Slashdot Mirror
Obama Is Forgiving the Student Loans of Nearly 400,000 Permanently Disabled People (marketwatch.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Hundreds of thousands of student loan borrowers will now have an easier path to getting their loans discharged, the Obama administration has announced. The Department of Education will send letters to 387,000 people they've identified as being eligible for a total and permanent disability discharge, a designation that allows federal student loan borrowers who can't work because of a disability to have their loans forgiven. The borrowers identified by the Department won't have to go through the typical application process for receiving a disability discharge, which requires sending in documented proof of their disability. Instead, the borrower will simply have to sign and return the completed application enclosed in the letter.
Obama is awesome
What's another $7.7 billion in debt?
Sick of paying my fucking student loans.
Having a student loan does not qualify as news for nerds.
Sure it does if you properly frame the problem:
Government help IS socialism!
3... 2... 1... FIGHT!
I know Obama is rich, but paying off 400,000 kids' student loans? That must have cost him a pretty penny!
I know that it's good to be charitable in personal views, and public policy. And you should not make the process onerous. But having no verification of disability by some authority is going to lead to abuse of this entitlement. And it just has to be a small fraction of people who take advantage, to undermine trust that the taxpayer is not being ripped off.
This is significant money being given forgiven. The administration would serve themselves better if they put up even small, reasonable checks on who is able to actually get this benefit.
Just like how you start to get very mad at people who are able to abuse handicapped parking spots because the govt is totally lax about who get to use this benefit (not just who has the placard, but who uses it). Trust in the appearance of public institutions is just as important as actual functioning -- a small number of cases of fraud and abuse can undermine it.
From TFA:
So if you owe $100,000 on your loans and it is "forgiven" then you've just made $100,000 and need to pay taxes on it.
And the IRS is not so forgiving.
Not to mention what that may do to any disability payments you may be receiving.
Is not it awesome, when you can spend other people's moneys and get all the credit for your "generosity"?
Are single mothers next on the list? Their's is a difficult lot too.
How about racial minorities — we know, they are economically disadvantaged as well?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Can Obama have his IRS send me a refund of the income tax I paid on that money?
One less thing Bernie Sanders can offer if he is elected. This looks like altruism on the surface but it is really a sneaky way to help Hillary Clinton.
How many of those 387,000 people were disabled when they decided to enter post secondary education?
I'm somewhat sympathetic to the plight of those who were paralyzed after amassing student loans, but anyone who knew what they were getting into and amassed the loans anyways, much less so.
"Are there no prisons?"
"Plenty of prisons..."
"And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"
"Both very busy, sir..."
"Those who are badly off must go there."
"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."
"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
Where are they getting that money from ? Oh, right. Taxes.
I was promised "hope and change"
still waiting for:
1. close GITMO
2. stop bombing people
3. take our gunzzzzzzzzzz
4. end dependency on fossil fuels
About the only thing he has accomplished is a de-facto Caliphate. I guess Trump was right and O'Bummer really is a crypto-Muslim.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
[...] just getting compensated for their loyalty.
I'm still waiting for my Obama iPhone that everyone claims that the government is handing out like candy.
when offered $700/mo in perpetuity. Combine that with food stamps and other perks (like cable and cell phones) and dope is the only thing you have to pay for out of pocket. Needless to say. SSD requires deep reform.
Someone has to pay for it. The government didn't loan the money to the student, a bank did or some financial doozis did. Either the government, ie. taxpayers, is paying the bank, or the bank is forced to accept a loss. As Heinlein said TANSTAAFL.
while many of these individuals are truly disabled.. social security disability fraud is not what you'd call a rare thing. i hope they aren't using that as the criteria.
I'm imagining people with massive student loan debts throwing themselves in front of cars now...
I'm guessing the privacy of these individuals will outweigh your FOIA request, so good luck with that.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
If someone's on disability they're already in the lowest bracket they can go. The taxes might be very small if at all. As for how it will affect future payments, that's kind of up to the government.
When the 1099s roll around, these hipsters are going to be crying even louder.
I MIGHT have be able to go along with this given that we properly vet everyone for said disability...then they throw this gem in there -->
"The borrowers identified by the Department won't have to go through the typical application process for receiving a disability discharge, which requires sending in documented proof of their disability. Instead, the borrower will simply have to sign and return the completed application enclosed in the letter."
WHAT THE FLYING FUCK!
How in the world is this good public policy?!?!? Your going to forgive possibly 10s if not 100's of thousands of dollars in debt, that every single one of these people entered into an agreement voluntarily with the govt and signed off on without coercion, and your going to do it with out a vetting process at all, just on their word, UNBELIEVABLE!
I know everyone's going to scream "evil socialism! disability fraud!" but people who actually qualify for a permanent and total disability are never going to be able to fully benefit from their education. Whether it's the inability to do physical work or acknowledging the discrimination that disabled people encounter in the workplace, the result is the same.
In this case, it makes sense to make it easy to get rid of the debt. If I recall correctly, student loans are almost impossible to discharge any other way. Bankruptcy doesn't get rid of them, nor does crippling financial hardship. There is a process to forgive them due to hardship but it's so onerous that no one in a normal situation would qualify.
Someone has to pay for it.
People who cry out socialism at the drop of the hat don't want their tax dollars being used to help those OTHER people. That don't mind if the government pays for the programs that they care about, say, Social Security benefits.
I paid my student loans off and now I'm disabled and unable to work.
It seems I should be able to get my money back...How?
Compensated. I have two friends who are "disabled" because they are "too fat to work." I know at least another half dozen who pull the disabled shit, and they do things like change engines in their cars, but they apparently can't work.
So they got SS disability, Medicaid, and food stamps now. I'm honestly shocked they haven't decided to make the foodstamp payout proportional to body weight. You know... because it's not the taxpayers' place to judge how much you should be entitled to eat.
This program has been around since 2010. The only difference now is that the administration is sending out letters to people they see as eligible for this program. Up until now there have been few who have applied for it. It could be they do not know about it, think it is too difficult, or that they do not qualify. All the letter does is emphasize that they can apply and sets out the process. This is not a straight out forgiveness. Each disabled person must apply and be approved to have their loan forgiven.
Ever known someone who was disabled who applied for Social Security benefits based on it? It's not easy to get them to admit that they are disabled. It seems unlikely to me that successful disability fraud would be all that common, because it's so damn difficult to get disability payments with a genuine disability. Got any references?
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
I've got a friend that's permanently disabled (lost part of each foot due to an accident) but is able to work fine as his education was for a desk job. But with the economic downturn he lost his job, didn't like the ones he could find and got a lawyer to get him on SSA disability instead to chase after his lifelong dream of writing the Great American novel. (Seriously)
Now you're telling me he'd get his student loan debt forgiven?! (If his parents hadn't already paid it off)
I have another acquaintance whose not disabled who went to college on a full scholarship but also racked up $50k in student loan debt so he could live off campus and party it up. (and he's still paying it off after 20 years because he stupidly deferred it because he kept living beyond his means)
What if he got disabled - Does he get to just shuck off all his responsibilities to?!
I fully support charity and have no problem forgiving the debt of disabled individuals that cannot function in society - But I'm working my ass off out here and can barely keep up but hey, gotta raise my taxes to help the "poor" people on disability who could work but don't because they're content and, gosh darn it, it's too hard for these people to prove their disability so we'll just go ahead and do it for them if they'll just press Yes on a dialog box.
You can hate what I am saying all you like, but this is theft.
So is inflation (money printing by the Federal reserve), so are income and wealth related taxes, all of the above will be used to "forgive" somebody's 'loans'.
This is simply theft, nothing else. The money is taken from tax payers and transferred to people in whatever group that makes the politician get browny points with the electorate. Obama is not going for reelections himself, the economy is dead pretty much, he won't admit it, he is doing all the propaganda together with Yellen to make it look pretty before elections, where he hopes to push Clinton through.
In any case, a government 'forgiving' loans is theft. A government printing money (and the Fed is not supposed to be part of government, but please) is theft. Income taxes and wealth taxes are theft.
