JakeStarkey
Diamond Member
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,522
- 2,165
- Banned
- #21
The pubs will come through. They want a trade off on something. The dems aren't agreeing at the moment. They will.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's up you ass....you know? The place where you keep your head?Yes, that whole keeping interest rates below what the market would charge has worked out so well for the housing industry, why not student loans?
Is there anything in which you wouldn't want the federal government to meddle? Anything?
Oh, and can you please point to the enumerated power in the Constitution that grants the federal government authority over student loans? I can't seem to locate it.
Ah, another MENSA member here on our board I see. That's quite the compelling retort...well thought out, specific and backed with logic and reason. Impressive. I bet you were the captain on your high school debating team.
Once again, Republicans show us who they work for. Their hatred of this president and his landmark health care law seeps from their pores. They would rather gut preventive health care funds (part of the ACA) than ask a small percentage of wealthy people to pay a little extra in order to prevent student loan interest rates from doubling.
Student Loan Vote: Republicans Block Bill To Extend Low Interest Rates
WASHINGTON -- Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked a bill that would have frozen student loan interest rates before they are set to double on July 1.
In a partisan vote of 52 to 45, the Senate failed to reach the 60 votes needed to begin debate on the Democratic bill. Sen. Olympia Snowe (Maine) was the lone Republican to vote "present." A Snowe spokesman told The Huffington Post her vote was related to her practice of voting "present" on legislation that contains the potential or appearance of association with the private business activity of her husband.
The vote wasn't much of a surprise: Republicans have been signaling they would filibuster the bill because of its cost offsets. Democrats would cover the $6 billion cost of keeping student loan interest rates at 3.4 percent for another year by raising Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes on certain high-earners. By contrast, Republicans have called for nixing a preventive health fund to pay for it.
Ultimately, the vote gives Democrats another chance to try to frame Republicans as favoring the wealthy over the middle class in the midst of intensifying election-year politicking.
During debate on the bill, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) said Republicans were "afraid" to agree to let it come up for debate because they would be forced to choose between helping college students and protecting the rich.
Only rich people deserve to be educated.
Everyone else should work in factories, digging ditches or forced to join the military.
They would rather...
Yes, that whole keeping interest rates below what the market would charge has worked out so well for the housing industry, why not student loans?
Is there anything in which you wouldn't want the federal government to meddle? Anything?
Oh, and can you please point to the enumerated power in the Constitution that grants the federal government authority over student loans? I can't seem to locate it.
Non Sequitur. Try again or fail.
Always, always it is better to use $$$ to create higher paying taxpayers than supporting folks on assistance.
So in short democrats wanted to raise taxes AGAIN???????
What do you mean "again"? They've only gone lower under Obama.
What I don't get is this......the students aren't getting free money. They are fucking LOANS! That means in addition to the principle, they are currently paying 3.?% interest on their debt. The government is going to collect that original money plus interest. There's no reason to raise taxes OR to cut to pay for this.
Yes...there are students who default.....but even if those people file for bankruptcy, those debts aren't eligible for forgiveness. They will get the money back eventually...they can even garnish wages to collect it.
It's up you ass....you know? The place where you keep your head?Yes, that whole keeping interest rates below what the market would charge has worked out so well for the housing industry, why not student loans?
Is there anything in which you wouldn't want the federal government to meddle? Anything?
Oh, and can you please point to the enumerated power in the Constitution that grants the federal government authority over student loans? I can't seem to locate it.
Ah, another MENSA member here on our board I see. That's quite the compelling retort...well thought out, specific and backed with logic and reason. Impressive. I bet you were the captain on your high school debating team.
What I don't get is this......the students aren't getting free money. They are fucking LOANS! That means in addition to the principle, they are currently paying 3.?% interest on their debt. The government is going to collect that original money plus interest. There's no reason to raise taxes OR to cut to pay for this.
Yes...there are students who default.....but even if those people file for bankruptcy, those debts aren't eligible for forgiveness. They will get the money back eventually...they can even garnish wages to collect it.
They want to drop interest rates and they want the taxpaying public to offset the the drops..
In short taxpayers are paying for government loans, which is retarded because taxpayers are already funding the loans.
This is nothing more than a ploy by progressive to paint republicans in a bad right to gain a few more student votes...
It's up you ass....you know? The place where you keep your head?
Ah, another MENSA member here on our board I see. That's quite the compelling retort...well thought out, specific and backed with logic and reason. Impressive. I bet you were the captain on your high school debating team.
What I don't get is this......the students aren't getting free money. They are fucking LOANS! That means in addition to the principle, they are currently paying 3.?% interest on their debt. The government is going to collect that original money plus interest. There's no reason to raise taxes OR to cut to pay for this.
Yes...there are students who default.....but even if those people file for bankruptcy, those debts aren't eligible for forgiveness. They will get the money back eventually...they can even garnish wages to collect it.
They want to drop interest rates and they want the taxpaying public to offset the the drops..
In short taxpayers are paying for government loans, which is retarded because taxpayers are already funding the loans.
This is nothing more than a ploy by progressive to paint republicans in a bad right to gain a few more student votes...
Your wrong...they are not "cutting interest rates". They are keeping them the same....which is still more than the principle of the loan...taxpayers are loaning the money at interest...so I still don't see the beef.
Ah, another MENSA member here on our board I see. That's quite the compelling retort...well thought out, specific and backed with logic and reason. Impressive. I bet you were the captain on your high school debating team.
They want to drop interest rates and they want the taxpaying public to offset the the drops..
In short taxpayers are paying for government loans, which is retarded because taxpayers are already funding the loans.
This is nothing more than a ploy by progressive to paint republicans in a bad right to gain a few more student votes...
Your wrong...they are not "cutting interest rates". They are keeping them the same....which is still more than the principle of the loan...taxpayers are loaning the money at interest...so I still don't see the beef.
Because asswipe, they will default and the taxpayer will get hosed by the democrats once again.. it's freakin fannie and freddie all over again.
Ah, another MENSA member here on our board I see. That's quite the compelling retort...well thought out, specific and backed with logic and reason. Impressive. I bet you were the captain on your high school debating team.
They want to drop interest rates and they want the taxpaying public to offset the the drops..
In short taxpayers are paying for government loans, which is retarded because taxpayers are already funding the loans.
This is nothing more than a ploy by progressive to paint republicans in a bad right to gain a few more student votes...
Your wrong...they are not "cutting interest rates". They are keeping them the same....which is still more than the principle of the loan...taxpayers are loaning the money at interest...so I still don't see the beef.
Because asswipe, they will default and the taxpayer will get hosed by the democrats once again.. it's freakin fannie and freddie all over again.
Your wrong...they are not "cutting interest rates". They are keeping them the same....which is still more than the principle of the loan...taxpayers are loaning the money at interest...so I still don't see the beef.
Because asswipe, they will default and the taxpayer will get hosed by the democrats once again.. it's freakin fannie and freddie all over again.
Pretty much............ A pseudo-bailout...