debt ceiling and the financial crisis.

[PTWOB02]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Basically, poor people get ****ed in the ass because none of this **** will help jobs. (of course, nothing will at this point...) Rich people continue to be undertaxed. The Koch brothers and Warren Buffett will continue paying a lower effective tax rate than me. Not enough cuts...not enough taxes.

I agree this bill is a kick in the nuts to students but in all fairness, let's blame all parties involved, not just blame the rich. Let's look at the big picture. Yes, republicans are guilty for opposing to tax the rich, aka "job creators," but democrats are not so innocent either as they avoided reforming welfare programs. So, before screaming and pointing fingers, let's realize both parties are at fault here for kicking the can down the road.

 

[owlegrad]

I agree this bill is a kick in the nuts to students but in all fairness, let's blame all parties involved, not just blame the rich. Let's look at the big picture. Yes, republicans are guilty for opposing to tax the rich, aka "job creators," but democrats are not so innocent either as they avoided reforming welfare programs. So, before screaming and pointing fingers, let's realize both parties are at fault here for kicking the can down the road.

I think VWU views the world in terms of social struggle between classes, not so much Rep v Dem. Not that he needs me to speak for him or anything.

 

[confettiflyer]

If washingtons is already ending student loans, who do you thinks are next? IBR no doubt. They will get your money anyway they can!

But seriously, I wouldn't count on IBR/PSLF if graduate students can't even get Stanford loans. I do so hate to be a doom/gloom poster, but I can't help but think the writing is on the wall with this one.

If anything, this bolsters my idea that IBR/PSLF will be around (for me at least). Even if it is modified, it'll be modified the way the loan program will be modified and cut it off for people going forward.

 

[R2pharmD2]

Does this mean that we either default on our own debt or we pass the bill to raise the debt ceiling but in doing so it would take away subsidized loans? 😕

Pretty much, yeah. Unless there is such an outcry between now and next July that they pass another amendment to the bill to reinstate subsidized loans for grad/professional students.

I sort of have mixed feelings about this. Clearly, it sucks for me personally, because this adds thousands of dollars of interest that I'll be paying. But we, as a country, do spend far more than we take in and that clearly has to change. Should higher education have been one of the first things on the chopping block? I don't think so, but wherever cuts are made they're going to be painful for someone, and I am mildly impressed that the politicians were able finally decide on something to do about the debt rather than just bickering about it constantly.

I've said before (as have many others) that the only way to get our budget problems under control is a combination of spending cuts and tax increases, and I don't see how we fix things without everyone paying a price in one way or another. It was really just a matter of time, but it turns out that many of us will be paying for it sooner rather than later.

 

[rxlea]

People are so damn greedy. If you taxed the billionaires of the world even one percent more, education and entitlement programs wouldn't be on the chopping block. Some of those people earn more money taking a **** than the working class makes in a year. How is that OK? How is it that our conservative friends can work so hard to "protect" those people and forget about the rest of us? It is not right, man. The middle class ALWAYS gets screwed over and the saddest part is that nobody does anything about it.

 

[Rockinacoustic]

I don't have a problem with them stopping the subsidizing of our loans, but more-so that the "savings" from this are going towards keeping pell grants. More middle class screwing...

 

[delano2000]

People are so damn greedy. If you taxed the billionaires of the world even one percent more, education and entitlement programs wouldn't be on the chopping block. Some of those people earn more money taking a **** than the working class makes in a year. How is that OK? How is it that our conservative friends can work so hard to "protect" those people and forget about the rest of us? It is not right, man. The middle class ALWAYS gets screwed over and the saddest part is that nobody does anything about it.

I agree. This is just absolutely ridiculous. 👎thumbdown👎thumbdown👎thumbdown👎thumbdown👎

 

[Ilikechemicals]

People are so damn greedy. If you taxed the billionaires of the world even one percent more, education and entitlement programs wouldn't be on the chopping block. Some of those people earn more money taking a **** than the working class makes in a year. How is that OK? How is it that our conservative friends can work so hard to "protect" those people and forget about the rest of us? It is not right, man. The middle class ALWAYS gets screwed over and the saddest part is that nobody does anything about it.

1% of the NET WORTH of Forbes 400 would be 14 billion dollars. The government spends 10.5 billion dollars a day....

 

[confettiflyer]

People are so damn greedy. If you taxed the billionaires of the world even one percent more, education and entitlement programs wouldn't be on the chopping block. Some of those people earn more money taking a **** than the working class makes in a year. How is that OK? How is it that our conservative friends can work so hard to "protect" those people and forget about the rest of us? It is not right, man. The middle class ALWAYS gets screwed over and the saddest part is that nobody does anything about it.

The problem is it's 1% here, 1% there...oh look, we're running out of money, let's tax another 1%, it's just another one measly percent.

It's easy to spend someone else's money, and yes it's only 3% going from Bush-era taxes to Clinton-era taxes, but there are also state taxes to contend with, etc...

Are income taxes low? Yeah. Should they be raised/more rigorously enforced? Some of them/yes. Should that be the total answer? No way.

Plus, when taxes are onerous, it's not that difficult finding ways to legally reduce your tax load. Money would simply just not be repatriated back to the US, and those stupid holidays don't work either.

 

[PharmaTope]

so are subsidized loans really gone? i spoke to a person i know in financial aid that said no they are still there

 

[CUninja]

so are subsidized loans really gone? i spoke to a person i know in financial aid that said no they are still there

they are still there for everyone for 2011-12. Only for undergrads and some post baccs for 2012-13 and after

 

[confettiflyer]

so are subsidized loans really gone? i spoke to a person i know in financial aid that said no they are still there

dude the president just signed the bill today, hahaha