Once it is established that government can tax income and wealth the only question is: how much today will you be able to keep of what you make? You are a slave of the system and if you are one of the vast majority who hope to profit from this system by benefiting from all the money transfer do not forget this simple fact: you are destroying the system, you are not making it any better or stronger or any more moral by condoning theft from the productive and transfer to the unproductive because the productive will be moving their money and thus jobs and products out and they are moving, do not for a second think you will really get what you are voting for in the long run. In the long run your economy and your society that relies on this economy are done.
You can't handle the truth.
I wonder how many were already disabled and could not work when they applied for and were given the loans?
Government-backed private student loans are not being given any more. Now the Federal government is loaning out money directly.
>> Why is this a slashdot issue
:)
>> Instead, the borrower will simply have to sign and return the completed application enclosed in the letter.
Because if you're good with IT and you have a student loan, NOW is the time to hack/socially-exploit the system sending the letters to get your name on the list.
benefits ran out in 2013. Which means either people who are unemployed are much more likely to slip and fall in their bathtub or that they're gaming the system. The same will likely happen for students with this new policy.
If people are stranded, they become a much greater on the whole of society thant when they are not. These are people who cannot work. You really think it's in your better interest to force them to keep trying?
Seriously, fuck you.
Disability Fraud is a different thing. Root cause and all. That should be addressed BAU, regularly.
This feels awful, ;like these former students are getting away with something. But the truth is, they are incapable of paying off their loans, and to pretend otherwise is to just wait until they die, and then saddle their heirs or such with the bill. Which isn't much of a solution. Unless you really, really want to collect from anyone, by any means. We've outlawed many of the most grievous debt collection methods elsewhere, so why not let the gummint go ahead and use those, right?
I don't see the downside to this.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
97% of student loans (or something close to that) is from the Federal Government, not a bank. The loss is on the taxpayer, banks did not loan out this money.
The ACA passed by placing all the interest collected on student loans to pay for the ACA. In order for that to be enough they had to take over pretty much every single student loan in the country. If they forgive student loans that means the ACA will not be fully funded. So we are taking money away from giving health insurance to poor people in order to give it to disabled who have student loans that they are not paying back.
The poor are paying for it. If you think that is the best you can do, go ahead and cheer for it.
People who cry out socialism at the drop of the hat don't want their tax dollars being used to help those OTHER people.
People that went to college make average salaries much higher than the median. So this is just another way that well intentioned social policy has been turned around to make the poor subsidize the rich ... and before you protest that these people are disabled, you should be aware that the number of people classified as "disabled" has tripled under Obama. At least 2/3rds of these people should be working.
That don't mind if the government pays for the programs that they care about, say, Social Security benefits.
... which is yet another example of the poor subsidizing the rich. Poor people, and especially black people, have much shorter expected lifetimes than rich white people. So they pay into the system, but collect much less in benefits, since they have many fewer years of retirement.
How does this work ? they made mistakes in their lives that got them in debt, then they found themselves in a bad situation that makes their debts worse ... soooo everyone else should pay them for them ?
So what do you get for doing things right ? for not drowning yourself in debt, busting your ass studying, working, investing, researching, learning and finally succeeding ? ... you get to pay for everyone that did not?
So, what is the incentive for doing things right ?, why waste the effort ?... what do you plan to do when the failure to success balance tips to the failure side because you subsidized being a failure ?
student loan need the old bankruptcy rules.
Under the rules in place the schools are jacking of there rates and are willing to take just about any one with the banks giving out loans to just about any one with pulse.
100K before interest for a masters in medieval studies we don't care that will not get much then working at Walmart.
80K before interest for a BA in women studies sign hear.
I knew a man who was too disabled to hire but not too disabled to work, and the army is responsible for causing the problem.
yep, starting a positive correlation between student debt and permanent disability. Soon we find out being white-collar increases the chances of permanent disability.
Depends on how old the loans are, actually. Nowadays the federal government is the originator and servicer of all student loans. I am not sure if they bought older loans off the books of other originators or not.
Not sure how the details of the forgiveness aspect works for these cases, but I doubt the gov't is asking any servicers of government backed student loans to take a loss.
This option for forgiveness in the case of disablement was actually already available, but I guess it was a huge bureaucratic headache to actually get it done if you applied for it. Thus it was almost never used. Apparently what they have done is streamline the process to make it much easier, and send out notices to those eligible. Hardly an earth-shattering change.
Lastly, the government loans out money to students, and takes payments with interest in return. It does not cost the taxpayers a dime, as the government actually makes money on the loans it issues. In this case, the 'taxpayers' being burdened are the students actively paying their debt, as the interest could be construed as a tax going into federal coffers. So you have students paying back loans, and subsidizing the forgiveness of loans for some.
There's a broader point to be made about whether the debt should be forgiven based on how disabled someone actually is. Disability fraud is a big thing, and this might make it bigger. Also, I've met blind, deaf, wheelchair-bound, and one-armed people at all levels of academia. So there is at least some question as to whether your disability actually inhibits you from performing in your chosen career. Lose function of an arm and a leg due to a stroke? That concert pianist job you had is probably gone for good. But a computer programmer might be more or less unaffected. It would have to be on a case-by-case basis to get it right. But that more nuanced discussion is not what you brought up at all.
As long as the list is accurate and as long as the recipients have to swear under penalty of perjury that they are indeed entitled to this relief, this sounds like a good thing.
I agree with an earlier poster though, this is not "news for nerds."
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Of course. The Conservatives have become so damaged by far-right-wing propaganda that they reject western civilization.
People who have the views that Republicans had 20 years ago, now have to vote for the Democrats, because the Republican party went off a cliff when they chose to become a media-driven cult with no interest in facts.
If you are on permanent and total disability, you aren't going to be able to pay off your student loans anyway. So all this does is write off the loses and save a huge amount of paperwork and money that the government would use to harass people with no hope of any benefit. Also, if the government already knows that these people are disabled as it states in the article, why would they need to verify it? I think what some people don't realize, is how hard it can be for someone who is totally disabled to jump through a bunch of hoops that the government puts up. Let's give them a break. I will also point out that private companies routinely do the same thing with people who they know aren't going to pay them. They write off the loss and move on.
Or your whole comment would be b.s..
Besides, the rich are going to get subsidies. Get over it. Focus on your needs and if you're a decent sort of chap the other 99%.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
This sounded interesting to me, so I decided to take a peek.
It doesn't look like there was a significant jump in claims from 2012 to 2013 - the number of claims actually decreased: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS...
There WAS a significant jump from 2008-2009 (about a 500k increase), but I don't see anything close to a 43% jump.
Can you show me where you got your data, or are we looking at completely different information (maybe claims to state aid instead of federal)?
Love sees no species.
The tax payer already has paid for it. Student loans are guaranteed (and since 2010 have been direct from the government).
There is a simple solution to this problem -- at least on the loan side. Any one who has ever gotten a student loan should have to pay an additional small percentage in income tax, say 1%. This money would act as an insurance pool for defaulted loans. This would allow students who can't pay off their loans to be able to declare bankruptcy. This would still hurt their credit but at least it wouldn't hang over their heads for the rest of their life. In addition, student loans should be interest free.
Now, as for the problem of rising costs. That it's a whole other problem. And a difficult one. I don't think, however, people realize that part of the problem is actually the widening gap between the haves and have nots. Consider as a college you can have 1,000 students who can pay $50,000 a year, or 5,000 that pay $10,000. Which kind of college would you want to operate?
:T:R:A:N:S:
This is election year give-aways. Wake up. Stop being such a non-thinking dooosh
Someone has to pay for it.
People who cry out socialism at the drop of the hat don't want their tax dollars being used to help those OTHER people. That don't mind if the government pays for the programs that they care about, say, Social Security benefits.
Uh, I'm the one paying for Social Security.
Only to a ditto head is this theft.
Is K-12 education theft? Is funding our military theft? Is funding of roads, police, and fire departments theft?
Choose carefully. Depending on your answer, you will fit one of two options.
1: Yes, all those things are theft. In which case, go start your own anarchist, theft-free government in Somalia or some other lawless hellhole. I am happy to pay a portion of my income to obtain all the various benefits of civilization, if you aren't, there are plenty of places out there to live out your anarchist fantasies.
2: No, those taxes are not theft. Just this one. In which case, you're a hypocrite, arbitrarily choosing things to complain about and dressing it up with ideological grandstanding. It's the equivalent of childish whining that life isn't fair and somebody is getting something that you aren't. In that case, stop whining, and do what you expect all the minorities and disadvantaged to do: shut up and work for what you want rather than complaining about everyone else that has it easier.
