Conservatives and Libertarians - Sound Off

[Ravi]

"You give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. You teach a man to fish, and he'll have food for a lifetime."

You can give people food, shelter, and clothing, and potentially get NOTHING in return for it besides entitled, lazy, selfish pricks. If you help someone get an education, you potentially get a more productive member of society.

Loaning someone money to get a real education is an investment in the country's future. Loaning someone money for a house just gives them a house. Giving them money for food just gives them food. What does the government get out of those two things besides a needy citizen and a vote?

If it's a government backed home loan, the government could make interest on that loan and the food would give them something to eat so that they could work and make money to pay off the loan. The government can therefore make a profit. Big Government wins again!!!!

Sure, until you loan the money to some uneducated trash man that makes $10/hr and then defaults on the loan because he had no higher education and couldn't make any real money.

The government doesn't benefit just because it's an interest bearing loan. It benefits from a school loan because that person is going to become more productive, and make a higher wage.

You can go to a regular bank and take a completely private loan, default, and that bank is obviously going to go to Washington to recoup its losses from you anyway.

No matter what, we lose as taxpayers. The government has already proven it will back stop bad debt time and time again. They back stopped home loans which got them NOTHING. At least back stopping an education ultimately leads to a PRODUCER.

So an uneducated trash man shouldn't be allowed to borrow money backed by the government but you should be able to? Pauli, I've got news for you...you are no libertarian.

 

[Paulie]

So an uneducated trash man shouldn't be allowed to borrow money backed by the government but you should be able to? Pauli, I've got news for you...you are no libertarian.

No, I've got news for YOU, Rav. You obviously need some student loans to go back to school and continue learning, because you are one dumb ass chick, let me tell you.

The trash man comment referred to getting a subsidized HOME loan. I don't agree with government subsidized home loans, Rav. Especially to a trash man making $10 a fucking hour. I DO HOWEVER, agree with government subsidized STUDENT loans, because they ultimately serve to produce an educated, productive member of society that will be able to PAY BACK his student loans, and afford his OWN home loan in the future, because he's got a good job that pays enough.

Why are you so fucking stupid the last couple days? In your wanton desperation to somehow try and prove I'm not something, you're instead making yourself look like a fucking loony toon. Do you realize that?

I agree with ONE FUCKING GOVERNMENT SUBSIDY, out of the fucking PLETHORA of them that exist, and you're having a hell of a time figuring that out apparently, because you can't even discern a simple statement I make.

You're out of mulligans Rav. I'm not going to help you through your fuck-ups anymore. This was the last time. From here on out, you say something retarded, I'm calling it like it is.

 

[Dante]

As libertarian as I am, I agree with student loans on their own merit. They generate revenue, and in fact, PROFIT. They serve to offer people an education they otherwise may never have been able to afford, and they add skilled workers to the labor pool. They are not "hand-outs". They get paid back, PLUS interest. If anything were worth the government INVESTING money in, it's higher education.

Sound off. Who out of the conservatives here agrees with them, who disagrees, and WHY?

You're just proving my point from the other thread. The majority of libertarians are only libertarian toward other people, but not toward themselves.

I can change your quote to justify how I feel about government backed mortgates:

I agree with government backed loans on their own merit. They generate revenue, and in fact, PROFIT. They serve to offer people a place to live that they otherwise may never have been able to afford, the provide workers with the ability to work simply by giving them the opportunity to enjoy a stable lifestyle. They are not government "hand-outs." They get paid back, plus interest. If anything were worth the government investing in, it is economic stability for its citizens.



It may surprise you to know that no group of people from any political persuasion thinks people should be given hand-outs. The vast majority of us believe that people in need are going to overall use the so-called handout as a stop gap measure. Just because there is a percentage that scams the system isn't a reason to destroy the system since it works, overall.

Just for fun, this may surprise you:

Students are a poor credit risk. So the federal government protects the interests of Sallie Mae and other private student loan companies. The feds pay interest rates on student loans that are at least 2.34 percent higher than the rates on commercial loans. And if a student defaults, the government pays off his debt. So Sallie Mae and other lenders reap extra-high interest payments at public expense -- and the taxpayers get stuck paying for the defaulters.

