Can't wait for the inevitable 10 page thread that will be made from this quote while overshadowing how big the Infrastructure bill is
Too late. What a shitshow that thread is.
Can't wait for the inevitable 10 page thread that will be made from this quote while overshadowing how big the Infrastructure bill is
Here's a very real possibility:my point is that they could be right it isn't and it might not matter. How many hilariously unconstitutional executive orders have gone by? This is a situation where there's no specific precedent but it could go either way. If Congress doesn't want to bother there's no reason why Biden shouldn't just attempt it and see if it works if it's something he actually wants to do. But it reads to me more like they are using the possibility of it not being legal as an excuse
they attempted to get a minimum wage increase in reconciliation and there was a good argument both ways that it could or should have worked. This is a lot like they the difference here is the lack of interest
I swear half of era just wants a left wing Trump. When did pragmatism/reality die, or did it ever actually exist?
Reading these threads makes me worry about democracy in general at times. For all the bashing we gave trump for being a wanna be dictator, a lot here are ok with dems acting the same way, just for policies they like.I swear half of era just wants a left wing Trump. When did pragmatism/reality die, or did it ever actually exist?
And it's every single time too. I think this is like the third thread I've seen today about dems where people go down similar paths. Thankfully this site represents a very small amount of people because pretty scary characteristics if it was a larger group.Reading these threads makes me worry about democracy in general at times. For all the bashing we gave trump for being a wanna be dictator, a lot here are ok with dems acting the same way, just for policies they like.
Yep. People on the edges just want a dictator that is for their policies it seems. Why have a legislative branch at all at that point.And it's every single time too. I think this is like the third thread I've seen today about dems where people go down similar paths. Thankfully this site represents a very small amount of people because pretty scary characteristics if it was a larger group.
Yes this as well but the unfounded takes that don't take into account reality just grind my gears. So many people in that thread saying how its proven that Biden can just wipe away student loans when that is explicitly not proven. It's not some grand conspiracy to keep student loans alive, they are figuring out if its even legal which it might not be.I'm just tired of the selfishness. "Give me exactly what I want and give it to me now. I don't care who if affects as long as I get mine."
Yeah, wouldn't be surprised given some of the takes on etc, if some people agreed it shouldn't exist.Yep. People on the edges just want a dictator that is for their policies it seems. Why have a legislative branch at all at that point.
The extent to which they attempted a minimum wage increase in reconciliation was asking the parliamentarian if they could and the parliamentarian saying no. They didn't go, fuck it we're doing it anyway and get tied up in litigation over it. They consulted with a bureaucrat. It's the same thing we consulting with legal scholars about whether or not they have the power to cancel student debt.my point is that they could be right it isn't and it might not matter. How many hilariously unconstitutional executive orders have gone by? This is a situation where there's no specific precedent but it could go either way. If Congress doesn't want to bother there's no reason why Biden shouldn't just attempt it and see if it works if it's something he actually wants to do. But it reads to me more like they are using the possibility of it not being legal as an excuse
they attempted to get a minimum wage increase in reconciliation and there was a good argument both ways that it could or should have worked. This is a lot like they the difference here is the lack of interest
Yeah, wouldn't be surprised given some of the takes on etc, if some people agreed it shouldn't exist.
Yes mr/mrs forum poster knows more than Pelosi and what I am guessing the legal scholars that reviewed this.
We should NOT be governing by EO. E.O.'s on general should be illegal and not used to push policies that cant pass congress. That is what authoritarian and dictators do.
Here's a very real possibility:
1) Biden signs EO canceling student debt
2) Court challenge filed by loan companies or others
3) Courts drag out process months/years
4) Courts eventually rule unconstitutional
5) All debt reestablished in names of holders
How would that not completely turn over government control to Republicans and potentially turn a generation of younger voters away from Democrats?
The extent to which they attempted a minimum wage increase in reconciliation was asking the parliamentarian if they could and the parliamentarian saying no. They didn't go, fuck it we're doing it anyway and get tied up in litigation over it. They consulted with a bureaucrat. It's the same thing we consulting with legal scholars about whether or not they have the power to cancel student debt.
So facts dont really matter here? Like I dont get the point of saying he ran on it when we now know cant legally do it. This isnt form some lack of trying.All I'll say is this. BIDEN ran on student debt. I get we can't just EO everything.
But it's not shocking to see people react the way they are to Pelosi's comments. It's not selfish it's just another thing people can post to about "Dems not keeping their promises"
Dems need to get their house in order or they are going to fumble voting rights as well.
Ok, let me say it this way then. There's no good way to properly research this to where you can say for certain how constitutional it is when there's no good precedent. I'm not asking him to do something proven to be done not legal multiple times.The extent to which they attempted a minimum wage increase in reconciliation was asking the parliamentarian if they could and the parliamentarian saying no. They didn't go, fuck it we're doing it anyway and get tied up in litigation over it. They consulted with a bureaucrat. It's the same thing we consulting with legal scholars about whether or not they have the power to cancel student debt.
As someone with over 10k of student debt left I would sure love for that to just disappear. But I also don't believe a good way to govern or a good way to preserve a functioning democracy is for the executive to just do whatever the fuck they want at any time, with the outcome determined entirely by the whims of partisan courts some months or years later.
I mean hasn't Biden already forgiven some student loan debt by executive order? I don't think the exact circumstances really matter (for profit colleges going under vs all other colleges). Isn't it you either have the authority or you don't?