Uh, I'm the one paying for Social Security.
Twenty years from now about two-thirds of the federal budget will go to Social Security and Medicare. Retirees will outnumber workers, reducing the amount of taxes going into the system. Who will make up the difference in benefits and pay for everything else? The few taxpayers who are still working.
I know what you mean (the median of everybody, college or not), but of all the ways of saying it that's in the bottom decile.
P.S. "People that went"? Seriously?
Amen its my money going into Social Security not a freaking handout!
If you aren't reporting this fraud. You are part of the problem.
https://oig.ssa.gov/report-fraud-waste-or-abuse/fraud-waste-and-abuse
400000 people? That's greater than 1/1000 Americans. And only half go to college, and about 20% are under 18 and don't count in this calculation, so we've got more than 1/400 college educated Americans disabled? How is that even possible?
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows. - Bob Dylan "Subteranean Homesick Blue
Is K-12 education theft? Is funding our military theft? Is funding of roads, police, and fire departments theft?
- in that order: yes. yes. yes. yes. yes.
My answer to all of your questions related to government doing anything at all is yes, it is theft, all of it must be done privately, however you choose to do it is none of my business, it's yours. Nobody should have any money stolen from them in form of any income or wealth taxes, it is theft and it is the worst thing from economic perspective, it is also the most immoral way of doing things, it presumes ownership of the individual by the State, that is my primary driver, economy is the secondary one.
As to you saying that "you are paying", no, you are not paying yet, you are about to pay with a completely destroyed economy and annihilation of your standard of living.
All income and wealth related taxes are theft, I am not a hypocrite. I am for Constitutional capitation and excise taxes if you actually care to understand.
You can't handle the truth.
That's pretty stupid suggestion, dude.
Of course, it is shaming.. our society doesn't really like disabled people. Just look at these comments about 'my money' and what not.. no wonder, these people don't want to admit anything..
Indeed.. you clearly don't give a shit that our tax dollars are being wasted. Report them.
The second one. More students means you need more faculty and more administrators (and people to administrate the administrators, and so on).
And the more people you're in command of the more important you are, and the more important you are the more you get paid.
What do I win?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Until you or someone in your family has tried to obtain disability benefits through SSA/SSI you can have no idea what an ordeal it can be --- or the restrictions that come with it. Consider yourself fortunate if you do not have to go to Legal Aid for help for an appeal before an administrative law judge.
You can live modestly on an SSI budget, but those student loans will never be repaid, and it is fantasy to pretend otherwise.
Which article of or amendement to the Constitution puts the president in charge of student loan payments?
I mean, sure, they got jobs related to their field of study but it would sure be nice to get them forgiven. Get a letter, sing and return and, like magic, debt gone. Don't start with me about fraud or any of that other bullshit. I pay more in taxes now than all my other expenses combined (I've just done my taxes so I can tell you this is 100% accurate). If my kids can get their debt forgiven, then we'll do it. I don't care what anyone else says. If Obama decrees it's cool for them to do it, who are any of us to argue?
Are they going to be anything like the Canadian government that requires vets who have lost limbs to provide annual proof that those limbs haven't spontaneously regrown?
Here you go -
https://www.google.com/#q=ssdi+fraud
News for Nerds... STUFF THAT MATTERS. quit bitching
Not if you carry disability insurance.
But, like I asked earlier, why stop at the disabled? Single mothers rarely prosper too — should their loans be summarily forgiven in the same fashion? Why not?
Good question! How would a bank go about it? Maybe, this whole business of student loans should've remained in private hands, huh? Then it would've been discussed by the banks' boards and willing shareholders, rather than us — captive taxpayers?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Amen its my money going into Social Security not a freaking handout!
That's not correct. Your money in Social Security is paying for today's retirees. When you retire tomorrow, tomorrow workers will be paying for your benefits. Unfortunately, 20 years from now, there won't be enough workers to pay for retirees.
That is where your comment jumped the shark.
You have clearly never lived in a country where the economy really is "dead pretty much". Those countries don't have 5% unemployment.
No. What's going to happen is that they'll bump the retirement age up to 70, and then 75, forcing lots of people who would have been "retirees" to keep working, putting enormous pressure on younger would-be workers to find work. The goal of Social Security, either overtly or covertly, was always to not pay out unless someone managed to exceed the average lifespan of Americans (American men in particular). The average lifespan of Americans in 1934 when Social Security was passed into law was 65. Now it's 76 for men and 81 for women, so expect SS to delay benefits for future generations until at least 75. Otherwise the program will be forced to delay payments or deny them altogether.
It seems unlikely to me that successful disability fraud would be all that common, because it's so damn difficult to get disability payments with a genuine disability
Do YOU have any references?
Poor people, and especially black people, have much shorter expected lifetimes than rich white people. So they pay into the system, but collect much less in benefits, since they have many fewer years of retirement.
So it's like insurance where I pay and pay and pay but never get to use the money I paid? Do I get a refund of all the money I've been forced to hand over to a private company for no reason?
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
The proof is obvious. SS disability skyrocketed with the recent economic downturn and massive job losses coinciding also with the president sending out a directive to SS disability program to basically start approving all applications and turning it into effectively a permanent unemployment benefit. It isn't really disability fraud if the people administering the program are tacitly approving of it. We can argue about whether it should or shouldn't, but whether it is or isn't shouldn't be in dispute. I have a friend who is a disabled radiologist whose vision was damaged. She now works for SS disability reviewing applications for suspected fraud. She worked there when the policy was changed and was constantly seeing obvious cases of fraud get approved even after she has flagged it.
The only thing Obama is doing is proactively canceling disabled people's loans. Its always been the case that if you are officially disabled that your can get your loans forgiven. The only thing he is doing is making the loan servicers proactively do it instead of waiting for the disabled person or family to do it.
OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink
All income and wealth related taxes are theft, I am not a hypocrite. I am for Constitutional capitation and excise taxes if you actually care to understand.
Ok, now that we have that out of the way: why is one type of tax theft, but not another? A capitation tax may be levied differently, but other than screwing over the poor disproportionately how is it qualitatively different than an income or wealth tax? Is it optional? Do you not go to jail if you refuse to pay it?
My point is, words have meaning, and distorting their meaning to try to win an emotional point just makes your bias obvious. Rather than saying something simple and true, like "I think taxes should be lower", or "These kinds of taxes are unconstitutional based on my personal interpretation", you tried to make it a moral issue by calling the tax something it isn't: theft. It's the same exact ploy used by the MIAA and RIAA, try to stigmatize a certain behavior (piracy in their case, or income tax in your case) by mislabeling it as a common criminal act.
Now, if you wanted to have a conversation about which tax policy is most likely to improve our economy, or what types of taxation are justified under the constitution, that's an interesting and complex problem to discuss. However, trying to pretend that initiatives such as these are somehow morally corrupt is intellectually inconsistent and sensationalist, and doesn't really help anything.
What we get with all of our government tuition subsidies is the worst of both worlds. 5,000 students paying $100,000 a year, many of them dropping out of getting shit degrees, and then wondering how to pay their loans. Subsidies destroy everything they touch.
Amen its my money going into Social Security not a freaking handout!
That's not correct. Your money in Social Security is paying for today's retirees. When you retire tomorrow, tomorrow workers will be paying for your benefits. Unfortunately, 20 years from now, there won't be enough workers to pay for retirees.
Correct, think of it as a federal Ponzi scheme for retirees
Here's the article. I typed my summary too fast - it's the increase in claims between 2003 to 2013:
http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/1...
No. We just realize that the money has to come from somewhere. The ultra-wealthy are a poor target because they can defend themselves. That leaves the rest of us.
Once you've been around the block once or twice, the mere promise of rainbow ponies isn't enough anymore.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
"Since Reagan, Democrats have moved to the right and the right has moved into a mental hospital.
So what we have is one perfectly good party for hedge fund managers, credit card companies, banks, defense contractors, big agriculture
and the pharmaceutical lobby - that's the Democrats.
And they sit across the aisle from a small group of religious lunatics, flat-earthers and civil war re-enactors who mostly communicate by AM radio and call themselves the Republicans" - Bill Maher
Awesome - thank you! I've seen the jumps in unemployment claims (very expected when there aren't many jobs), but hadn't seen the link to disability. But I suppose it's something we should expect... People willing to abuse one system are going to try to game the other.
Love sees no species.
The second one. More students means you need more faculty and more administrators (and people to administrate the administrators, and so on).
And the more people you're in command of the more important you are, and the more important you are the more you get paid.
What do I win?
The first one. More students means you need more faculty and more administrators (and people to administrate the administrators, and so on).
and the more people you pay, the less profit you make.
and you call yourself a capitalist bastard....
If a job isnt waiting for you after a degree then you are a job assassin. Only employed individuals should be prepaid through college by their company (not employer). What does a teacher know about industry that a day trader cant tell you allready?
no, it's not theft.
no, the economy is not dead (though you your brain may be).
no, a government that prints money is not theft (wtf??!)
and you apparently missed the whole part of history where the greatest period of economic prosperity occurred under conditions involving MUCH higher taxes, MUCH higher minimum wages, more "free stuff" being handed out, etc. IE, under liberal progressive policies. it was that period that proceeded the voodoo of reaganomics that trashed everything.
your post is simply more stupidity from one who thinks himself intelligent.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
No you're not a hypocrite.
but you are hyper-ignorant.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
> while many of these individuals are truly disabled.. social security disability fraud is not what you'd call a rare thing. i hope they aren't using that as the criteria.
Utter nonsense. It is exceedingly difficult to get approved for SS disability even if your case has merits. Quite often it requires multiple appeals and the intervention of a lawyer that's a specialist in this particular are.
It is NOT an easy system to abuse.
You're just demonstrating the common, charity-hostile attitude in the US that makes any social welfare here problematic.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Who is the bigot now?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Without SSDI fraud, there would be 40,000 unemployed lawyers in this country.
https://www.google.com/#q=ssdi+fraud
>> It seems unlikely to me that successful disability fraud would be all that common, because it's so damn difficult to get disability payments with a genuine disability
> Do YOU have any references?
I dunno. Why don't you go and actually look. While all of the references I could provide are private and would include actual personal details, I am sure you can find some more public patient forums where people complain about this.
Of my cohort, I can't think of anyone that had an easy time of getting their disability status granted. Most required lawyers and appeals. This is despite the condition coming with acceptance criteria that's very simple to measure, verify, and document with a lab report.
I've heard may 1st hand complaints.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Seriously? Tell that to Mark Levin.
This is not the Soviet Union. You are not forced to stay in the US. If you find the social contract unacceptable as presented, you are free to depart to greener pastures. The fact that you continue to accept the benefits and privileges of living in the US constitutes acceptance of the terms and conditions.
I am disabled, but I paid off my college debt. Can I have that money back?
So being disabled get you better privacy too? Man, I gotta get disabled.
I dunno. Why don't you go and actually look.
Yes, that's my contention as well. You don't know.
You see, if YOU are going to make an argument, the burden isn't on me to prove your point. If you want to make baseless statements, well, good for you, but you aren't going to convince too many people that way. I had assumed incorrectly that you posted here to try and make a point, not just waste the Internet's bits. My mistake.
You: Did you know that Idaho has the largest number of people with an IQ > 150?
Person: Really? Where'd you hear that?
You: I dunno. Why don't you go and look it up yourself.
Brilliant.
Is K-12 education theft? Is funding our military theft? Is funding of roads, police, and fire departments theft?
No, because I get a benefit from those things.
How does our executive spend money? I thought congress had the power of the purse. He's either stealing it from an approved program or just making shit up.
I think what some people don't realize, is how hard it can be for someone who is totally disabled to jump through a bunch of hoops that the government puts up.
What percent of those folks are so disabled they can't even get to a computer and type?
I hope there are many, many hoops to jump through if it comes to getting a $100k+ gift from the US taxpayers. I hope it's very hard to obtain. It shouldn't be any other way.
I will also point out that private companies routinely do the same thing with people who they know aren't going to pay them. They write off the loss and move on.
Uh, no. They sell your debt to a collection agency who's business it is to squeeze you until you pay.
Mistrust of others comes from self knowledge.
I know a man that qualified for disability because he could not get out of bed. Yes, he was disabled, but being bed ridden was a result of laying in bed all day drinking. His legs had physically atrophied from lack of exercise. /sarcasm/ I'm glad my tax dollars go to support him and his habit. /sarcasm/
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
You lost me when you tried to argue that interest on a loan could be construed as a tax just because the loan was made by the federal government.
So it's like insurance?
Insurance rates are based on actuarial predictions of risk. Social Security treats everyone the same. But since people are not the same, this is a huge benefit to rich old white people, at the expense of poor young black people.
Social Security was designed to be unfair toward poor people, and especially toward blacks. It was the only way for FDR to get Southern Democrats to vote for it. But it is deeply unjust, that 8 decades later, we still haven't fixed the problem.
Just because you didn't bother to apply doesn't mean the program doesn't exist... or that it was well run: http://freebeacon.com/issues/f...
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Are you kidding?
I've seen a lot of firsthand accounts about this stuff.
I could be a counter-example myself and you would try to deny my relevance just because it's not on the web somewhere.
Beyond that, are you seriously expecting a magical reservoir of relevant statistics to be sitting out there on the web somewhere?
Ultimately, you're just buying into a lot of media hype generated by muckrakers that need to fill airtime. If you want to talk about actual "evidence", there really is none. You're as much "full of shit" as anyone here. More so actually because you don't actually know anyone with direct experience.
You're a moron.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I would wonder how they managed it. Morbid obesity might be in the regulations. They're easy enough to check out. They're online. However, the process is not easy. I would suspect they would need a crooked beaurocrat to be in on it.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Not sure if sarcastic, or actually that selfish and shortsighted...
But I'll assume you are serious about this. Ok, so let's suppose that you never have a house fire, not even in your neighborhood. Do you materially benefit from the fire department's existence? Nope.
Ok, now let's assume that you are not disabled, and never become disabled. Do you materially benefit from disability benefits? Nope.
However, as a whole, we've collectively chosen to use our combined resources to help out people with house fires, and help out people that have disabilities that make it difficult or impossible to work. The fact that you might not ever personally benefit from such a policy doesn't make it theft to pay taxes for it. I'm hoping this was sarcastic, though, and I just got whooshed.
Hey, if you're unemployed chances are you're at home more, so of course you're more likely to slip and fall in your bathtub.
If you slip and fall in the shower at work, you claim Workman's Comp.
Duh.
Does anyone doubt why this happened in an election year? Obama loosened the rules to qualify for disability. It made the unemployment rate look better, now he's using those who are living on the benefit to buy votes for the Democrats. Meanwhile, Social Security is going bankrupt.
people paid into social security their whole life, they have a right to expect the benefits
taking my money to pay for lazy losers is the problem
people paid into social security their whole life, they have a right to expect the benefits
The taxes taken out of your paycheck today pays for today's retirees. It takes three workers to pay for one retire today. In 2030, retirees will outnumber workers and two workers will have to pay more in taxes to pay one retiree.
taking my money to pay for lazy losers is the problem
I have the same feeling about senior citizens.
There's several programs with varying amounts of forgiveness. From joining the Peace Corp for several years, all the way to being on a payback plan, that forgives the remainder after a set number of years. The people who are really screwed are those who have taken out private loans.
Call it what you like, it is just semantics. All I meant was that the gov't actively makes money off the student loan program, and if it uses some of that money to forgive other loans, than that is okay by me. They can manage their loan department however they like. As long as they are making money, it is hard to argue that it is really hurting regular taxpayers. If they charged no interest, then they would be losing money on defaults, forgiveness, and even simple management of the loans. In that case, you could argue that the regular taxpayer is footing the bill for defaulted or forgiven student debt.
I am the GP, I am just too lazy to log back in.
I have the same feeling about senior citizens.
If you are lucky, someday you are going to be one. I bet that you will be just as adamant then that the promises that were made to you while you were working and having money extracted from your paycheck based on those promises be honored, as you are adamant now that senior citizens who have had their money taken with the promise of benefits when they get old are "lazy losers".