Washington Times - Student loan mayhem

And this:

Paul supported his children during their undergraduate and medical school years, preventing their participation in federal student loans because the program was taxpayer-subsidized.

Ron Paul - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[DiamondDave]

I believe in the GI bill. Should I have to go into the Armed Forces to avoid high interest rates from the banks? What do you think banks would charge students if there weren't federal student loans?

Should you EARN your benefits?? YEP... not only yep... but HELL FUCKING YES.....

Does it have to be the Army?? Nope... Could it be an entry level job in a corporation that has education reimbursement benefits? Yep... Could it be a normal loan? Yep... Could it be saving it up for yourself? Yep....

What would banks charge?... WHAT THE MARKET WOULD BEAR..

Again.... you are not owed this because you fucking exist..

Owed? Hmm how can you be owed if you are required to pay them back plus interest? the rate from the bank would be outrageous and banks don't have to loan you money. If you hadn't said hell fucking yes, you wouldn't have meant what you said?

It is not just money that can be owed... but the right to be able to borrow it from the government that was never set up to be a national lending institution for individuals who want their personal education... you seem to think that right is owed

Whether the government charges interest is not the issue... it is whether this is a job of the government

And as for the Iraq or any other war... please read your constitution to see that a primary charge of the federal government is national defense/military

 

[elvis]

Should you EARN your benefits?? YEP... not only yep... but HELL FUCKING YES.....

Does it have to be the Army?? Nope... Could it be an entry level job in a corporation that has education reimbursement benefits? Yep... Could it be a normal loan? Yep... Could it be saving it up for yourself? Yep....

What would banks charge?... WHAT THE MARKET WOULD BEAR..

Again.... you are not owed this because you fucking exist..

Owed? Hmm how can you be owed if you are required to pay them back plus interest? the rate from the bank would be outrageous and banks don't have to loan you money. If you hadn't said hell fucking yes, you wouldn't have meant what you said?

It is not just money that can be owed... but the right to be able to borrow it from the government that was never set up to be a national lending institution for individuals who want their personal education... you seem to think that right is owed

Whether the government charges interest is not the issue... it is whether this is a job of the government

And as for the Iraq or any other war... please read your constitution to see that a primary charge of the federal government is national defense/military

I don't think it's owed. just think it's a good idea.

I know what the constitution says. That doesn't mean every war we've participated in has been a good use of funds, not to mention lives.

 

[Paulie]

It's ok to spend hundreds of billions on a war that may not have even been necessary, but it's not ok to loan someone money to go to college.

Hey Kevin, if you're reading this thread, I'm interested in your opinion on government underwritten student loans. I know Ron's against it, but it's probably one of the very FEW things I disagree with him on. I don't have a problem with the federal government investing in higher education. If they absolutely MUST spend money on something, it might as well be something they can profit from and get real production out of.

Even Ron said the other day that he doesn't oppose infrastructure spending, just not in the way it's being done in THIS case. If infrastructure spending can be ok, I think student loans ought to be considered as well.

 

[FistyTheBadger]

As long as the funds for such a program are given voluntarily, I am all for it.

 

[Paulie]

As long as the funds for such a program are given voluntarily, I am all for it.

Student loans are voluntary. If no one happens to want one, no one gets one. You apply to Sallie Mae, or Wells Fargo, or a couple others I can't remember off the top of my head, and they provide you with a certain percentage of your semester costs. You pay it back, plus interest, and you earn a college degree. Everyone wins. You can't even write it off in a bankruptcy, student loans can not be included in bankruptcies. It doesn't get much more rock solid an investment than that.

 

[FistyTheBadger]

As long as the funds for such a program are given voluntarily, I am all for it.

Student loans are voluntary. If no one happens to want one, no one gets one. You apply to Sallie Mae, or Wells Fargo, or a couple others I can't remember off the top of my head, and they provide you with a certain percentage of your semester costs. You pay it back, plus interest, and you earn a college degree. Everyone wins. You can't even write it off in a bankruptcy, student loans can not be included in bankruptcies. It doesn't get much more rock solid an investment than that.

I was speaking of the funds, not the loaning activity. I was also responding to your original premise which involved government funding, not bank loaning.

