Democratic Debate

Quote Originally Posted by anatta View Post

'Exactly. you don't want student debt work hard for a scholarship,or find a trade ( much better then liberal arts)
free college just means people will go to avoid work ( in some cases) and get free subsidies

why in the hell should we pay for other kids babysitting? again don't have kids or acquire debt you can't afford"

High five, anatta.

They want you to provide free lunches to other parents children, too.
 
https://www.ancestry.com › search › collections › flhg-revwarbountylandg...
"After the Revolutionary War, the federal government awarded bounty lands to citizens and soldiers for services rendered. In its simplest form, this involved the exchange of free land for military service."

These brave men, many of whom gave up arms and legs in battle, have earned this.

Help with college is a way to acknowledge their sacrifice and thank them for it. Both are greatly appreciated.

Any loons on the left want to dispute this.

Speak right up.
 
TOP said:
No problem with free child care with proof of employment....
Vocational education programs, for sure....they're out there...people (kids and aduts( should be taking advantage of all the opportunities....but they don't come looking for you...you actually have to go to them....
Let's also focus on Work ethic..... 5 people called off yesterday from one of the places we work with.... because there was a "holiday"....?????
Click to expand...

Are those providing the care doing it for nothing? It's not free.
 
Getin the ring said:
A lot of great points, and ideas, but
55 is very young with at least 20 and probably 25 or 30 years of life left x that social security check.
Click to expand...

True...however, the primary reason older workers don't retire early is because of health care. That would get solved with M4A.

The other main reason older workers don't retire early is because of retirement savings. That gets solved by expanding SS and lowering the eligibility age.

Boomers leaving the workforce creates room for younger generations to advance. It also solves the current labor issue; people have multiple jobs because their primary job doesn't pay enough. Why? Because of legacy workers preventing advancement for younger ones.

Plus, it probably sucks having to work into your 60's and 70's if you're not an executive.
 
LV426 said:
True...however, the primary reason older workers don't retire early is because of health care. That would get solved with M4A.

The other main reason older workers don't retire early is because of retirement savings. That gets solved by expanding SS and lowering the eligibility age.

Boomers leaving the workforce creates room for younger generations to advance. It also solves the current labor issue; people have multiple jobs because their primary job doesn't pay enough. Why? Because of legacy workers preventing advancement for younger ones.

Plus, it probably sucks having to work into your 60's and 70's if you're not an executive.
Click to expand...

Always wanting the government to do for you because you refuse to do for yourself.

How would you know what working is like?
 
Hello Micawber,

Micawber said:
Seriously? I am not for free college, but I manage to do it without calling college "babysitting" and assuming people go to avoid work.

The fact is people who graduate make 10s of thousands per year for life over those who don't. People who are babysat or slack off flunk out.

Man you are just a big ball of prejudices. I don't want to pay for others' college because I had to pay for mine, and repay a few student loans,
and I did. Was the GI bill a bunch of baby losers avoiding work? 1/2 of everyone's dads went to college on the GI Bill and therefore families had
nice homes, cars and braces for their kids and GOOD JOBS
Click to expand...

But college costs a lot more these days. It didn't used to saddle one with a mortgage sized debt.
 
Getin the ring said:
I'd rather see more of a 'more jobs created' to fill the need rather than vacate jobs early to make room philosophy
Click to expand...

Well, one way we can achieve that is with the Green New Deal. I know you don't like it, but tens of millions of people can be put to work -and get decent wages- rebuilding and retrofitting our infrastructure. That's really the best way to create the most jobs fastest. Bernie estimates that the GND would create 20 millon jobs, but I think that's conservative. I think the actual jobs created by the GND would be double. We have a lot of roads, tunnels, and bridges that need to be fixed. We have a lot of buildings that need climate retro-fitting. We have a power grid that is aging and vulnerable. All that needs fixing, and all that can be fixed by employing people at good wages.


Getin the ring said:
The government is watching our numbers carefully, they have moved the goal post a lot over the years, and never toward younger retirement.
And they are not going to lower the age of retirement , ever. imo
Click to expand...

