Elizabeth Warren 2020

[Js1 87,214]

Yeah, I'm not going to stop paying my loans right now and fuck myself on some wing and a prayer that (the right) Democrat gets elected in 2020 with a Democratic House and Senate so I can get them forgiven.  

[GSU&UT 1,799]

Right, you'd have a point if all of us didn't watch Wall Street and the big banks get bailed out for causing most of their own problems in 2008.

[troph 25,238]

Oh I’m very much in favor of major student loan reform. Just not free, just not complete loan forgiveness. I’ve said what I would propose but it likely wouldn’t rebalance income inequality or opportunity the same way.

[troph 25,238]

Right, you'd have a point if all of us didn't watch Wall Street and the big banks get bailed out for causing most of their own problems in 2008.

Well stopping the bailouts is important but even more stopping the risky behavior that led to the need for the bailouts.

[David Dennison 19,560]

29 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

Student loan forgiveness brings back the old fashioned moral hazard conundrum. Basically encouraging graduates to neglect paying down loans in hope of a bailout, analogous to the mortgage crisis. Also this bailout punishes folks who have been responsibly spending, saving, and deleveraging. 

The responsible thing to do is to make student debt interest fully deductible regardless of annual income. This is a solid first step to helping folks with high debt load. 

You should also be able to do away with student loan debt through personal bankruptcy. 

[troph 25,238]

Fixed rates, subsidized lower rates, longer terms to pay back and deferrals and interest cost subsidies are absolutely needed at a minimum.

[gmr548 16,702]

We shouldn't have invested in rural electrification, it punished previous generations that worked hard to succeed without it.

We shouldn't have eradicated preventable diseases like polio and measles (lol fuck), it punishes those who battled through them as kids.

We shouldn't have invested in the interstate highway system, it punishes this who had the fortitude to cross the country without it.

We shouldn't relieve student loan debt and invest in bringing the cost of higher ed down because it punishes those that have paid off their loans.

What do all of these have in common? They are trash takes.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[6th Street 6,692]

24 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Right, you'd have a point if all of us didn't watch Wall Street and the big banks get bailed out for causing most of their own problems in 2008.

Actually Treasury turned a tidy $15.3B profit on the TARP loans from 2008. Is Warren proposing a similar liquidity injection to graduate debt holders, or is it a straight up cash payment with no payback required? 

https://money.cnn.com/2014/12/19/news/companies/government-bailouts-end/

 

[NBMisha 224]

 

I'm all for making college less onerous, and generally for student loan relief as I know some folks for whom this is a terrible burden.  That they didn't think through or realize.   Yet I'm for some reform, some forgiveness).  But all forgveness for everyone?  Something like 1/2 of all outstanding balances are for people with incomes in the top 25%.  Why would we target the top 25% (attorneys, drs, a few engineers) for the bulk of the relief?

I need to do more homework on her stuff.  

[BrickHorn 18,447]

Yeah, I’d certainly like student loan relief but I don’t need it.  I’d prefer a need-based program.  If you go into a low-income line of work that requires a college degree or beyond (teaching or social work or shit like that), then your loans can be forgiven.  But if you take out $100,000 in loans for an MBA that gets you a multi-millionaire track job on Wall Street, you can pay your own damn loan.

[SimonBolivar 11,065]

12 minutes ago, NBMisha said:

 

I'm all for making college less onerous, and generally for student loan relief as I know some folks for whom this is a terrible burden.  That they didn't think through or realize.   Yet I'm for some reform, some forgiveness).  But all forgveness for everyone?  Something like 1/2 of all outstanding balances are for people with incomes in the top 25%.  Why would we target the top 25% (attorneys, drs, a few engineers) for the bulk of the relief?

I need to do more homework on her stuff.  

Well those attorneys, drs, and engineers are going to end up paying for the forgiveness with higher taxes than most others. I'm all for a drastic raise on my taxes to make as much education as free or cheap as possible. 

[troph 25,238]

We shouldn't have invested in rural electrification, it punished previous generations that worked hard to succeed without it.

We shouldn't have eradicated preventable diseases like polio and measles (lol fuck), it punishes those who battled through them as kids.

We shouldn't have invested in the interstate highway system, it punishes this who had the fortitude to cross the country without it.

We shouldn't relieve student loan debt and invest in bringing the cost of higher ed down because it punishes those that have paid off their loans.

What do all of these have in common? They are trash takes.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

And none of them have applicability to the student loan issue.

I’m very much in favor of major reform and some forgiveness but it needs to be need based if we are talking about rebalancing due to wealth inequality. Massive influx to the pell grant programs and major reforms to loan programs. And some post graduate relief in the way brick talks about. All good, Carte Blanche relief to all? I don’t think it’s a good or appropriate idea.

[troph 25,238]

Yeah, I’d certainly like student loan relief but I don’t need it.  I’d prefer a need-based program.  If you go into a low-income line of work that requires a college degree or beyond (teaching or social work or shit like that), then your loans can be forgiven.  But if you take out $100,000 in loans for an MBA that gets you a multi-millionaire track job on Wall Street, you can pay your own damn loan.

