556
submitted 1 year ago by Odusei@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

The predominantly ludicrous lawmaker from Georgia did Biden a solid this weekend, telling Republicans the Democratic president is fiendishly attempting to make people's lives better.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Cough.....student loan debt....cough

[-] OctopusKurwa@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Imagine supporting an ideology that has been nothing but demonstrably harmful to most people except for a tiny handful.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

They not only are against student loan forgiveness they also support Tony Blair. Yes that one, the war criminal who helped hand over prisoners to be waterboarded.

Don't believe me? Go visit any of the websites that they infest.

[-] MrCrankyBastard@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

While I am by no means a Clinton fan, a huge part of the student loan hellscape is less Clinton active malice/stupidity and more Gingrich and company leverage - AKA the usual right-wing obstructionist bullshit that people gave them the numbers to force through. It wasn't helped by Clinton's need to cave due to getting sloppy toppies in the Oval Office and the huge stink Newt and Starr raised to get their way...or the Perot school of 'fuck you I got mine' Libertarians who apparently needed placating to keep the Dems in office.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Yes because they held a gun to his head and ordered him to not veto it.

Neoliberals don't like student loan forgiveness, they like Clinton who made it very hard to get it forgiven.

[-] MrCrankyBastard@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

No gun is required when so-called self-interests are threatened. He shouldn't have caved, but then he also shouldn't have given credence to the welfare and social safety net talking points from the Reich wing. And the CBC damned well shouldn't have gone along with bullshit 'tough on crime' narratives.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

He didn't veto it and no one forced him. There really is nothing else to say. The neoliberals knew full well the disaster that would follow but not only ignored it they also actively encouraged it.

Anyone with brains could see that if tuition is rising faster than income and you make student loans inescapable you would end up with mountains of debt. The only two options I can see

  1. They couldn't see the obvious in which case they should have zero power.

  2. They knew this would happen and wanted it.

[-] MrCrankyBastard@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I don't completely disagree, though the argument bears the advantage of hindsight. My suspicion is that the balance of the problem stemmed from the typical right wing obsession with the desire to obliterate the social safety net but the lack of pushback was due to an explicit underestimating of the scope of resulting fuckery - see also those black politicians who didn't push back on Tough on Crime bullshit. People made bad calls out of panic and circumstances, and fixing the problems are far simpler onbpaper than in application, particularly because of those who see the situation as a feature, not a bug.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Student loan debt balooning is caused by too easy access to loans coupled with too little state funding

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

And of course you are not supportive of forgiveness for it. Evidently you are going to continue to evade this issue.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I support forgiveness for student loans based roughly on income level, sure. I don't think we should be subsidizing wealthy kids more than we already do.

It should go, basically in order:

  • college dropouts
  • government employees (teachers, social workers etc)
  • others with similar income level and undergrad degrees

Then finally, mostly unforgiven

  • post-grad degrees
  • wealthy families

I'm very much in favor of progressive tax and social benefits.

I'm sorry, are you under the opinion that Democrats don't push for student loan forgiveness? Biden literally took it to the Supreme Court lmao.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Not a neoliberal if you support loan forgiveness. Which you only sorta do so guess you are only sorta one.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Brilliant rebuttal..sorry you don't know what your own movement believes.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago
[-] SCB@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Did you like skip my earlier post or what's up

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Admit that your bff voted for the Iraq war.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Sure. Who cares? Her constituents wanted it and I support doing what constituents want.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

First off no. The war was massively unpopular and she was from blue state ny.

Secondly she knew it was all lies, illegal, a crime against humanity, and killed massive amounts of people.

Democracy is not an excuse for crimes against humanity.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Lol it's so cute to see people born after 9/11 try to talk about history I lived through.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/8038/seventytwo-percent-americans-support-war-against-iraq.aspx

Wherever you get your info from is not base on reality. Dont be Trumpy. Live in the real world.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Agism? Real nice. But like most neoliberals what you say and what the truth is are fairly far apart. I was born before 9-11. I am old enough to remember it. I am old enough to have gone to protests against the Iraq War.

I am also old enough to know that the average of the entire US is not the average of NY state. Stick to lying about economics.

[-] SCB@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Lmao can't quite admit you're full of shit

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Brilliant rebuttal. Very neoliberal

this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
556 points (95.9% liked)

politics

19072 readers
1869 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS