DontBeStupid
Look it up!
- Thread starter
- #61
No, they are NOT the same. Taking a student loan out is a voluntary act. They cannot be compared because one is a turnip cart and the other is a radish.Really?
The one who has taxes increased has less income because it is confiscated from him. In other words, he has no choice and was given no choice in the matter.
The other fully understood that at this point in time, he would have to pay more for additional loans. He, or She, made the choice. It was strictly voluntary.
Please tell Me you understand the difference between entering into a contract and having government confiscate wealth?
And please tell me you understand that in both situations the outcome is the same. A person has less of their own money due to something the government did.
So again, if the "conservative" position is that having less of your money is bad for the economy, why are the Republicans not supporting legislation that would allow people to keep more of their own money?
I'll say this one more time. The GOP position is to continue the low interest rates. Why do you continue to lie about that?
The DEMOCRATS wrote the legislation that lifts the interest rate.
Your point is like saying that because I spent 100 dollars on a new cable service and the government raised taxes on a 1%'er to the tune of 100 dollars, that the outcome is the same.
It doesn't matter if it's voluntary or not. If someone has less of their money to spend, per the GOP, that is bad for the economy. Period. Full stop.
Why then did the GOP vote in favour, twice, of raising rates? Why are they not championing the cause of lower rates to allow people more money to spend? None of you are even trying to address the economics of this. You're trying to make it some kind of bull shit emotional discussion. I don't care if you hate college graduates or hate students. Their money is just as good as yours and if they have less of it, they will spend less, and that is not good for the economy. Right?