Same. And I’m a good example of the system prior working. 3.25% fixed for 20 years for $60,000 for law school. I was frugal in undergrad and law school and worked to pay my bills.

Costs are too high now and loan programs are no longer subsidized enough. Higher costs, variable rates and higher rates are choking grads, no doubt.

But a modest monthly payment is something most grads can afford. And it will prevent some significant waste allowing for additional programs to help those in significant need.

[wildcat09 29,595]

2 hours ago, GSU&UT said:

If this wasn't happening, you'd probably see more people agree with you.

I don't remember where I saw it but I think Boomers on average were able to work their way through a 4 year degree with something like 300 hours working a minimum wage job. Doing the same today takes something like 4,500 hours.

[TwiceHorn 32,087]

Free college kind of worries me.

It just seems to me that a college education, and the major chosen, should be subject to some sort of cost-benefit analysis.  Granted it doesn't occur already, but at least there's an incentive to do it.

In the UK, there apparently is kind of a standard financial aid package and you pay on it for only so many years, like after 20, it's extinguished.  Forgiveness seems to be kind of a blunderbuss solution.  But she generally isn't a proponent of the blunderbuss approach, so maybe she's onto something.

Edited April 30, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[BrickHorn 18,447]

Free college should also come with merit-based restrictions.  If you qualify for a university, we’ll pay for it.  If your best option is some for-profit internet college that sells useless degrees to anyone willing to pay, uh no...  We’ll pay for you to go to a legitimate trade school, though.

[TwiceHorn 32,087]

9 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

Free college should also come with merit-based restrictions.  If you qualify for a university, we’ll pay for it.  If your best option is some for-profit internet college that sells useless degrees to anyone willing to pay, uh no...  We’ll pay for you to go to a legitimate trade school, though.

Yeah, that goes without saying.  Be interesting to see what happens.

[troph 25,238]

15 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

Free college should also come with merit-based restrictions.  If you qualify for a university, we’ll pay for it.  If your best option is some for-profit internet college that sells useless degrees to anyone willing to pay, uh no...  We’ll pay for you to go to a legitimate trade school, though.

I think she's already wanting to cut off federal funding for for-profit educational institutions.

[SKJ 1,322]

On 4/22/2019 at 6:42 PM, Bruh Man said:

Republicans have really done a great job pitting working people against each other. Seriously, Trump could add 1 trillion dollars to the military industrial complex tomorrow and there wouldn't be a peep from these posters. 

I know everyone loves to hate on the current generation, but the facts are we fought two wars, came home to the bankers crashing the economy and at the same time have to deal with automation and globalization transforming the job market. It's about time something bold like this be done for the working people of this generation.  

Andrew Yang

[GSU&UT 1,799]

1 hour ago, 6th Street said:

Actually Treasury turned a tidy $15.3B profit on the TARP loans from 2008. Is Warren proposing a similar liquidity injection to graduate debt holders, or is it a straight up cash payment with no payback required? 

https://money.cnn.com/2014/12/19/news/companies/government-bailouts-end/

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/22/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-student-debt.html?module=inline

 

It's canceling any federally held debt for households whose annual income is less than $100k. I don't get your argument about profit turned, you seriously think people who no longer have huge debt wouldn't be more freed to spend money that could stimulate the economy, or are we holding corporations as some perfect sacrosanct thing because America?

Edited April 30, 2019 by GSU&UT

[6th Street 6,692]

8 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/22/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-student-debt.html?module=inline

 

It's canceling any federally held debt for households whose annual income is less than $100k. I don't get your argument about profit turned, you seriously think people who no longer have huge debt would be more free to spend money that could stimulate the economy or are we holding corporations as some perfect sacrosanct thing because America?

You're arguing money multiplier effect versus tangible returns on TARP - that is a false analogy. 

If the goal is to stimulate consumer spending, a far better plan would be a broader tax cut for the working class that spans ALL Americans, not just those with college degrees. This would also resonate with Rust Belt whites in MI, WI, and PA who will decide the election. 

[GSU&UT 1,799]

12 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

You're arguing money multiplier effect versus tangible returns on TARP - that is a false analogy. 

If the goal is to stimulate consumer spending, a far better plan would be a broader tax cut for the working class that spans ALL Americans, not just those with college degrees. This would also resonate with Rust Belt whites in MI, WI, and PA who will decide the election. 

If you seriously think she's just going to ignore the Rust Belt after 2016 and non-educated poor whites and PoC then I don't know what to tell you, it's clear to a lot of us she understands the problems of many. It all depends on who gets elected to the Senate, these are ambitious proposals that likely aren't going to all easily get passed, instead they are to show us that she understands how much inequality exists right now.

[bad_teammate 13,561]

50 is ... a lot

 

[henrygandorf 29,228]

there were stories a couple weeks ago about her burn rate.  it was crazy, she was spending money like elton john.

[Js1 87,214]

More like a Republican Congressman.

