It’s the same metaphor though. Helping a group of people doesn’t hurt a different group. Did they make a decision based on whether they expected to get help: yes. Does providing that help against that expectation hurt them: no.
It’s an especially good metaphor because nobody is even talking about taxing tradies to fund the relief.
Any solution to a problem that’s existed in the past is going to be unfair to those who had the problem in the past. That can’t be an argument against doing something now. Some blue collar workers could turn around and use the improved system to go back and get degrees, and an improved economy from less people in debt will indirectly help others.
didn’t feel like they could afford the loans, so went to work instead.
That’s me, I did that. If I’m what’s stopping it I don’t think loans for horrible interest rates should be given to a jobless teenager and if you took that risk that’s too bad you didn’t make better investment decisions. Those loans did more harm than good and canceling them now will help reverse that a bit.
The underlying issue is that education is expensive and it should be free. I don’t understand American’s obsession with keeping the public stupid but I’m sure you’ll defend it.
Right and that’s a great thought, we should do that; just like we should nationalize healthcare and immediately eliminate private health insurers and PBMs and all the other dozen middle men that make health care more than 10 times as expensive in the US than abroad. But massive sweeping reforms are massively unpopular amongst the wealthy, and the wealthy through use of undemocratic systems of control like the Senate and Electoral college can wield supermajority control of the government despite only having support of 20% of the people – so it’s not happening until wider reform happens, and during that time tens of millions of people are being crushed by a trolly.
To really push this metaphor it’s ‘do we invent planes so people can stop being tied to train tracks, or do we stop the trolley.’
It’s not an either or situation, it’s not a zero sum game, we can do both, but we absolutely should do one regardless of our choice to do the other.
“You can only help people if everyone gets the exact same amount of help”, is the dumbest argument on the planet. And I’d challenge you’re premise that blue collar works are paying for white collar workers to go to school. With progressive taxation, really it is upper middle class and wealthy people that are paying for that school regardless of education background. Very little of that money is coming from the blue collar workers that aren’t brining in a lot of money. If $2 of Joe the cashiers taxes go to paying for education but $20,000 of random rich guys taxes go to bettering education, I really don’t think that is such an unfair system like you make it seem. The lack of a debt burden on a large subset of society ends up benefitting everyone, including the janitor or cashier.
I agree it should be fixed, but our present legislative branch is incapable of taking on that kind of progress, they can barely wipe their own ass. If that’s the best they can do I think it is still better than doing nothing at all. “ploy to win votes” is another way of saying doing what people want, or what they are literally paid to do. It’s funny to try and propagandize that into a negative thing.
deleted by creator
You can stop the trolly anytime, but it’s unfair for the people not on the train tracks.
deleted by creator
It’s the same metaphor though. Helping a group of people doesn’t hurt a different group. Did they make a decision based on whether they expected to get help: yes. Does providing that help against that expectation hurt them: no.
It’s an especially good metaphor because nobody is even talking about taxing tradies to fund the relief.
deleted by creator
Can’t they do both? Do they still need to kill all the people on the tracks? That part of the argument isn’t coherent.
deleted by creator
It’s not a substitute for actual action. But in the meantime, it’s at least better than doing nothing.
deleted by creator
Any solution to a problem that’s existed in the past is going to be unfair to those who had the problem in the past. That can’t be an argument against doing something now. Some blue collar workers could turn around and use the improved system to go back and get degrees, and an improved economy from less people in debt will indirectly help others.
That’s me, I did that. If I’m what’s stopping it I don’t think loans for horrible interest rates should be given to a jobless teenager and if you took that risk that’s too bad you didn’t make better investment decisions. Those loans did more harm than good and canceling them now will help reverse that a bit.
deleted by creator
The underlying issue is that education is expensive and it should be free. I don’t understand American’s obsession with keeping the public stupid but I’m sure you’ll defend it.
deleted by creator
Right and that’s a great thought, we should do that; just like we should nationalize healthcare and immediately eliminate private health insurers and PBMs and all the other dozen middle men that make health care more than 10 times as expensive in the US than abroad. But massive sweeping reforms are massively unpopular amongst the wealthy, and the wealthy through use of undemocratic systems of control like the Senate and Electoral college can wield supermajority control of the government despite only having support of 20% of the people – so it’s not happening until wider reform happens, and during that time tens of millions of people are being crushed by a trolly.
To really push this metaphor it’s ‘do we invent planes so people can stop being tied to train tracks, or do we stop the trolley.’
It’s not an either or situation, it’s not a zero sum game, we can do both, but we absolutely should do one regardless of our choice to do the other.
deleted by creator
Why would people continue to get student loans if school was free?
deleted by creator
Easy, give everyone the amount of the person with the most student loan debt.
deleted by creator
Make the ones giving out these loans responsible for funding the program. After all, they’re responsible for its necessity in the first place.
deleted by creator
“You can only help people if everyone gets the exact same amount of help”, is the dumbest argument on the planet. And I’d challenge you’re premise that blue collar works are paying for white collar workers to go to school. With progressive taxation, really it is upper middle class and wealthy people that are paying for that school regardless of education background. Very little of that money is coming from the blue collar workers that aren’t brining in a lot of money. If $2 of Joe the cashiers taxes go to paying for education but $20,000 of random rich guys taxes go to bettering education, I really don’t think that is such an unfair system like you make it seem. The lack of a debt burden on a large subset of society ends up benefitting everyone, including the janitor or cashier.
deleted by creator
I agree it should be fixed, but our present legislative branch is incapable of taking on that kind of progress, they can barely wipe their own ass. If that’s the best they can do I think it is still better than doing nothing at all. “ploy to win votes” is another way of saying doing what people want, or what they are literally paid to do. It’s funny to try and propagandize that into a negative thing.
deleted by creator