a problem.

 

Well the fact that everything he said is true makes him credible

 

So your principle about “ personal responsibility” is only when DEMS are not living up to their obligation.

When the richest banks in the world became greedy and made risky loan and take down the entire world economy, "personal responsibility" should set aside for greater good. Got it.

In another word, your principle is only applicable only when it is convenient for you. Got it.

 

You are desperately trying to draw a connection where one does not exist.

We all have differing political desires. We all vote for people that most closely pushes our ideals with no candidate being perfect for any one individual.If you agree with everything that comes from a single politician, you are blindly following rather than exercising any sort of independent judgment.

With that reality in mind, you are trying to compare voting for the lesser of two evils in a situation where both legit alternatives that year supported an issue that I opposed (Tarp), to possessing a political desire on a specific issue which in this case is that you want to see taxpayers pay off student loans for people that had legally signed to pay back those loans.

Since you never agree 100% with any candidate, there will always be things they support that you do not. Voting for the lesser of two evils is not analogous in any way to holding a political desire on a specific issue.

I know you are desperately trying to pretend these are the same thing, but they are not.

Sorry.

This is not a close call.

 

Not that simple. The supreme court told him not to do it and he did it anyway. Hopefully the supreme court will figure out a consequence for him.

 

I remember when Rick Santelli of CNBC railed against the idea of helping mortgage holders affected by the housing meltdown caused by Bush's Great Recession. He referred to the idea as moral hazard. What I don't recall is him railing against the billions of dollars in bailout money that went to the big banks who's reckless behavior in large part caused the crisis.

I once again invite anyone interested in gaining some perspective on the issue to watch this..........

 

sure. bring it on!

 

This discussion is about your support for Student Loan forgiveness and the subsequent discussion as to whether that is wise, fair, moral etc.

If that discussion were going how you liked, you surely would be laser-focused upon the righteousness of your position. Being that you have instead opted to be laser focused on this strawman to that discussion, I surmise that you must think arguing this strawman has any bearing on the discussion of Student Loan forgiveness and that it somehow justifies your support of what I would describe as fundamental unfairness.

I am confident that you are wrong and that your deception is as plain as day. At any rate, we have both made our argument and it is time to let the reader decide for themselves. I do not subscribe to the notion of continually repeating the same thing over and over with slightly different words in an endless loop spanning several days. It is time to move on.

 

It’s a good idea because there isn’t a dollar spent enriching Democrat constituencies and voting blocs that they don’t like.

Hence why not a single Lib here dislikes it. Free money for the trash idiots they’ve trained up to be their next generation rent a mob

 

The hypocrisy is in full display here.

Someone who believes it is ok to pay 700 billion dollars to a greedy bank then lecture a single-mom-school teacher, who makes 32K USD per year, "you should take personal responsibility" is laughable.

If you truly believe "personal responsibility", you wouldn't vote for a party who pays $700 billion to banks year after year and hide behind "I have other priorities to consider".

You don’t believe in personal responsibility. You use that as a sword to attack DEMS.

 

Don't hold your breath.

 

While I am left to wonder whether you understand the irony that TARP was a loan that was paid back in full with interest, this conversation is still played out and is in ridiculous strawman territory once you turn it into a discussion of TARP. People that turn to strawmen are basically never holding a strong position in an argument which is why they do so. It is sort of like putting all the dice back into the cup for your second spin in Yahtzee.

At any rate, I am confident in the belief that I have more than proven my point, and you certainly cannot say you have not had time to express your position that you have repeated now several times.

It is time to let the reader decide. Move along.

 

Oh I am not. GOP is more interested to eat their own and oust their own speaker of the house because he wants keep the Government open rather then GOP Wishlist – impeach Biden.