I swear half of era just wants a left wing Trump. When did pragmatism/reality die, or did it ever actually exist?
I mean hasn't Biden already forgiven some student loan debt by executive order? I don't think the exact circumstances really matter (for profit colleges going under vs all other colleges). Isn't it you either have the authority or you don't?
That's because the latest round of canceled debt was specifically done through the "borrower defense to repayment" program. Borrower defense was created to protect people from being defrauded by schools engaging in misconduct or violating certain laws, such as falsely claiming guaranteed employment or incorrectly telling students that credits would transfer to other colleges.
It is separate from the Biden administration's efforts to determine whether the president can legally cancel student loan debt through executive order.
"They are apples and oranges," said Betsy Mayotte, president and founder of The Institute of Student Loan Advisors, a nonprofit.
Many legal scholars believe it can be cancelled. Most seem to really debate how much can be cancelled.
Blame Congress for ceding their power to the President. They specifically gave the Secretary of Education the ability to cancel debt and/or modify it to zero.
I'm not sure loan companies would have standing to sue. It seems like Congress would have to sue for the President overstepping.
Parliamentarians can be overruled by a majority vote. There would be nothing to litigate.
It's so very clear that so many people here have no idea how pollitics work.
oh yeah, we need some form of it in this country but the first few years are going to be a total shitshow. We STILL have lawsuits about obamacare coming up.Like, I support single-payer in theory, but it would not be simple as people claim it is.
I dont see how legally you can say only X amount can be cancelled. Wither it all can be or none ide think.
If what you say is true in your second paragraph then there wouldnt even be a debate on if it can be done. I'm guessing ots not so cut and dry.
Lenders 100% would have standing since the would have lost billions of dollars.
In more important news, looks like Lamb will be launching a Senate campaign in August.
Relatively happy as I think he'll be a pretty great general candidate.
I honestly think it's about 50% "Amazon can get me a video game in 3 days, so why does it take so long do do x" and 50% a misunderstanding of how complicated the world actually is. Like, I support single-payer in theory, but it would not be simple as people claim it is.
She's really not, but who knows. I think once the bipartisan bill passes the senate it won't matter what Sinema thinks. There's no chance in hell she actually is the sole one to tank the reconcilliation bill, there's just too much money in that that she can gloat about. It'll be a show and she might get 3.5T cut down a little, but I can't imagine she'll be even allowed to be the sole D vote against it. At least that's what I tell myself so I can sleep at night and not live in constant anger at her public behavior.
Of course, there are things that can be changed about the current process. Like the fact Senators take far too many vacations.
I swear to god the terminally online leftist are the dumbest people on the planet.Can't wait for the inevitable 10 page thread that will be made from this quote while overshadowing how big the Infrastructure bill is
In more important news, looks like Lamb will be launching a Senate campaign in August.
Relatively happy as I think he'll be a pretty great general candidate.
I really want to see Fetterman's personality and size in the senate though. I'm not from PA so him only being state specific keeps us from his national sized personality.Two really strong Dem candidates for the Primary with very contrasting styles. I'd probably go for Lamb given that he is my House Rep. and I've generally been impressed with him though I'd be happy with Fetterman as well. I think Lamb probably has a better chance in the General of the two.
I thought it was a foregone conclusion that Fetterman would run away with the primary? I like Lamb and wish him well.
In more important news, looks like Lamb will be launching a Senate campaign in August.
Relatively happy as I think he'll be a pretty great general candidate.
Honestly, at this point, either Sinema has some absolutely bizarre kinks she's indulging in public or she has thr worst political advisors of all time.
Dude is gonna get bodied by Fetterman, idk why he's bothering.
Like you said, statewide office holder, and he's *very* popular ime. He's got that authentic edge.I think Fetterman is a favorite because he's a statewide office holder, but I also think his perceived advantage online is much bigger than his actual beginning advantage. Like, I give Fetterman 65/35 odds at the moment.
It's honestly better just to put the ignore list to use if you end up feeling like you're getting worked up. This is still a video game forum and most people aren't open to have their minds changed it seems.Bleh, shouldn't risk a ban-bomb replying but I want to spread pragmatic realism in politics if people are interested in actual meaningful change. 😬 hopefully can get through to at least one person.
It's honestly better just to put the ignore list to use if you end up feeling like you're getting worked up. This is still a video game forum and most people aren't open to have their minds changed it seems.
I think if there were no interest rates, there'd be no loans given, period. I'm not sure the math of college grads earn more income thus pay more into the govt via taxes works, especially when the highest income earners so frequently evade paying taxes at all!I am hoping at a minimum that the interest rate freezes are made permanent if possible. There is little reason for the student loans to be collecting interest given the government sees increased income via educated peoples salaries are most often higher thus higher tax revenue. I would like to see more of course but that and making student loans forgivable in bankruptcy would be great. I've yet to see an argument why they are not forgivable via bankruptcy.
When did pragmatism/reality die, or did it ever actually exist?
I am hoping at a minimum that the interest rate freezes are made permanent if possible. There is little reason for the student loans to be collecting interest given the government sees increased income via educated peoples salaries are most often higher thus higher tax revenue.
Joe Biden could do the pragmatic thing that Chuck Schumer keeps asking him to do instead of listening to the unpragmatic thing that Nancy Pelosi just said.