Maybe. But I think that we have to think in those terms because automation is eating up many jobs and narrowing the job market for job seekers.


Getin the ring said:
I think there are a lot more people than your stat indicates with a lot less than 250k saved for retirement who are at or very near retirement. I personally know
a lot of people who have taken money out, borrowed money from and otherwise pilfered their retirement savings.
My personal philosophy is to use your real estate property equity as the gap filler. You have to live somewhere anyway and it certainly has a bigger safer return than most investments.
Click to expand...

Yes, but what happens in the event of another housing crash, which is entirely likely? I also agree that $250K savings stat seems inflated...but that's just the average, likely being skewed at the top by high earners with tens of millions saved in retirement accounts already. Only half of all American workers have retirement savings. That's why we need to bolster SS.


Getin the ring said:
And remember my first point, SS is based on what you put into it. a person who spends his or her life in low paying jobs obviously has chosen to live in lesser means.
And will live in lesser means after retirement also.
I'm not saying SS is perfect or by any means a livable wage. But it is fair, is all I was saying, not racist, or catered to the privileged.
Click to expand...

I can appreciate that perspective, but one thing you have to keep in mind is that the amount you paid into Social Security is always going to end up being less than what you get from the program simply because of inflation. The $1 you paid in taxes to SS in 1989 doesn't have the same value as the $1 you get back from SS in 2019.


and any attempt to reward someone equally who has not contributed equally is a move toward socialism, just as taking more of some ones money simply because they have more is also.
We are not America because of socialism, we are who we are because of capitalism.
Click to expand...

We're where we are because of both. But too often, capitalism needs socialism to bail it out. Like the $30B we just spent in socialism bailing out farmers because of the dumb Trade War. Or TARP. Or the S&L bailout. Or the auto bailout. Or when we bailed out the airline companies. When you start thinking about this in terms of punitive or reward, I think you're missing the point. The point isn't to reward someone who has not contributed equally (and by what standard is "equal contribution" anyway?), but to encourage labor elasticity by incentivizing people to leave the workforce early. Again, what are the reasons someone would work until they're 65? Health care and retirement savings. If they didn't have to worry about either, then they wouldn't feel compelled to work until age 65....unless they really love their job, but in my experience, most people don't like their jobs and are only doing them for the health care and/or paycheck.



And lets not forget for one second that the Champion supporter of socialism right now (The Bern) is in fact a 1%er because of capitalism. :wink2:
Click to expand...

Is he, though? I wouldn't put Senator Sanders in the same boat as Zuckerberg, Steyer, or Blankfein. Bernie made his money by writing a book. People in Europe write books and make money too. Just because he made money off the royalties of the content he created doesn't make him a hypocrite.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Micawber,



But college costs a lot more these days. It didn't used to saddle one with a mortgage sized debt.
Click to expand...

Who is forcing anyone to go to college?

Between my wife, myself, and our two children, we have eight degree, several of which are advanced. Not one penny in debt exists as a result.
 
Hello anatta,

anatta said:
that would definately help . But it won't happen. there will be cries of "you can't penalize students for failing"
Click to expand...

Why don't you argue against what people actually say instead of something imaginary?

I think college should be free but only to those who demonstrate they can get the grades to justify it.

The only college debt should be placed on this who DO drop out.
 
LV426 said:
Well, one way we can achieve that is with the Green New Deal. I know you don't like it, but tens of millions of people can be put to work -and get decent wages- rebuilding and retrofitting our infrastructure. That's really the best way to create the most jobs fastest. Bernie estimates that the GND would create 20 millon jobs, but I think that's conservative. I think the actual jobs created by the GND would be double. We have a lot of roads, tunnels, and bridges that need to be fixed. We have a lot of buildings that need climate retro-fitting. We have a power grid that is aging and vulnerable. All that needs fixing, and all that can be fixed by employing people at good wages.




Maybe. But I think that we have to think in those terms because automation is eating up many jobs and narrowing the job market for job seekers.




Yes, but what happens in the event of another housing crash, which is entirely likely? I also agree that $250K savings stat seems inflated...but that's just the average, likely being skewed at the top by high earners with tens of millions saved in retirement accounts already. Only half of all American workers have retirement savings. That's why we need to bolster SS.




