Biden’s latest student loan forgiveness plan would cost taxpayers $475B, analysis says

Well, in point of fact, we do not know what portion of the loan forgiveness is fiat financed.

 

So are you ready to persecute Christians who want to be Christ like because of the failures of a few who pale in comparison to the general population of secularists? Perhaps it's because true believers set their standards higher than you do that you would deal with them so harshly.

 

just saying there are good and bad Christians, just like there are good and bad in every other group

swearing on a Bible doesn't mean one is good

are you willing to persecute good people because they do not swear on a bible?

 

I disagree, but i wonder where conservatives got the idea that corps dont pay taxes. I am going by their logic on this. It works for me to pass of my costs, dont see why it wouldnt for large corporations that have a willing consumer base.

The math checks out honestly.

 

Unfortunately, corporations can donate to a political campaign and get a no-bid government contract in return. If you pay taxes, you fund corporations.

Welfare spending may lead to less welfare spending!!!

They love to help people into a life of poverty as long as it brings in votes. Why have voting machines when we could just use ATMs and let them get the cash immediately!!!

Student A worked through college and entered the workforce with little or no debt.
Student B smoked pot and was the beer pong champion.

How can you justify moving the burden from student B to student A?

 

Democrat policies helped me and im not in a life of poverty. AA even got me into the electric trade, and not over anyone, AA opened more seats then would have been available. The AA sponsored open seats were the only merit based spots. Typically they use a legacy based system for their apprenticeship.

 

What's "fair" some... is unfair to others.

 

Equal treatment under the law is what I am saying.

 

I would question their integrity in that not seeing anything greater than themselves they wish to hold power. Granted, many feign faith to gain power such as our current President and others, but that is on them.

 

That term generally refers to the courts and juris prudence.
I'm not a tax guru, but my wife is. Its impossible to ask her a question and get a simple answer on the question of taxes. For example, I once asked her why capital gains (money made on investments) should be taxed at a lower rate than income you work for and EARN. The answer turned out to be logical. When someone invests, they are taking a risk. There needs to be some incentive to take that risk. And investing is essential to our economy. Most questions about tax have answers which aren't as simple as they would appear to be.

 

You are honest in your assessment I don't doubt, but Capital gains is a tax on money you already earned. Your wife studies tax law and I don't doubt she knows her stuff....however if we went to a National Sales tax that was substantial enough to cover necessary costs of limited government, then those that spend more would pay more. Perhaps we would not need to pay tax consultants and there would be no loopholes. It would, by nature be a "progressive tax".

 

not swearing on a bible doesn't mean you do not have other beliefs and it definitely doesn't mean one will tell the truth or is a good person

the last President would be a good example of that, bad people can swear on the bible too

 

You can try to pass of costs, but without sufficient demand, you won't be able to. You will be forced to eat the diminished return, accept the loss (which you might do if you anticipate increased sales at a later date due to other factors), or discontinue selling the product, or find a way to reduce the cost of the product despite the tax increase.

Thing is, it's consumer demand that dictates the price. The vendor finds the price that creates an equilibrium, i.e., the price point that yields the most profit on total sales on a given product or service. That is determined by demand.

I've owned retail AND service businesses, and that has been my real world experience. I don't know what books say, I leaned business by doing it,

 

Well, the issue your wife raises is the conservative viewpoint, It's not logical to me. I've owned stocks, I've owned businesses, and I do not agree with that viewpoint at all.

I would counter that by saying potential profit is, itself, the incentive. If someone invests, and loses money, they can write it off. Working for wages less than you are worth can't be written off. Being in business, or earning money from investments gets you all sorts of deductions a working man or woman is not privy to, so why should unearned income be taxed at a lower rate than that of the working man?

No one should pay a lower tax rate on unearned income than the working men and women, period. It's immoral, in my view,

 

It's so good to know that the House controls the purse strings... and the House is Republican!

 

Public policy should never be designed on anecdote, especially politically charged assumptions about what the facts are.

You claim a policy that helps someone buys votes.

But that policy is supported by far more people whom the policy does not directly benefit, as well, so how does it buy their vote?

You see, Doofen, when the rubber hits the road, your tired, old conservative tropes fall apart under scrutiny.

A friend of mine got free training to be an IT professional under California's ROP program, and now he's earning over $100k per year, and the state and federal governments are recouping the cost of his training in taxes.

That's liberalism at it's finest.

I voted for that program because it's the right thing to do, though I never benefited from the program. If a program lifts individuals, it raises the aggregate morale of the society, and helps all of us, indirectly. it moves us towards a 'more perfect union'. Remember the Declaration of independence and the bit about a 'more perfect union' ? Well, liberals are just continuing in the spirit of that document upon which our country was founded.

Funny thing, the only people trying to prevent us from achieving it are conservatives and republicans.

 

Libs love the idea of burdening others to get a free ride themselves. These bums assumed a loan promising to pay it back. They lied. Now I must pay off THEIR LOANS!! The miserable bums.... Will they pay off MY MORTGAGE?
GET THESE COMMUNISTS OUT!!!!!

 

Two points for thought.

Point the first. The action, if carried out, would also benefit specific taxpayers to the tune of $475B.

Point the second. It's not unusual to hear complaints about the US helping those in other countries which end in the line, 'How about taking care of Americans first?'

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

 

Unless Democrats are selling freshly dead children as a means to push their anti-gun agenda, of course.

That some might vote for the people who created a policy, even thought they do not benefit from said policy, does not change the fact that votes -are- bought from those that -did- benefit - as intended, and as was the claim.
Thus, the claim that "a policy that helps someone buys votes" survives your... challenge... such as it was.

You see, Silva, when the rubber hits the road, your tired, old liberal tropes fall apart under scrutiny.

 

In my mind, this is about as unfair as unfair can get. What makes these students today so special, so privileged, that they get their loans forgiven? What about all those past students who have paid off their student loans? They fulfilled their obligations, why can’t these students today do the same? What about students in the future who take out loans? They’ll have pay them back. This discriminates big time to former students who paid off their loans and future students who will take out loans and must pay them back.


You can tell these special, privilege students to, well you get it. It seems today’s college students are in a special class all by themselves, the privileged few. Where hard working Americans, usually making a lot less then these privileged one will make with their college education pay for the forgiveness of their loans. Something is totally wrong here.

 

I’ll tell you what makes them special. They’re a large enough voting base now to swing states. Buying votes is illegal and that’s what this equates to in my opinion.

 

Given your earlier comments about how the cost of goods sold have nothing to do with the price a product can fetch on the market, what is the distinction you're making between price and "worth" here?

 

That’s nothing to brag about.

 

So do you suggest that the ones that initially proposed that our Presidents and others swear on the Bible were just full of crap? Or do you think they had the idea that moral people will be serious about their commitments if a power greater than themselves (God) is invoked? Perhaps you think their wisdom was "old fashioned" and your ideas are "new and enlightened" with a new morality all of your own.
Followers of Jesus understand "all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God". There is a sense of humility there. We understand we are not perfect therefore we invoke God,who is Holy, in our decisions. The Godless don't grasp that concept. They believe "they have arrived". All that exists is between their own two ears. That is why they can come up with a concept "we should forgive student loans". It makes them feel good. They cannot even conceive that "government" has to "steal" from it's hard working citizens, many who have paid their loans, to make that happen.
This doesn't seem to be anything you would grasp. I just explained my position.

 

as you have shown, some are easily fooled by swearing on the bible, so they were just taking advantage of those easily fooled

do you think Trump is a better person cause he swore on a bible?

Trump raised the debt in 4 years, more than any other President had in 4 years