Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Kalit posted:

Is there much text to that? I don’t have an NYT subscription, but from the text that’s visible to me, I don’t see anything about current sanctions. Same with a quick Google search for current sanctions

Google Winnetka library NYTimes and grab a 3 day free pass for reading it. You can do this as many times as you want

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Fritz the Horse posted:

What is it telling of?

They let themselves get led around by their noses

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

On the Democratic side, they are about to vote on completely revamping the primary process.

The main changes would be:

- Encouraging primaries over caucuses.
- Further reducing superdelegates.
- Eliminating Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina's early primary/caucus status and instead nominate a group of five different "diverse states" each cycle.
- Encourage states to have more elections in blocks.

A majority of DNC delegates approved the initial plans, but delegates from Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina oppose it.

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/1508629788134719496

I would love if Illinois got to go.first using a ranked choice system to emulate a caucus without all its issues

Mainly because I want the primary to continue in the ice and snow, which is an important part of the iowa/nh festivities.

Iowa should be permanently stripped of its prez primary caucus after what happened last year

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Nanomashoes posted:

Illinois is the most demographically average state in the country and also a solid blue stronghold where the machine still works so the party can pick whomever it wants. I see no reason why it shouldn’t be us.

Illinois should get the Iowa spot so long as IL does ranked choice voting to mirror a caucus without any of the onerous time commitments

It would be a fairly interesting state for the Republican primary too

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Rochallor posted:

Politicians don't deserve to eat good food.

Imagine them trying to eat dipped Italian beef

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Pobrecito posted:

I am and hopefully it will work out, but I won't hit my 10 years until 2025. I am not optimistic about my chances of getting to utilize it since Joe Biden and the Democrats are about to get slaughtered at the polls.

It's incredibly demoralizing to have the cloud of student loans hanging over your head for a decade, the specter of which affecting every major life decision you make with the only light at the end of the tunnel being the possibility that either the Dems won't gently caress it up or the Republicans won't be motivated enough to end PSLF (or just gently caress with it like Trump's Education department did). Also incredibly depressing watching your student loan balance grow and grow because your payments aren't even touching the interest (or at least up until the payment moratorium).

I worked with dozens of people who went to law school post 08, had 200k or so of loan debt, and were working for 45-55k salaries in Chicago with bad benefits. They were all relying on 20 or 25 year paye/ibr forgiveness , pslf never entered any of their minds.

The question of "what about the tax liability of forgiveness" that pslf doesn't have was simple - bankruptcy.


On the other hand, these people paid much lower payments monthly than everyone who went to school in the mid 00s and straddled the line of before/after the grad loan "reforms". That generation was much closer to undergrad students who had to do both private and public loans


Frankly, fed student loans are a red herring for people being more financially well off - either you're making enough money you can pay them just fine, or you're not and you pay only 10-15% of your AGI (or nothing for 2 years due to covid). It's the private loans that crush people, and those are the same ones the entire political class is ignoring since they can't just say "Biden can do this with a stroke of his pen."
And that's without even getting into the equity arguments of bailing out people who have better lifetime earning prospects than those who didn't want to take the gamble on loans, whether that meant a lower ranked/less prestigious school or even not going at all.

mastershakeman fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Apr 28, 2022

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

rscott posted:

You're completely ignoring the marginal value of a dollar of debt forgiveness for someone who's poorer and earns less compared to someone who's wealthier and making more, again overly reductive

But you have to take ibr/paye into account. If people are on those plans, partial forgiveness.(10k) may mean nothing to them while reducing a big law attorneys repayment total.

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Jaxyon posted:

I think student loan forgiveness is at least something that we can that hasn't been done already and that establishes a precedent on educational loans moving forward.

I think it's a terrible example of a signature policy for most of the reasons you gave. It's lovely, not enough, and is the dude who helped created it doing something too late to fix it.

That's why I have to laugh if that's the best he can come up with.

Colleges are probably salivating at the thought of telling gullible 17 & 18 year olds - don't worry about debt, the president has forgiven it once and he'll do it again!

Not far off from the georgetown law presentation about how to take out maximum student loans since the more the better due to PAYE

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin
Theory: someone in the supreme court hates the idea of Biden forgiving student loans. That person rightly believes student loans as his attempt to get election excitement for the party. So the person leaked the decision early to boost dem excitement and make the student loan thing not happen

If they'd waited til the June decision date, the student loans would have already been forgiven

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Concerned Citizen posted:

obama could have codified roe, possibly without even needing to abolish the filibuster - there were at least 2 gop votes for it. i am unsure as to whether the decision was made not to do so because it was considered bad politics or if because they simply didn't feel it was a priority, but either way it was clearly the wrong decision. and incredibly short-sighted, as the dem party often is.

Bidens papal instructions were to trick Obama and keep him from doing this

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Epic High Five posted:

We need to reform the Presidential Primary process to start selecting for Presidents that are first and foremost hale and vigorous of constitution

As a counter-point though, I propose that since pretty much any candidate will have smoked weed beforehand and still ended up where they have, they should have to do shrooms and submit to ego death instead

Didn't see that but I agree lmfao

Gary Johnson would have been a shoe in since he' did the seven summits prior to 2016

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Heck Yes! Loam! posted:

to be frank our "forebears" haven't gotten poo poo done either and I don't see why they deserve any more respect than someone just starting the fight. nobody is vote scolding or dismissing leftists in this conversation. not to say they deserve disrespect, but the idea they know the way to the promised land is also not evident.

I look forward to these types of thoughts in 30 years when more people are upset about climate change. Certainly they won't be scolded for ignoring things before it was too late

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

No, Trump didn't do this successfully. He only activated a small portion of voters and turned off many more. He only received 46% to 47% of the vote share in both of his elections - which is lower than any modern Republican except John McCain's historic loses.

Successfully doing it would look like a candidate receiving between 60% and 65% of the popular vote. It would imply that they kept their original coalition and expanded it to mobilize and capture most of the ~24% of voters in that group that are inactive.

It's really hard to activate an entire group of inactive voters in general, but even harder to activate a group who oppose at least half of your agenda without losing anyone in your current coalition from disappointment, single issue voting, enthusiasm, etc.

The only one who has really successfully done it is FDR, but even the New Deal Coalition died about a decade later. Plus, partisanship and ideology were a lot more fluid and heterodox at that point.

Do raw numbers/ turnout not matter to you?

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin
Banning guns will solve deaths

Just like banning fentanyl and suing the opioid manufacturers made it so opioid deaths fell. Well, they fell off the front page at least

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin
Kav is gonna need a stiff drink to get through the day. Someone find him a high abv beer or three

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

mastershakeman
Oct 28, 2008

by vyelkin

Jaxyon posted:

I don't think he has been convicted of rape. So are we being pedantic, or not believing women when our politics lines up with doing so.

which is more pedantic, facts or the justice system

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply