Biden to announce $9 billion more in student debt relief
reuters.com
U.S. President Joe Biden plans to announce on Wednesday that his administration has approved an additional $9 billion in student debt relief for 125,000 borrowers, the White House said.
Biden has said he will pursue new measures to provide student loan relief to Americans after the Supreme Court blocked his plan to cancel hundreds of billions of dollars in debt.
The president's announcement, planned for 1 p.m. EDT at the White House, will bring the total approved debt cancellation by the Biden administration to $127 billion for nearly 3.6 million Americans, the White House said.
In 2020 I voted against Trump, in 2024 I'm voting for Biden.
Is there someone better running for a change?
How about just anyone under the age of 60
Between 40 and 50 would be ideal.
In 2000 Putin was between 40 and 50. Depends on what is ideal for you. Between 18 and 30 would be ideal.
I don't think an 18 year old president is a good idea. Bold of me to say, I know.
Also, I don't think Putin's age was the problem when he took office the first time.. it was that he is Putin.
We need Bernard Sanders.
We need the house and the senate with a comfortable majority. Sanders as president without those critical conditions being met would make little difference.
we need bernard sanders brain inside a younger person. Matt Gaetz isn't using his? maybe some kind of transplant or brain swap device is in order.
Iam not from US even I agree this
We can do better. Dr. Cornel West gets my vote.
You aren't actually serious right?
Cornell has bumbled his micro campaign into irrelevance within weeks of it starting. He's shown no political savvy. He has run for and won no prior office. He'd be a disaster.
Fetterman, or literally any progressive who has won a federal election is a better option.
Dude, if Fetterman ran I'd vote for him in an instant. Doubly so if he took the oath of office in shorts and a hoodie
You shouldn't, He just entered federal Politics. He needs experience and more importantly he needs to be stabilize his Health before he would even dream of going to the next level.
He just won his election against a TV host bullshit artist.
He's playing the game excellently. He'd be a great candidate.
He just needs more experience. He didn’t debate well either. Oz was just such a dumb candidate.
Agree to disagree. I think he'd do fine. He'll debate better than Biden. He's got a record of victory against big names.
Thats plenty. We could have elected a boot in 2020 to oust Trump. We basically elected weekend at bernies Biden. But its fine. Whatever it takes.
And honestly, I'd be shocked if there are even debates. If Trump doesn't' show up for primary debates, he doesn't deserve the privileged and airtime that general debates would offer.
That’s reasonable. I’m not saying I wouldn’t vote for him. I prefer politicians that know how to play the game and will be strategic over giving idealistic speeches that sound great but never go anywhere.
Personally I don’t care about Biden’s age. He’s perfectly fine. If not Harris is there for a reason. We are moving forward. Fetterman has the same mindset actually: https://www.businessinsider.com/john-fetterman-never-understand-progressives-support-joe-biden-2023-9?amp
It's pretty clear to me the way the DNC has been buying airtime for Newsom that Biden won't actually be on the ticket in 2024. They're pulling a bait and switch and we're in the bait phase.
I'm promoting Fetterman because I want a real progressive option instead of a force fed Newsom. And as far as playing the game, it is a game of idealistic speeches and sound bytes. It doesn't matter how Machiavellian you are if you can't win Iowa, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania. Fetterman can deliver those states.
I'm all for staying with Biden for the moment. But the second he starts to waiver, in dropping what I'm doing and joining the Fetterman campaign. Newsom will lose if he runs against Trump.
I'm voting for cornel west because I like what he says, not what people say about him. but the people talking shit on him cement my belief he's the right guy.
This some ignorant ass shit, but I'm not worried.
You don't really strike me as the "actually votes" type.
I live in a swing state. you can buy my vote for $20,000
Bruh why I gotta pay you when I already know you wont get off your ass to do shit.
if you don't want it, don't buy it.
Not true at all, still polling at 5% and will get at least that in the general.
Not surprised someone who thinks a walking corpse like Fetterman is a better option would be so ignorant.