*badum-tiss*

[Bruh Man 3,160]

 

[Patrick Bateman 3,982]

Strangely, this will probably help her more than most announced policy initiatives.  Fucking kills.

 

[happyfunball 481]

@troph

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[bad_teammate 13,561]

That's right, Julian, bend the god damned knee.

You will all bend the knee!

(Liz rules)

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[Red Five 41,758]

Would have. 

[bad_teammate 13,561]

Records matter, and Warren's is good.

[GSU&UT 1,799]

Came to post those videos. They're only further proof that she's not pandering at all, she absolutely gets what our economy has done for the poorest and most vulnerable.

[406W30th 1,111]

30 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Came to post those videos. They're only further proof that she's not pandering at all, she absolutely gets what our economy has done for the poorest and most vulnerable.

And to the demographic formerly known as the middle class.

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,465]

Those demographics are too stupid to know she is doling out the truth.  They are more concerned that she's going to take away their guns and make them have five abortions before lunch.

[bad_teammate 13,561]

I love Liz. And if she's not in your Top 2 then come fight me in a Spec's parking lot on Friday night.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

^Follow up tweets

.@SenWarren: "The information that has been given to us in the Mueller report clearly constitutes adequate information to begin an impeachment proceeding in the House of Representatives."

Warren: "No matter how many times Mitch McConnell or the rest of the Republicans want to wish that away, it's there in black and white in the report."

"We took an oath not to try to protect Donald Trump. We took an oath to protect & serve the Constitution of the United States of America & the way we do that is we begin impeachment proceedings now against this President."-Warren ends her 40 min floor remarks on Mueller report.

[Guest Lobo]

Kudos to her for at least trying to get black & white information out there.  That some of you trip over yourselves to back completely hollow and unproven candidates when somebody like Warren is out there is beyond me.  I'd vote for a Weld/Warren ticket,.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

On 4/27/2019 at 9:32 PM, bad_teammate said:

You're god damned right she does!

At the Bernie launch party I went to today a guy in his 30s said something like, "I like Warren, but I don't know if she's electable" and it took every piece of my self-control to simply be annoyed when I responded instead of violently apoplectic.

Damn you really are close to unhinged. Getting violent because someone doesn't think your girl is electable. Damn you should have punched him right in the face.  You really need help.  I'd love to throw some lines your way, just to see your face change color, and the veins pop on yer forehead and neck.

[GSU&UT 1,799]

2 hours ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Damn you really are close to unhinged. Getting violent because someone doesn't think your girl is electable. Damn you should have punched him right in the face.  You really need help.  I'd love to throw some lines your way, just to see your face change color, and the veins pop on yer forehead and neck.

Hell yeah

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

I could totally see Trump doing this, mingling with the common folk, doing common folk things. 

/sarcasm 

[UTDD 362]

It seems like she is getting a little traction now.  Her toughest issue right now to me is that I feel like Bernie/Warren are fighting for the same voters and that neither one can win the nomination if the other has decent strength.  It probably helps Biden a lot if those two split votes and are both viable as long as possible.

[RomaVicta 30,606]

Warren as Veep or AG or whatever highly placed role in the executive would suit me fine. She has an iron grip on vote right now.

[UTDD 362]

7 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Warren as Veep or AG or whatever highly placed role in the executive would suit me fine. She has an iron grip on vote right now.

I wonder if Warren in the end would love to be perhaps the Secretary of the Treasury and Chairwoman of the Working Group on Financial Markets working with the Securities Exchange Commission, etc.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

12 minutes ago, UTDD said:

It seems like she is getting a little traction now.  Her toughest issue right now to me is that I feel like Bernie/Warren are fighting for the same voters and that neither one can win the nomination if the other has decent strength.  It probably helps Biden a lot if those two split votes and are both viable as long as possible.

I don’t think the Warren voters would flock to Bernie if she pulled out.  They’d probably split among the top 5 of Bernie, Biden, Kamala, Buttigieg and Beto

However, If Bernie pulled out, I’d speculate Warren to get the lion’s share of his supporters.

[UTDD 362]

17 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I don’t think the Warren voters would flock to Bernie if she pulled out.  They’d probably split among the top 5 of Bernie, Biden, Kamala, Buttigieg and Beto

However, If Bernie pulled out, I’d speculate Warren to get the lion’s share of his supporters.

You may be right, I honestly don't know.  I only know anecdotally from progressive friends (I would classify most as hard left progressives not mainstream Democrats) I know personally (about 20-30 people or so) I have talked to about the election primarily in Texas and Hawaii that Bernie/Warren are a combo of 1 or 2 for most of them with Harris sometimes creeping in there but never Biden.  If Bernie wouldn't pull the majority of Warren support if she pulls out, I think Bernie is then probably doomed anyway unless Biden stumbles.  I don't believe Bernie will ever garner enough non-white support, it's a really tough slog for him there.  I think Warren on the other hand could do better there.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

This is how you campaign asymmetrically

[bad_teammate 13,561]

she didn't show my note

Edited May 11, 2019 by bad_teammate