I can appreciate that perspective, but one thing you have to keep in mind is that the amount you paid into Social Security is always going to end up being less than what you get from the program simply because of inflation. The $1 you paid in taxes to SS in 1989 doesn't have the same value as the $1 you get back from SS in 2019.




We're where we are because of both. But too often, capitalism needs socialism to bail it out. Like the $30B we just spent in socialism bailing out farmers because of the dumb Trade War. Or TARP. Or the S&L bailout. Or the auto bailout. Or when we bailed out the airline companies. When you start thinking about this in terms of punitive or reward, I think you're missing the point. The point isn't to reward someone who has not contributed equally (and by what standard is "equal contribution" anyway?), but to encourage labor elasticity by incentivizing people to leave the workforce early. Again, what are the reasons someone would work until they're 65? Health care and retirement savings. If they didn't have to worry about either, then they wouldn't feel compelled to work until age 65....unless they really love their job, but in my experience, most people don't like their jobs and are only doing them for the health care and/or paycheck.





Is he, though? I wouldn't put Senator Sanders in the same boat as Zuckerberg, Steyer, or Blankfein. Bernie made his money by writing a book. People in Europe write books and make money too. Just because he made money off the royalties of the content he created doesn't make him a hypocrite.
Click to expand...

He didn't create it if you believe the black POS that was President.
 
Darth Omar said:
Arguably the greatest political irony of our time is a supposedly racist president presiding over an economy that has benefited so many minorities.

And his supposedly racist supporters cheer him on for it.
Click to expand...
Says trump. NO data to support this
 
Earl said:
Pardon me while I hand your argument a debilitating blow. No disrespect, of course. But I must clear the air.

High taxes are disincentives for the wealthy to start a company or expand their existing companies. American companies do not bring them back to America with crushing taxes.

.
Click to expand...
LMAO. So then we should be swimming in high paying jobs, given the fact that nobody pays taxes now
 
LV426 said:
What narrative is fake?

M4A is funded by a 4% tax on income for individuals, and a 7.5% tax on income for businesses.

Right now, the average worker pays 12% of their income for health care that is restricted within their provider network.

So is 4% > or < 12%?
Click to expand...
Self employed people now pay app. 16% FICA (self employment tax), and would add another 11.5% if M4A is passed. That's a bit of a flaw in the plan.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello Micawber,



But college costs a lot more these days. It didn't used to saddle one with a mortgage sized debt.
Click to expand...

True that. But a mortgage didn't cost what a mortgage does now either. My parents bought for $27,000 and sold for $800,000.

My house cost me about $800k. Don't I have a claim for a free house by the same token?

They signed the note. The note might have been too large, but it was a negotiable instrument with a simple payment due.

I had a client with a side issue. Seems granny wanted to pay for poor little rich girl's Pepperdine education. They asked me to negotiate
a debt of about 300K. I had a warchest. IOW I could pay it all off lump sum. That's what we had to do because there is no SOL
on a government loan, and this person was not even in default. She certainly wasn't much of a hardship case. They cut a check for
balance in full. No wiggle room. Should she have gotten a free Pepperdine education? I advised against a strategic default to qualify for an
interest waiver, because they had the money to simply pay and not ruin perfect credit.

At some point life is not fair. That point might just include people who knowingly overpay for a college education. Forgive the interest, pay the nut.
 
Cypress said:
I think debt forgiveness is merited. My generation basically went to college for almost next-to-nothing. University of California at the time was about 800 bucks tuition and fees for the whole quarter. Peanuts to pay for a top tier public university.

The millenials are being saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in debt - and thus a serf-like indentured servitude to debt for years on end. That is something us old farts did not have to deal with.

Subsidized or free college, university, or trade school makes eminent sense to me, for a civilized 21st century nation.
Click to expand...
Yea...it was much cheaper back when a degree meant something.

We already have debt forgiveness programs for many who opt to work in depressed areas for a certain number of years. Given that a degree no longer guarantees gainful employment, I would like to see a bigger push for trade schools, and job creation in the public sector.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top