• Yawweee877h444@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    8 months ago

    I definitely sympathize with people in college debt, but this feels like just temporary wins and doesn’t address the real problems. This won’t solve the overpriced cost of education. Forgive debt now, a new crop of students will just go into debt next, right?

    We need universities to be completely free, universal single payer health care, drastically cheaper housing to rent and own, etc.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      66
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      When someone is having a heart attack you don’t give them a lecture on the importance of diet and exercise.

      There is a problem now, solve it. Fix the root cause next.

    • OpenPassageways@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I agree but that would require Congress to do something. Trying to accomplish this through executive actions alone might not actually work, but it at least shows voters clearly which party is willing to take action on this issue, and hopefully we will end up with a Congress that is more in line with the will of the people.

      • Dragster39@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        I think this might be my key takeaway. He is wiling to address exactly this problem and might continue in the future. Even if you don’t benefit from it, it shows a clear path he is willing to take.

    • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      81
      ·
      8 months ago

      Why do you want free universities for degrees that actually give a net benefit?

      And the reason housing is so expensive is directly due to government intervention in housing.

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        42
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        And the reason housing is so expensive is directly due to government intervention in housing.

        Fuck off you conservative dipshit, try your incredibly wrong talking points somewhere people aren’t gonna see right through it

        • constantturtleaction@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          While it is certainly not the only reason, government intervention via zoning laws is definitely a factor in the house crisis. If mixed use zoning was more universally a thing, then that would be the government not intervening in the housing market.

          • Aceticon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            It’s even more so due to the ultra-low interest rates that were the “temporary” “solution” to the post 2008 crash recession (only they weren’t all that temporary and didn’t really solve the problem, more pushed it along).

            There is a lot of info out there about how such monetary policy pushed money up the yield-scale out of Treasuries and Bonds and into things like Stocks and Realestate.

            Another point is the wealth concentration we’re seeing: as a bigger and bigger fraction of GDP ends up in the hands of the already very wealthy the fraction of GDP that’s seeking investment opportunities (rather than being spent: poorer people spend all or most of their income, whilst rich people spend but a tiny fraction and the rest they invest) exploded and all that has to go somewhere and Realestate is perceived as safe (especially if governments will do all they can to not let prices fall) and has a lot more yield than treasuries.

            This shit goes all the way back to Obama, and was just as much pushed by Republicans as by Democracts.

            • GhostFence@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              7 months ago

              Oh please. None of that even PALES in comparison to the outright supply crunch being caused by housing investors. It doesn’t even compare to the damage being done by the rampant construction of expensive luxury/multifamily homes.

              • Aceticon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                It explains why there are so many house investors now when there were way less about a decade or so ago.

                It also explains the record-setting stockmarket valuations even though most people feel things have gone backwards.

        • GhostFence@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          Yup! Housing investors >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zoning laws or all the other narratives about government interference.

      • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        8 months ago

        because I’m not a piece of shit and want to see my fellow Americans do better. a rising tide lifts all boats.

          • nomous@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Wow TIL all degrees are useless.

            What’d you get your degree in? Maybe you got a useless one.

            • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              13
              ·
              7 months ago

              Where did I say all degrees are useless? I got my degrees in engineering and science.

              • GhostFence@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                7 months ago

                Dude you must think they get their degrees in feminist dance or some boogeyman degree. News flash you want some people to get good jobs with that “useless” feminist dance degree. Because if not, they’re going to crowd into degrees like engineering and greater numbers of engineering grads creates greater competition for engineering jobs… which drives down the pay that most engineers get, plus it reduces the odds of actually getting a starter engineering job. Supply & demand.

                Signed, 100% NOT a feminist.

                • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  The market pretty much tells us what are useful and useless degrees. The issue with your theory is that people do crowd into engineering and then the joke is after they fail they do business.

                  • GhostFence@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    So when they shipped computer engineering jobs overseas the market was saying computer engineering is useless? Man you really know a lot of things that simply aren’t true.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Why do you want free universities for degrees that actually give a net benefit?

        It is in your sentence. I want things that offer a net benefit. That’s why I like fire departments for example. We all benefit from not having uncontrolled fire about.

      • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        That’s 100 percent, certified bullshit.

        Government could fix housing SUPER fast. Tax rental payments on single-family homes at 100% to make SFR build-to-rent impossible.

          • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            7 months ago

            I work in municipal development.

            100% of new single-family developments approaching the city over the last 2 years have been for build-to-rent exclusively. The existing SFR homes are being bought up at massively inflated prices to convert them into rentals.

            The only reliable way to buy a home for your family to live in within 50 miles of the city is to buy empty land and have a custom million+ dollar house built, because the existing inventory is being grabbed up by rental investors and new inventory isn’t even being made available for sale.

            • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              If that is true then your area is very different than the rest of everywhere, because SFH are terrible investments. And taxing them is just going to make housing more expensive and fix nothing.

        • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          7 months ago

          Sure, in short housing is too difficult and too expensive to build to keep up with demand. All this is due to government requirements on housing which adds over $100k on average per single family house, as well as it just being a general headeache. And this doesnt even get into the currency manipulation issue.

          • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            7 months ago

            What requirements though?

            And the government doesn’t control monetary policy, so can you expand on that too?

            • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              7 months ago

              There are probably 1000 different requirements for each small town and then add the state and national ones to that. The requirements will be things like getting an engineering report if you remove more than 10 yards of dirt, or add a roof element that makes the house look good.

              The government does control the supply of money via the Federal Reserve. If you are interested I can tell you how it directly makes the rich richer and takes the wealth of the middle class and poor.

              • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                7 months ago

                The fed is independent. If you’d like, I can give you a primer on how that works

                • CableMonster@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  Let me get this straight, the US controls and funds all kinds of governments around the world but they wouldnt control the fed? “But its a private company!!!” Sure it is, its totally not completely controlled by the government…

                  • jeffw@lemmy.worldOPM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    It’s not and they have proven as much every single election cycle by not giving into political pressure.

              • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                7 months ago

                waaaaaaa regulation makes stuff more expensive to do, get rid of it so we can make money at the expense of the ppooooooooorrrrrrssss

                Classic conservative