Your reply to the OP is a non-sequitor. People paid into social security their whole life and they have a right to expect the benefits from that. That those benefits will be coming from current taxpayers is irrelevant to that statement.
Why does he have to go to 'Somalia or some other lawless hellhole'? Why can't he have it wherever he is at?
It might because you and those of your tilt would ask for the state-sanctioned murderers to put a stop to it?
Order is more important that life or liberty to your kind.
Can't let people have freedom unless you agree with it, right?
With people like you around, nobody is free.
If you outlaw freedom only the outlaws are free.
Forget 'rights', I want freedom.
As someone said a couple month ago. One can't pay their taxes with this "income" so why call it that?
I've seen a lot of firsthand accounts about this stuff.
Okay so your sample size is 5, 10? Out of tens of millions of cases?
I could be a counter-example myself and you would try to deny my relevance just because it's not on the web somewhere.
Do I really need to explain to why one counter example doesn't prove a point ... ?
Beyond that, are you seriously expecting a magical reservoir of relevant statistics to be sitting out there on the web somewhere?
Yeah, that's generally how these things are done. Data is collected. Facts are determined. I know I'm saying some controversial things here, but try to take it in.
If you want to talk about actual "evidence", there really is none.
Let me recount what happened here.
1. The OP made a statement.
2. You made a counter point, offering no references, asked the OP to provide references. Remember this?
Ever known someone who was disabled who applied for Social Security benefits based on it? It's not easy to get them to admit that they are disabled. It seems unlikely to me that successful disability fraud would be all that common, because it's so damn difficult to get disability payments with a genuine disability. Got any references?
3. I asked you for references.
Do YOU have any references?
4. You say you have none, and that I should take your word for it.
Do you see any logical problems at all this that line of reasoning?
You're as much "full of shit" as anyone here.
I never took a side one way or the other on the topic at hand. I just pointed out that you offer no evidence for your opinion yet chastise others for not providing evidence. Maybe you forgot what you said. Just scroll up.
A student loan isn't a benefit. It's a contact between a lending institution and a private party. I vote to fund fire, police, and disability benefits. I didn't vote to pay off the debt of private parties.
There's ~$1.2T in debt across ~37M people right now. That's ~$32.4K / person. So we're talking about $12.3B in forgiveness. No, I didn't vote for that.
"The less fortunate get all the breaks!"
Your assuming. You know what they say about assuming right? Ss is a bad idea and should be fazed out asap
I don't particularly mind helping people that actually need help and aren't able to help themselves. So much of the money the government passes around these days has nothing to do with that though. They already had forgiveness for people that showed they were disabled but now they just have to say they're disabled. No need to actually provide any proof. I have a serious problem with that. That's not even socialism, its waste and fraud.
For almost everything I can think of, a home loan, Insurance, you have to prove you're up to it first. I don't just mean health insurance; if I buy a car, my insurance has to see it or receive pictures to validate the condition to make sure I am not buying a wreck and asking the insurance to fix it. I am not saying forgiving the debt is inappropriate. But if it is going to be a standard practice I want to be indemnified as much as possible by before the loan is made having the students certified as not disabled and unlikely to become so. Again, not necessarily against it but everything needs balance. Without this it is a gift not a loan. Maybe also OK, but we need to be honest about what is being done.
No they wont. The system will break. What's going to happen then is anyone's guess but I bet it wont be pretty.
I know my mother in law would probably fall into that category. She claims disability, yet is able to sit on her computer all day long in order to be the first person to like to comment on every Facebook post made by myself or anyone in my wife's family. Seems to me if she can sit at a computer all day long she could probably find a job requiring just that.
This isn't about forgiving all student loans. Only the ~400k student loans of disabled people.
And think about the alternative - the goal of helping out disabled people is to prevent them from becoming homeless, resorting to crime, or the other things they might have to resort to. This helps the entire society.
Your original claim is that taxes are theft if you don't get a direct benefit. Is car insurance theft, if you never get in a crash and use it? Remember, it is compulsory for drivers, just like taxes are compulsory for U.S. residents.
The thing is, you don't get to assign new meanings to words to try to make reality what you want it to be. When you say "taxes are theft", what you really mean is "Waahhh, they get something I don't, I'm gonna COMPLAIN". You have every right to whine about people getting things you don't want them to have, but it isn't intellectually honest to arbitrarily redefine words to suit your agenda and invent a moral high ground for yourself.
It's pretty well known, and I personally have seen it occur several times, that the trick to getting disability is hiring a lawyer and being persistent. They almost always reject on the first and second try unless you're an actual invalid confined to a bed. I have several relatives that have worked the system and get their monthly "gubbmint check." It's not exactly a windfall but it does enable you to sit in front of the TV all day and eat potato chips. This article is pretty informative. A lot of people like to blame President Obama for the surge in SSI recipients but in fact the rules were loosened by President Reagan back in 1984.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/th...
Very interesting read that is.
In other words, you were completely talking out of your ass.
...thanks, Obama.
20 years from now it'll be the robots refusing to pay for "today's" retirees cause there won't be any humans left working. It's gonna be fun.
Yeah, it's not like there aren't at least a half dozen easy ways to fix things, from reducing benefits (helps the young at the expense of their elders), to means testing (helps the poor at the expense of the rich), to increasing age (helps the wealthy since poor die younger). Take your pick depending on who you want to get the most help and who you want to screw over.
Cheap storage VM.
Nope, just transcribed the interval from the article incorrectly, which I promptly correctly. After further research my thesis still stands, such as this report from the Fed:
https://www.richmondfed.org/~/...
Once you're disabled, on disability benefits. Nobody can debt collect off you anyway. Gov't knows they can't win, so good PR out of it
This isn't about forgiving all student loans. Only the ~400k student loans of disabled people.
Yes, that's what my math is based on. 380K x $32.4K average debt = ~$12.3B forgiven.
And think about the alternative - the goal of helping out disabled people is to prevent them from becoming homeless, resorting to crime, or the other things they might have to resort to. This helps the entire society.
That's akin to extortion. Give people money so they won't commit crimes against me?
The thing is, you don't get to assign new meanings to words to try to make reality what you want it to be. When you say "taxes are theft"
That's good since I didn't say that. You are quoting the wrong guy.
Letting him drink himself to death in peace is probably the best use of our tax dollars.
What if you can work a desk job, bu there are no desk jobs in your rural area, only some specific factory, or general farm labor? Are you disabled since you could work if you moved to a city?
This is why we should move to a UBI, it would save rural America and simplify all this stuff that really isn't so black and white.
Cheap storage VM.
What's going to happen then is anyone's guess but I bet it wont be pretty.
If nothing is done. The quickest — and perhaps easiest — solution is to abolish the wage cap at $118,500, tax all earned income for social security and build up the trust fund for future generations.
Wrong. We younger people are hoping to be lucky enough to get what we paid in, not 8-9 times what we paid in as current retirees are getting. There was never a promise of 8-9x return.
No need to actually provide any proof.
My understanding that the Social Security records will be cross-referenced for disability qualification, eliminating a more cumbersome process that existed before and discouraged many people from applying before.
I bet that you will be just as adamant then that the promises that were made to you while you were working and having money extracted from your paycheck based on those promises be honored, as you are adamant now that senior citizens who have had their money taken with the promise of benefits when they get old are "lazy losers".
I'm planning that Social Security won't be around and I'll be working until I drop dead at 120.
People paid into social security their whole life and they have a right to expect the benefits from that.
A 1950's Supreme Court ruling stated that Social Security is a government program and no one has a right to claim benefits. If Congress decides to shut down Social Security and keep the money, tough luck.
That's akin to extortion. Give people money so they won't commit crimes against me?
Nope, give people money so they don't become homeless and/or starve to death. Just like we hire firefighters to save people's homes and prevent fire victims from becoming homeless. By your logic, funding the military is extortion, because if we don't pay them foreigners will invade and take over the country. The thing that makes it not extortion is that your democratically elected representative is implementing these policies. You may not agree, but that's democracy - sometimes you are in the majority, sometimes you are in the minority. Don't try to victimize yourself by claiming somehow you are suffering from "extortion". Once again, words have meaning. Use them accordingly.
That's good since I didn't say that. You are quoting the wrong guy.
