College loans through government Videos

+DarthVBrookZ Agreed. 

+Scotto Wd I know my friend I studied economics. I have a degree in economics and access to the same information you have . There is no secret information that you have. I know your argument because I think critically. We just have a difference in ideology.

+DarthVBrookZ It's one thing to suggest the powers that be should help out the poor and less fortunate of our society. It's admirable to do so but then there is reality and the bigger picture. Nothing is free, someone is paying for it and that someone is most often the tax payer. When the government got involved with higher education by providing individuals with student loans the colleges raised the cost substantially. The college institutions did this because they knew the student loans were guaranteed. mMeaning "They get paid no matter what" and if the student can's pay it back to the government it's "Not our problem". From an economic point of view, the united states has what is known as a fiat currency or debt based currency. In order for our economy to function people must take on debt. Give people a college education paid for by the tax payer and guess what happens to the economy. (Reality check) Lets also keep in mind that we live in an oligarchy and not a free and vibrant democracy. There is a video you might check out when you get a chance -  (911 to JFK everything is a rich mans trick). It's an excellent documentary about the wealthy and how they financially take advantage of the sheeple.    

+Scotto Wd well that's very admirable my friend. Sometimes I'll listen to conservative talk radio to see what they're saying on the right. I thought Thom was kind of a badass here to be honest.

+DarthVBrookZ I like to look at the macrocosm of social issues. 

+Scotto Wd that's cool though. Are you more rightward leaning and just watch it objectively?

+DarthVBrookZ No, I watch Tom spew his bullshit.  

+Scotto Wd I guess you're the troll today. Welcome troll!

+DarthVBrookZIt's true, much of society is in a precarious position right now. I think the job that has been done to "save" the economy post '08 has perhaps been paraded around too much / prematurely and, like you said, the sub 5% unemployment figures that are often championed today do not tell the whole story of what many people face in terms of job prospects. And in fact, I unfortunately see things getting worse before they get better.

+sausagemcbean ya I agree. The industrial revolution gave way to the Information Age and thwarted its human capital (us) to be more of a knowledge based economy like you said. But in order to achieve some sort of upward mobility to get the comforts my parents had in the 1960's for example, as far as making a living wage goes, it's more likely on average to achieve a salary like they could at GM that will offer healthcare, security and a decent standard of living if you have knowledge, actual value to add to a business or service. Unfortunately a lot of the jobs created in the post-crash economy are low wage jobs. Forgive me if you're already aware of that. Now a lot of us are back to working 50-60 hours a week at maybe 2 jobs that still don't qualify us for healthcare, after FDR already passed the Fair Labor Standards Act. The industrial revolution should have freed us from tedious labor so we can ultimately work less but more efficiently and still have a good standard of living.

+DarthVBrookZI agree that if money is going to be taxed it should definitely go towards more productive things than killing Arabs and subsidizing factory farms that are destroying our environment. I would argue though that, the reason high school diplomas have lost their value is because of grade inflation caused by the idea that everyone needs to go to college, and even to some extent, graduate high school. Graduating high school used to be a legitimate accomplishment and if you look at any elementary or high school curriculum before 1970, it's the equivalent of some college courses today. I have far too many friends who were funneled into college after high school without really thinking about it because the common mindset today is that you need to go to college if you want to be successful, which isn't necessarily true and their generic degrees didn't get them anything. But also, I think with automation, society is moving towards a more knowledge based economy. Large portions of the populace can't drop out of high school anymore to go work in a factory making 3 or 4 times the minimum wage simply by being a hard worker. There certainly is a dichotomy today that divides jobs into either requiring a large amount of education and skills, and being totally automated/minimum wage.

+sausagemcbean ya that's a bit of a different argument but a good one. My response would be I pay taxes and I'd rather have my money go to my higher education than go to killing Iraqis and corporate welfare. Not to mention having a more educated populace that takes part in our democracy. You could also argue that a high school diploma has lost its value over the years, and now a 4 year degree is the equivalent of a high school diploma 30 years ago or so.

+DarthVBrookZI know this may start a whole different argument that we don't necessarily need to have, but the government simply handing over tens of thousands of dollars to tens of millions of people with the goal of "stimulating the economy" is not really a realistic goal. That money has to come from somewhere, it doesn't just enter the economy from thin air. And using that same logic, you should also support the government handing out tens of thousands of dollars to every citizen for no reason. Lots of people have various types of debt and I'm sure they could all use some extra free cash that they would then collectively use to "stimulate the economy". From the demand side point of view, the economy doesn't care where these people get their extra cash from, so your argument would have to concede that handing out free cash to everyone would have an equally positive effect.I see your point about marijuana but I think there is a key difference between that and college debt. There is nothing unethical about a person taking on debt to pay for their post-secondary education, but there is something very unethical about someone being locked up for simply possessing the wrong type of plant. One could imagine a hypothetical society where all schooling was privately run and people paid for their entire education out of pocket, and there would be nothing inherently wrong with that if that was simply how the society was structured from the get-go. But I would argue that under no circumstances would it be ethical for a society to lock people in jail for having marijuana on them. Paying off student debt would be done, as you said, for calculated economic reasons, whereas legalizing marijuana and applying the new law retroactively would be done in an attempt to atone for a historically grievous injustice.

We could also extrapolate the ethics of that argument in terms of marijuana legalization. If somebody is serving 5-10 years for possession of marijuana and all of a sudden marijuana becomes legalized, should that individual still serve his time because he knowingly broke the law?

+sausagemcbean I see your argument also and I agree in some respects.

+sausagemcbean you can make the argument that the student debt bubble is the next economic collapse. Also, the debt they've knowingly incurred, for the crime of wanting to receive a higher education, reduces consumer consumption and stagnates the economy. If students could spend that money toward goods and services instead of paying the debt it could result in economic growth, they'd have more disposable income to support their local economy. Your argument is more from an ethical point of view and mine is more economic.

+DarthVBrookZOkay, but that's not the question here. If the government just came out and said they would pay for everyone's college going forward, that would be one thing and that's arguably a good idea. But on what grounds do people who have already willingly taken on debt have to demand that the government pay their personal debts for them?

+sausagemcbean investing in human capital as an economic resource. It's a good return on investment, especially when we must compete in a modern global economy.

+DarthVBrookZWhat is?

+sausagemcbean it's profitable