Folks, I give to you the anti reality views of the Green Party in real time!
Wow. First time I've seen anti gay rhetoric on Lemmy
Nonbinary people refer to themselves as Enby (N.B.).
So you're against nonbinary people? Wow. That explains a lot of your conservative positions.
Enby is essentially an equivalent to boys/girls, and some nonbinary people like the term while others do not. I hadn't realized there was mild controversy on it, I was just using it because I wanted to be inclusive and memeing but not formal. Since there isn't a consensus and some people dislike it, I'll go back and edit my comment.
I suspect you don't actually care about any of this since you've unironically used "submissive cuck" as an insult, but it's good information for anyone else who ends up reading this comment chain.
You've got some real thinking to do. Nonbinary people aren't hurting you or anyone. I don't care what people want to call themselves.
Damn man, he didn't say you were stupid, he just said he disagreed with you. Don't need to sling mud for a different opinion.
He did insult someone who has likely accomplished 1000x more with his life, Dr. West. So no, I'm not the one slinging mud here.
Someone saying a public figure with little experience in politics is doing poorly at their third party run is not mudslinging.
This is one of the many reasons that third parties aren't taken seriously. If party members clutch their pearls at critical observations of their candidate, they don't stand a chance in hell.
Besides, Greens are anti science sensationalists. Or have they admitted fault yet on being anti nuclear, anti GMO, ambivalent on vaccines, and entertaining pseudoscience like wifi causing cancer? I don't need Republican lite, grifting populists.
Except he does have political experience and had been involved in many campaigns. You just won't bother to learn or even read his campaign website.
The greens change like any other party depending on leadership. Go read their website and see that you're mistaken on those views. Many have changed over time since I first read them over ten years ago.
This is completely and utterly incorrect:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeder_reactor#:~:text=With%20increased%20concerns%20about%20nuclear,them%20to%20more%20fission%20products.
We have had a technology since the 60s that can reprocess nuclear waste back into fuel. The screeching and fear mongering of anti science sensationalists has been a roadblock in developing these on large scale. The policy of the Green Party fucking literally leads to more nuclear waste than we would have otherwise.
That alone is enough for me to view the Green Party as a bunch of anti science idiots standing in the way of actual progress. But wait, there's more!
Fucking lmao. What a fucking joke.
These are the issues I brought up, and the platform on them only confirms to me that Greens should be voted against at every opportunity. It's a blessing that they're usually as ineffective as they are impotent.
So hey, thanks for sharing their website and platform. You've convinced me that they're every bit as insane as I thought, and unless they make significant changes, I need to vote against them at every opportunity.
I have good news for you then:
https://www.cornelwest2024.com/
Dr. West announced he is running independent so go check out his website.
Once again, the Green party, like all parties, change with the leadership.
I disagree on those issues and will be supporting the green whenever possible as they are the lesser evil to the Democrats and Republicans.
Bro Dr. Wests students don't even want Dr. West to run.
West is being played the fool right now, and you along for the ride.
Fake as fuck. Ben Dixon is a Democrat grifter you're the one being fooled here.
Aight you just a troll.
👍
You're the troll posting an hour podcast like anyone gave a fuck.
Richard Wolff gets mine.
I'd happily vote for Dr. Wolff.
As I'd happily vote Dr. Cornel West, comrade.
There always has been but people are afraid to vote 3rd party because of the oligarchy's brainwashing
It's not brainwashing when the voting system is specifically set up to give an advantage to the dominant parties and to suppress every minority party. There are valid reasons to be skeptical that a 3rd party could ever win without a reformed voting system.
They also can't win if everybody says "don't vote for them because they can't win" so I will carry on voting for them and spreading the word that we all should.
You’d be a lot better off voting for majority party candidates that want to enact ranked-choice voting.
Until that happens, unfortunately the reality is that third parties are going to remain on the margins in the US.
Political parties never change in the US. That's why I'm still voting for the Whig party.
And it's always settled to two major parties, in spite of that. The fact that we've had several parties over the country's history but it almost always comes down to two major parties should tell you something.
Fortunately, there may be an opening soon, with Republicans in disarray.
They can't win because they don't even play the game correctly. You can't just get up and give grand speeches about radically different ideas, with little to no strategy or evidence to back it up and expect to jump into literally the most powerful job in the world. It's utter nonsense. Unless you're a Billionaire that wants to buy your way in.
You can tell none of the third parties are serious because all their attention goes to the presidency.
They have no consideration for what would happen if they actually won. No representatives in the House, no senators, no state governors even. They'd be lame ducks the instant they were sworn in.
They should be targeting Congressional seats and state governorships. Instead, they're just grifting money.
Congress spent the last century concentrating power in the executive. I think you'd be surprised what a motivated individual could accomplish.
You're underestimating Congress. It still plays a lot of roles, especially the Senate. It just isn't obvious because the president's party typically has control at the beginning of their terms.
This would probably work for Greens except that they don't have people running for those positions.
what's the senate going to do? remove them? not if the senators are jailed on corruption and war crime charges.
You are aware that the Senate must confirm all cabinet positions, right?
the senate is supposed to, but both there is already a precedent for acting secretaries
It's not fear. Third parties simply do not work with our system. If you want third parties to succeed, then we need to
Ideally star or approval instead of ranked, but honestly anything is better than the current shit show.
Simple Math = brainwashing
FPTP makes 3rd parties counterproductive.
It's not that simple. Several factors come into play.
The biggest systemic issues are the first past the post voting system and the electoral college (for president).
People who have even a simplistic understanding of how the system works and the track record for third parties know the odds are low. Those who are pragmatic will vote for Dem or Rep. In the current polarized political climate people are less likely to take a chance with a third party vote.
Also, the press mostly ignores candidates of other parties. So they aren't as well known and thus can't get popular enough to get traction.
If you really want more parties to have a chance, push for alternate voting systems like ranked choice, cumulative, etc.
This chart from fairvote.org compares a number of different systems based on their research.
Things I wrote in a GE sociology paper
In 2016 I voted for Gary Johnson because I thought there was really no way anyone would vote for the other two.
Gary Johnson is a fool who didn't even act like he was seriously running for President. It looked like he drew the short straw.
Still a better choice than what we have today.
I have no idea what elements of libertarianism you like, nor why a ex-Republican for that roll in your mind, but he would have been a bad Republican, but not Trump. He had no chance so it really didn’t matter
And Jo Jorgensen in 2020!
Amen. Proud to support Dr. Cornel West and the Green party in 2024!
These people are really brainwashed, either that or it's DNC bots downvoting you
After reading your post history, the only potential bot here is you Boris.
your russophobia is disgusting
So is every Russian who supports Putin.
I couldn't give a fuck what you and all the rest of the lads at the troll farm think.
🥔
You think I'm Boris Johnson? Mate how did you know
I was approved for relief but thanks to fucking Supreme Court and weak as Biden I am forced to pay student loans. Fuck him. He should of canceled all the debt.
How is it the result of “weak” Biden? How does a “stronger” president overrule the Supreme Court?
See Andrew Jackson.
Who was objectively a terrible president.
He did that because the supreme court told him not to genocide indigenous folks
You're saying Biden should invoke more "genocide the indigenous folks" precedents?
And how is it Bidens fault the supreme court is corrupt?
Biden made student loans undischargeable even in bankruptcy
Terrible take. Biden was poised to cancel student loan debt, and the Supreme Court said no. You know how the branches of government work, right?
$9 billion for 125k borrowers is $72000 per borrower
Would be nice if they would vanish the 40k in loans I have that I've been paying on since the Obama years. I've paid in far beyond the total amount I ever borrowed, while the compound interest just added it all back over the years. Progress has been very slow for me to pay that off, started payments with about 50k loans, after being ballooned up from the original principal from several years of economic hardship forbearance where the interest still gets capitalized.
You should look into the Income Driven Repayment plan: https://studentaid.gov/idr/
It's one of the new major programs from the Department of Education and can help a lot with reducing repayments while eventually being eligible for full forgiveness.
I filled out the application and both the payment and interest doubled for me, not sure where is the benefit here. Hell, maybe I lucked out with my 30 year loan
That's nice for those who it can help, but I don't really need help making the payments. I'm just fed up with having to pay them at all since I've already paid back much more than I ever borrowed.
Biden's new SAVE plan is set up so that any interest not covered by your IDR payment is not capitalized. It would probably also be worth your while to look into the forgiveness plans and terms because you might be able to reduce how much you owe based on previous payments.
Just cap the interest rate, my man. That would solve the entire problem.
at zero. If the loan is risk free it shouldn't be profitable, to do anything else is to funnel public money into the banks.
At 0% interest, no bank would offer loans, because it would literally just be them losing money managing loans they make nothing from.
Zero percent and govt covers operating costs with a stipend per loan. Granted figuring out the rate to pay would be a task, and keeping that from being a gouge itself... but better than passing it along to borrowers.
Yeah if you give them a way to turn some sort of profit I think this idea could have some legs. Even something small like OP costs plus a flat thousand or so per loan processed could still keep the game running.
Loan values would still keep going up, but the price would be much more understandable to those taking them out.
IMHO, college tuition and student loans should be handled the way that the healthcare marketplace of the ACA should've been handled: less carrot, more stick.
To the banks/insurance companies:
"If you want to continue to do business with the American public, you must offer competitively priced insurance packages/low or zero interest loans for education on a government run portal. If you don't serve the public in this way, you'll be prohibited from accessing the American people as a market for your for-profit business."
Honestly, the American Consumer Is the greatest driver of global economic growth and domestic economic stability in the world, and the American government's single most valuable economic asset. That the government chooses, through its policy decisions to exploit and abuse this asset rather than protect it, grow it, and prosper alongside it speaks to who's really calling the shots.
Sure, it would piss off the hard-line "free market" advocates, but small businesses pay taxes at a level that impacts their profitability in a way that larger corporations simply don't. I feel it's more than fair to level that playing field by some small degree by locking access to the American consumer behind the condition of having to contribute to the betterment of that market.
That requires legislation and we do not currently have a House that can even consider legislation
Definitely a good start until we can get education costs under control.
Biden had a really good plan. Zero interest as long as you pay at least something, and the payment being as low as $1 with a sliding scale based on income.
It's more fair than just forgiveness to people without loans since the debt isn't eliminated. I'm personally fine with eliminating the debt to have a more educated society, but a lot of people aren't, and that's a good middle ground.
This is what I was curious about. Thank you.
Finally a bailout that is for the people! You da man Biden!! Yeeyee!!
At least not bailing out some huge corpos that short-term themselves to bankruptcy.
What a monster lol
The world's on fire.
cool, how about a living wage tho
That’s not his job, that’s congress’s job. He can propose a bill, but wtf is the point when the house doesn’t even have a speaker and the current majority hasn’t brought a single bill to the floor for a vote.
Fight to put a solid majority of Dems in Congress, and you’ll get that. President can’t constitutionally do that.
—You
In case you weren't aware, the President isn't allowed to draft and ratify his own legislation.
The standard debt relief stuff that every administration does as it is required by law, but doesn't bluster about. For example, one cannot just choose to not pay public service benefits as that is part of the deal those workers signed up for.
No, the Trump administration repeatedly blocked loan forgiveness that was already in law. Betsy Devos had to be brought to court multiple times and sometimes ignored court orders to pay for years. I wouldn't trust a republican administration to even live up to the bare minimum of what's required by law.
In addition to not fighting loan forgiveness laws already existing, the Biden administration has also broadened existing forgiveness rules to apply to more people people. They're also crafting a new rule to again try to do what the supreme court blocked in broader forgiveness under a different law that also grants the executive branch power to modify loans to try and get around the ruling.