OP said taxes are theft. You said that my examples weren't theft, but your reasoning was because you get a benefit. Inference is, if you don't get a benefit, it's theft. If that's not what you meant, feel free to clarify.
Overall, I'm just tired of conservatives who don't just state their case like an adult - "I think this is an unwise use of taxpayer dollars". That's a perfectly valid statement, and an interesting discussion to have. Instead, it always has to get wrapped into this hysterical persecution complex, where the government is somehow maliciously sinning against you personally, thieving and extorting like a cartoon villain. I would take conservatives much more seriously (and would support them on more issues) if the rhetoric wasn't always so moralizing and extreme. Of course, it happens on both sides, but I call out democrats when they do it too, and the conservative whining is particularly strong with this topic.
Just because you didn't bother to apply doesn't mean the program doesn't exist.
Re-read my comment. I was referring to the Obama iPhone, not the 1985 program that Reagan signed into law. My tea party relatives in Idaho reassure me that the government was handing out iPhones like candy. I pay $80 per month for my iPhone. Sounds like a great deal to have the government pick up the tab. Unless, of course, it's not true.
A 1950's Supreme Court ruling stated that Social Security is a government program and no one has a right to claim benefits.
Another non-sequitor. I said "right to expect". You said they have no "right to claim". Someone who has lived their lives with a promise from their government, a promise that was used to justify confiscation of income, has every right to expect the government to follow through on that promise. "I will gladly pay you tomorrow for a hamburger today", when you get the hamburger today and refuse to pay is called "breach of contract" at best; fraud at worst, and the person who gave you the hamburger has every right to expect payment.
You have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight to realize that the specific promise of social security is probably going to be invalid, but that is hardly the only promise being made that you may not be so ready to discount as invalid.
You said they have no "right to claim".
No, that was from the Supreme Court ruling. It was a funny case. The government was kicking a communist out of the country and he wanted his money back from the government. The guy lost everything and got kicked out anyway.
Someone who has lived their lives with a promise from their government, a promise that was used to justify confiscation of income, has every right to expect the government to follow through on that promise.
But the government can change the rules at any time, especially if the Supreme Court goes along with it.
So what, money has inflated three times since the 1980
no real issue with SS running out of money, they only need to raise the part of gross income taxed for it from $50K to $250K and problem solved forever.
Nope, give people money so they don't become homeless and/or starve to death.
Sorry, that's not what you said:
goal of helping out disabled people is to prevent them from becoming homeless, resorting to crime, or the other things they might have to resort to.
Again, I'm against paying someone to not commit crimes.
where the government is somehow maliciously sinning against you personally, thieving and extorting like a cartoon villain
I don't think that and I don't think most people do either. I think the government is so huge they, and some citizens, lose track of the fact that the money has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is us. Firemen: good investment. Police: good investment. Roads: good. I don't think giving stupid people money is a good investment for the nation. I say stupid because they either pissed away the money and didn't get a degree, got a worthless degree, or were too disabled to work and therefore shouldn't have taken the money in the first place. Sure, it's a mistake a lot of us could, or did make. But life is about being responsible for your actions. I learned that around age 4.
When an adult makes an informed decision to enter into a contract to borrow money, that's between them and the lender, and shouldn't involve anyone else. Don't like it? Fair enough, don't borrow the money next time. There's bankruptcy* and all it entails. It sucks, but it's supposed to suck because you f'ed up. There should be some punishment such a royal f'up. I don't know about you, but $50k is a lot of money to me. It only seems like no big deal if you are stuck in the mindset of "not my money" or "eh the government's so big they can absorb that".
* I read in this thread somewhere that student loans don't get erased in bankruptcy. I don't agree with that.
What do I win?
A student loan.
-- I have monkeys in my pants.
No, that was from the Supreme Court ruling.
This game is over. You quoted that ruling as if it were relevant, and it is a non-sequitor for the reason I specified. Your statement that the government can change the rules does not deny the fact that people have a right to EXPECT honesty, which is what I said. That makes you responding with yet another non-sequitor.
Your opinion that people who have paid into a system for their entire lives based on a promise of security later in life are "lazy losers" is ridiculous, because they've done the work, given up the money, and deserve the return. But you clearly don't care if you are a heartless bastard, so goodbye.
It's amazing to read the neocon f*ckers on /. these days. It's so typical of people who get jobs as developers and expect to be worshiped for their existence. It's stunning what a myopic point of view that boils down to "I'm a developer with no degree 'cos I'm too smart for college and every other field of study is for idiots who deserve to be poor." My undergrad degree was in liberal arts and my advanced degrees are in computer, information, and library science. Along the way I picked up MCSE and CCNA certs and went to night school to pick up German and Russian language. What did my liberal arts background get me? A job in the State Department (Foreign Service) thanks very much. That's a real adult job that requires all kinds of skills and education that one-trick-pony programmers always seem to lack. I borrowed $40,000 to get through eight years of school ($100,000 in scholarships thanks very much and a full ride scholarship for my PhD). I paid back $60,000 with interest. Eventually that amount ballooned into $125,000. Why? Right wing bastards in Congress kept upping the interest rate. Oh and I got cancer. Leukemia. And that caused kidney failure, which makes me connect to a dialysis machine three days a week. Another three times I week I get chemo. Oh and bone marrow biopsies every six months. Oh and I get to take about 20 pills a day which mess me up as if I wasn't messed up enough already. Last year I got a bone marrow transplant, but even after I still have to get chemo. So yes I burned through all of my savings, lost my sweet job, sold all of my stuff, and worked my way into impoverishment. Since nobody here seems to have bothered to look up what it takes to be declared Disabled here's a quick list: Total personal assets must be less than $5000. Total bank accounts no greater than $1000. You may own one vehicle but only if it's worth less than $3500. You have to prove your income with several years worth of tax records. You have to have your hospital provide details of your medical condition on a consistent basis. Even then the SSA likes to send letters about once per year saying that for no reason they've decided that I'm not disabled and that they're rescinding SSD payments and Medicare, so I have go to an attorney and get them to straighten it out. That takes months. In the meantime, no income. The last such occurrence happened when I was in the hospital for four months getting a bone marrow transplant. The SSA goes out of its way to hack people off Disability benefits. And the student loan dismissal? Even harder to get. Your medical condition has to be verified by two different doctors and your condition must be likely to end in death. Even if you do get the dismissal it's totally probationary, so for three years they watch your bank account and taxes like a hawk. After the three year period IF they decide you're fit for loan dismissal you're still never allowed to go back to school, work a part-time job, or any other venture that requires mobility. If any of those happen they instantly reactivate your loans. So it's a thoroughly shitty process. In no way is it as though you break your leg and get a dismissal. Disability is NOT the new f*cking welfare. So for you fukcs who've never had to have a GoFundMe venture just to stay alive and bitch about your measly 19% tax rate I hope you get @$#& cancer and die a hideous death, all the while getting constantly hounded by student loan outfits demanding a garnishment of your $900/month income. That is, in between non-stop phone calls from the hospital demanding their share of what Medicare or my two supplemental private insurance plans don't cover. Seriously. Get cancer and die. I hope nobody even throws a funeral for your selfish asses.
This game is over.
Wait 20 years and find out.
Your opinion that people who have paid into a system for their entire lives based on a promise of security later in life are "lazy losers" is ridiculous, because they've done the work, given up the money, and deserve the return.
As a Generation Xer who paid into "the system" all my life, I'm planning on Social Security not to be there when I retire in 30 years when I'm 77. In fact, I expect to work until I drop dead at 120.
But you clearly don't care if you are a heartless bastard, so goodbye.
No, I'm an asshole. I wouldn't be working in IT if I wasn't.
Again, I'm against paying someone to not commit crimes.
Again, that's not what this was about. It's about preventing the problems that come along with poverty, crime being just one small sample. Calling it extortion is a textbook example of a strawman fallacy.
I don't think that [the government is a scheming villain] and I don't think most people do either.
Then please stop mischaracterizing social programs as theft or extortion. The hyperbole doesn't help your case.
I don't think giving stupid people money is a good investment for the nation. I say stupid because they either pissed away the money and didn't get a degree, got a worthless degree, or were too disabled to work and therefore shouldn't have taken the money in the first place.
What if I told you that some people become disabled AFTER getting a degree, through no fault of their own? And remember, this is student loan forgiveness ONLY for the disabled, not for a bunch of hippy-dippy art history hipsters. I know a guy who was an engineer and lost his hands in a wood chipper, no freaking joke. Successful contributor to society, probably making good money. But there's no question his ability to earn a wage is now severely impacted, quality of life took a big hit, and it is just simply a freak accident that was in no way his fault. Has a family with several kids too, including some he had adopted. Do he and his family deserve to have the banks come after them?
Denial of first time applications are around 65-70%. Reconsideration denial is 80%-90%. And it usually takes 3-5 years for the first round.
Oh, my.
I knew it was racist in its effects. But I hadn't heard it was deliberately so, before now.
FDR is slowly getting de-deified. http://duckduckgo.com/?q=regim...
There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
Let's say you have a pension with a company. You retire. A few months later the pension checks stop coming because, it is revealed, the financial management of the pension fund was a fraudulent Ponzi scheme. The fund is bust and the money is gone.
Do you now have a right to go over to your neighbor's house and put a gun to his head and take his money, because "someone" has to pay the money you were promised?
Heh. On top of that, if you qualify you get subsidized gas, power, and telephone landline. That's been around for decades and decades.
Frankly, subsidized Internet access and cell service is a GOOD thing. Good luck getting people without those things into lasting jobs.
I do. An ex girlfriend had MS, but wasn't in a wheelchair all the time. Maybe 30% on bad days. The rest of the time you'd never have known.
Getting her and her daughter into housing and medicare was more work than I spent in my full time job. The system is stacked against truth tellers. All of these "protections" against fraud mean it's actually easier to just "lie" even if you're not lying. Streamlining the process will save money AND get help to those that need it. Sure, there will be a small percentage of abuse, but I'm willing to accept that. You should be too. The few moochers out there will simply turn to burglary or other crimes to avoid work anyway.
Be careful what you wish for. I watched my father go from a strong commanding presence to an emotionally stunted frail shell in 5 years after his brain tumors. Guess what? Disability required years of applications and appeals. My mother was a saint, babysitting the local kids and my dad for years until the aid was finally approved. Then, he died, and I lost my father twice.
Go fuck yourself.
That (sic) don't mind if the government pays for the programs that they care about, say, Social Security benefits
The government does not pay for Social Security. Each citizens pays into the fund and generally gets much less back than they put in. Many die before they can collect what they put in and the people who do collect, collect money that is worth less than the money they put in.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
That's not correct. Your money in Social Security is paying for today's retirees. When you retire tomorrow, tomorrow workers will be paying for your benefits. Unfortunately, 20 years from now, there won't be enough workers to pay for retirees.
Funny that you should mention that. In the early 1980s, congress passed a law saying they could "borrow" from the Social Security fund using treasury bonds. So no, you are wrong, even if you are effectively correct since the government has no intent on ever paying back the money they plundered from the Social Security fund.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
The "one"? Well that's generous of you.
Not just an asshole, but an idiot, too.
What percentage of people over 100 years old work now?
Who will employ you in those golden years?
If people in their 50's and 60's have as much finding decent work with 30 years experience, you're simply fucking stupid to not save for retirement and work until 120.
Social security is probably for idiots like you who fail to plan.
Those student loans are probably less than 1% of the loss of tax revenue resulting from tax laws that favour big corporates.
How about we deal with the budget deficit the right way. I.e., by making everyone pay their fair share rather than looking for vulnerable groups to rape.
I have the same feeling about senior citizens.
If you are lucky, someday you are going to be one. I bet that you will be just as adamant then that the promises that were made to you while you were working and having money extracted from your paycheck based on those promises be honored, as you are adamant now that senior citizens who have had their money taken with the promise of benefits when they get old are "lazy losers".
Your reply to the OP is a non-sequitor. People paid into social security their whole life and they have a right to expect the benefits from that. That those benefits will be coming from current taxpayers is irrelevant to that statement.
No, tell that special snowflake to pay back all the money he received in toll free roads, public schools, etc. I bet if he is college age he'd agree that he shouldn't have to pay for it. Even though I had to pay into social security AND pay for my own school.
Time to adopt the Starship Troopers model - snowflakes aren't citizens until they do federal service. (I would say 2 years military or 3 years volunteering in hospitals)
Clinton is a square shooter. Clinton 2016!
1) This is funded by government.
2) All loans are given with a risk attached. Every lender knows that a small number of loans will never be repaid. The interest rate takes this into account such that they still make a profit because those loans get balanced out by a portion of the interest payments made on other non-defaulting loans. That's the reason the banks who specialise in lending to people with low credit scores have much larger APRs than normal. The banks put a lot of effort into hedging different loans to reduce this risk to maximise their profits and minimise the interest rates (since that's required to be competitive).
3) These are people where it is recognised they are never going to be able to work again. That means they will never be able to repay the loans, so all the government is doing is writing off debt where there is no already no hope of recovering that money. The only real impact is it removes the stress hanging over the heads of those 400,000 people. This is a good thing.
I thought the US pushed a lot of businesses to hire more disabled individuals and now I guess we are just forgiving their loans and taking care of them? I know some people end up having some sort of debilitating health issues, and can accept that some probably end up not able to work. But this number seems a bit high and I wonder what the government defines as disabled enough to forgive such loans?
Something for both you and the poster above you: The last psychiatrist
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
I have over $20k I can't pay back that I got nothing for. The University of Georgia accepted me into a PhD program, then when I got there said they didn't know why I was there because I was accepted outside the normal process by someone who just left (apparently not on the best terms), so they put me in a different program in a different department and everything went tits up from there.
UBI? Seriously, what the hell makes you think that you, or anyone else for that matter, is entitled to a UBI?
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
Er. Technically, there is already a trust fund for surpluses. However, by law, it is spent on non-transferable bonds from the Treasury. It contains no 'liquid' funds. That cash raised from selling the non-transferable bonds is then put into general revenue and spent. Whenever we reach the inversion point, the Treasury department will have to pull money out of general revenue to pay off those bonds.
If you ignore the accounting terms, the money is essentially spent and will have to be repaid from the US government's general revenue in the future. This is by law, so even if you abolish the wage cap, you'd essentially just be raising general taxes and not financing Social Security except on paper. It's inaccurate to say 'Social Security is broke' as Social Security must be cash flow neutral (all funds are either dispensed via benefits or be used to buy bonds), it is accurate to say all of the surplus funds have turned into future liabilities on future budgets.
I'm often shocked at how few people realize this. It's not inherently a bad thing (cheaper than borrowing from other sources, for example), so long as folks understand the money is being spent now and has to be repaid later.
Close. All Social Security surplus funds MUST be used to buy Treasury bonds. Social Security Trusts (there's two of them) must use the extra cash to buy special (which means non-transferable) interest-bearing federal government securities. The Treasury takes the money from those sales, and puts it in general revenue.
Trust Fund obligations or liabilities are considered "intra-governmental" debt. So far, the US government has paid off every bond it has issued, more or less.
It's clearly the best use of our tax dollars and easiest way to stabilize the economy. We'll get there eventually.
Cheap storage VM.
What percentage of people over 100 years old work now?
My grandmother worked until she dropped dead at 83. My father worked until he dropped dead at 75, working 50 years at the same company for three generations of owners. I can't rule out the possibility that medical advances will keep me working until I'm 120.
Who will employ you in those golden years?
Self-employment. Why climb the corporate ladder when you can own the corporate ladder?
If people in their 50's and 60's have as much finding decent work with 30 years experience, you're simply fucking stupid to not save for retirement and work until 120.
I wrote that I wasn't planning for Social Security to be around when I retire. I'm still saving money for the future.
Social security is probably for idiots like you who fail to plan.
Social Security are for idiots who didn't plan for their retirements to last 30+ years. A common problem these days.
[...] so long as folks understand the money is being spent now and has to be repaid later.
A point most politicians don't mention and most voters don't want to acknowledge.
y'know, I was skeptical about the BIZX acquisition, but so far you're doing good! Keep it up :)
[...] so long as folks understand the money is being spent now and has to be repaid later.
A point most politicians don't mention and most voters don't want to acknowledge.
Not too different from when I needed to buy something nd the folks had a $20 for one item and a $20 for another. I pointed out I woulkd use my two tens as I needed a $20 for anoother purpose
"No way" "this 20 is for the druggist's"
"But hey Pop.. I'm using my two $10 for the druggists"
"No, son, I want you to use THIS $20"
"Isn't $20 just $20, no matter how it's paid out?"
"No.. I want you tio use THIS $20"
"Yoiu mean you want me to pay with your $20, and then ask the cashier to change my two $10s into a $20?"
"Don't change the subject , son. I want you to pay with THIS $20"
"What if he gives me back your $20 in change?
"Come over here, Dear, , *your* son is being difficult again"
"2$$^*(&"
It's the same measurement we've been using for decades and you can compare it to equivalent numbers in other countries.
You can certainly look at other labor metrics (like labor participation rate) but then you need to compare apples to apples with that same metric for other countries and other points in US history.
But you don't want to do that. Because you're a fucking moron.
based on the percentage of the population that is retired--or else it is meaningless. Guess what, baby boomers are retiring in mass numbers and thus they are counted as "unemployed" by your stupid metric. I guess the existence of baby boomers and the incontrovertible march of time are both "Obama's fault"?
The problem is that you are worse than stupid--you're a stupid person that hunts around looking for some kind of numbers to justify your stupidity--and then you don't understand those numbers because you are, in fact, really pretty fucking stupid.
How about decreasing military, medicaid and medicare spending; increase research grants and infrastructure spending. These are all better suggestions than a UBI. Additionally, why do we need to come up with a "best use" scenario when they could just not collect it. Taxes hurt middle income house holds the most.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
So, gut the safety net and give away money to researchers who will privatize any discoveries? Where do I sign up.
Taxes are a necessary evil. They should absolutely be born by the wealthier, because they get more benefits from society.
Cheap storage VM.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
You are missing one key philosophical point. Life isn't fair. This idea of the world being equal is absurd. There are too many people using too limited resources. How do you plan on creating your utopia without culling half of the worlds population? Instead of trying to make everyone equals, I prefer a system where ones contribution to society is measured and paid, but that's probably because I work for a living. If I was a sofa lounging leech, I'd probably want a UBI.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
So, your ability to make an amount well above any UBI doesn't count? It's not enough that you win, everyone else must fail?
Is that you Ghengis Khan?
Cheap storage VM.
Better yet.... How about discharging the student loans for honorably discharged veterans! At least they contributed something to this country, like their time and possibly their good health.
time to get a free student loan, and maybe pick up a free cell phone as well.
i already get adverts telling me about food stamps. it is getting hard to resist all the freebies while looking for work.
When SS first started there was 16 people contributing to 1 person. Now it's 3. In 10 years it will be 2. We already spend almost 66% of all budgetary financing on entitlements which includes SS. Another 7% to service the already exploded debt. President Obama forgiving the debt, as if he were an emperor granting a favor to the subjects of his empire, has basically tacked on even more debt. Now the able bodied will be complaining too about their student loan debt forgiveness. That debt has to be displaced somewhere and as always, on the backs of producers. It's sad you are permanently disabled, it's sadder that student loan debt isn't allowed constitutional protections like bankruptcy. We would, as a country, had been better served if he would have promoted legislation to allow to it be so instead of pulling this bullshit.
Yeah...originally black people were excluded from social security. I highly doubt it was specially crafted with the "..especially black people, have much shorter expected lifetimes than rich white people. So they pay into the system, but collect much less in benefits.." angle in mind. However, it, like most everything at the time, was made to disadvantage black people. Just not in the way you made it seem.
Uh, cuz they need another "minority" to jazz up the vote and set apart another sector. Not long ago we were busy (PCing) '"handicapped/disabled people to be proud, hopeful, and encouraged to take on the world, to not think of them as inferior. NOW, we need another wedge in the process politic
BTW, anyone heard of Stephen Hawking?
This.
No, I'm a realist. You live in some fairy tale where everyone can live like Bill Gates, if only we redistributed the wealth. Additionally, I don't want to live in a society were ignorance, stupidity, apathy and laziness are not only acceptable, but supported by the state. I want to live in a place where those that work hard prosper.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
OK, who's in the fantasy world now. Hard work does not guarantee prosperity, it doesn't even correlate well with it.
I love hard work and hard workers, but I don't think providing for others hurts them. I think it gives them more freedom.
Imagine a world where you don't have to avoid homeless people or worry those kids terrorizing your neighborhood because their parents are both working low wage jobs and nobody is home to supervise them.
Cheap storage VM.
Yes, I get it. Give poor people benefits so they will commit fewer crimes. Understood. You can try to craft that in as bleeding heart liberalisms you like but it won't change.
What if I told you that some people become disabled AFTER getting a degree
For those people, forgive their loans. I agree with you, move on.
If you are suggesting we should pass policy based on the minority of cases, uh, no. I could care less about "some people". I care about the majority of people. The fact that there's own counterexample is really, REALLY poor reasoning that you should act one way or another.
Did you know that seat belts actually result in more injuries in some cases? We should outlaw seat belts. It's sound reasoning.
this is student loan forgiveness ONLY for the disabled, not for a bunch of hippy-dippy art history hipsters.
For the disabled, that don't have to prove they are disabled any longer. And, "disabled" and "hippy-dippy art history hipsters" are not mutually exclusive.
I know a guy
I know a guy that owns a rocket launcher, but only uses it to eradicate moles in his backyard, and always wears eye protection. Ergo, rocket launchers should be legal.
But there's no question his ability to earn a wage is now severely impacted, quality of life took a big hit, and it is just simply a freak accident that was in no way his fault. Has a family with several kids too, including some he had adopted. Do he and his family deserve to have the banks come after them?
Oh well that's different. It wasn't his fault? I ask why didn't he take legal action against the responsible party (his employer, the manufacturer of the chipper, the person that forced his hands into the chipper ...). Let the school loan be paid from his settlement.
If I become disabled and lose my job, do I "deserve" to have the mortgage company repo my house? They will. Why is this different?
If you are suggesting we should pass policy based on the minority of cases, uh, no. I could care less about "some people". I care about the majority of people. The fact that there's own counterexample is really, REALLY poor reasoning that you should act one way or another.
Nice job mischaracterizing the argument again. You spoke as though all the people getting benefit from this were people who took out student loans they never intended to pay off. It was easy to disprove that point with a single counterexample.
For the disabled, that don't have to prove they are disabled any longer. And, "disabled" and "hippy-dippy art history hipsters" are not mutually exclusive.
Why don't you actually read about what this is? They still have to prove they are disabled. This merely streamlines the process - if they have already proved it to the Social Security Administration, they don't have to duplicate the process to get loans forgiven. Would you prefer to maintain redundant bureaucratic processes? I figured you liked smaller government...
If I become disabled and lose my job, do I "deserve" to have the mortgage company repo my house?
Of course not. This is the entire thinking behind disability pay. Horrific things happen to some people, for no reason at all. Survival of the fittest is one option, where we turn a blind eye and try not to notice the disabled guy starving to death in the street. Civilized societies, though, realize that we can have empathy for the less fortunate and don't have to condemn them to homelessness or worse.
I ask why didn't he take legal action against the responsible party (his employer, the manufacturer of the chipper, the person that forced his hands into the chipper ...).
Ah yes, let's sue our way to happiness! Not every tragedy is due to negligence - freak accidents happen. Do you really want our society to become even more litigious?
Nice job mischaracterizing the argument again. You spoke as though all the people getting benefit from this were people who took out student loans they never intended to pay off. It was easy to disprove that point with a single counterexample.
You are the one that keeps talking in black or white terms, not me. I never said everyone does, everyone did, or any such thing.
If you think one counterexample proves / disproves a point, you are hopeless.
Ah yes, let's sue our way to happiness! Not every tragedy is due to negligence - freak accidents happen. Do you really want our society to become even more litigious?
Right, so instead of suing the responsible party, let the taxpayer cover it. Let the negligent corporation off the hook. You really got something here. Have you ever considered running for office?
Not every tragedy is due to negligence
Well don't keep me in suspense, how'd it happen? Either he was negligent, the manufacturer was negligent, or the employer was negligent. Or the magical wood chipper fairy was negligent.
My wife got her debt written off and we then had to claim the write off as income. So at least they will have to pay taxes on it :/