 

[Paulie]

As long as the funds for such a program are given voluntarily, I am all for it.

Student loans are voluntary. If no one happens to want one, no one gets one. You apply to Sallie Mae, or Wells Fargo, or a couple others I can't remember off the top of my head, and they provide you with a certain percentage of your semester costs. You pay it back, plus interest, and you earn a college degree. Everyone wins. You can't even write it off in a bankruptcy, student loans can not be included in bankruptcies. It doesn't get much more rock solid an investment than that.

I was speaking of the funds, not the loaning activity. I was also responding to your original premise which involved government funding, not bank loaning.

I'm not quite sure how Wells Fargo, for instance, would be mandated to loan money to college students. Not all banks even offer student loans. If Wells Fargo decided tomorrow that they were going to exit the student loan business, I don't think there's anything stopping them from doing so.

The government isn't funding the loan, they're guaranteeing it. The banks are private, for-profit institutions.

 

[elvis]

Student loans are voluntary. If no one happens to want one, no one gets one. You apply to Sallie Mae, or Wells Fargo, or a couple others I can't remember off the top of my head, and they provide you with a certain percentage of your semester costs. You pay it back, plus interest, and you earn a college degree. Everyone wins. You can't even write it off in a bankruptcy, student loans can not be included in bankruptcies. It doesn't get much more rock solid an investment than that.

I was speaking of the funds, not the loaning activity. I was also responding to your original premise which involved government funding, not bank loaning.

I'm not quite sure how Wells Fargo, for instance, would be mandated to loan money to college students. Not all banks even offer student loans. If Wells Fargo decided tomorrow that they were going to exit the student loan business, I don't think there's anything stopping them from doing so.

The government isn't funding the loan, they're guaranteeing it. The banks are private, for-profit institutions.

without government loans, I wouldn't be able to get a loan from the bank without a cosigner. and the rates of these loans from banks are near 10 percent. how does anyone go to college with those kind of choices?

 

[Ravi]

So an uneducated trash man shouldn't be allowed to borrow money backed by the government but you should be able to? Pauli, I've got news for you...you are no libertarian.

No, I've got news for YOU, Rav. You obviously need some student loans to go back to school and continue learning, because you are one dumb ass chick, let me tell you.

The trash man comment referred to getting a subsidized HOME loan. I don't agree with government subsidized home loans, Rav. Especially to a trash man making $10 a fucking hour. I DO HOWEVER, agree with government subsidized STUDENT loans, because they ultimately serve to produce an educated, productive member of society that will be able to PAY BACK his student loans, and afford his OWN home loan in the future, because he's got a good job that pays enough.

Why are you so fucking stupid the last couple days? In your wanton desperation to somehow try and prove I'm not something, you're instead making yourself look like a fucking loony toon. Do you realize that?

I agree with ONE FUCKING GOVERNMENT SUBSIDY, out of the fucking PLETHORA of them that exist, and you're having a hell of a time figuring that out apparently, because you can't even discern a simple statement I make.

You're out of mulligans Rav. I'm not going to help you through your fuck-ups anymore. This was the last time. From here on out, you say something retarded, I'm calling it like it is.

You can call me whatever you want. You are advocating that one American is deserving of federal help while another is not...and you are deciding by which criteria one is more deserving...salary. That isn't libertarian. Heck, it isn't even American.

 

[mightypeon]

Ahh, the social paradice that is Germany,
we have: -A monthly handout of about 150 Euro for each parent missing, does not subsitute a parent but helps a lot.
-BAFOEG An interest free gouverment loan, how much you get per month (between 50 and 450 Euro) depends on your living costs, number of siblings and a lot on the income of your parents. If you do well while studying (graduate in time and on top of the class) and pay back everything in one go, you only have to pay back a third of what the gouverment loaned you.
-Many reknowned universities such as the Humboldt univesity have no tuiton fee (something like 200 €, but in that case full access to the public transportation system is included), the ones that have one are capped at 500€ per Semester.

 

[DiamondDave]

I was speaking of the funds, not the loaning activity. I was also responding to your original premise which involved government funding, not bank loaning.

I'm not quite sure how Wells Fargo, for instance, would be mandated to loan money to college students. Not all banks even offer student loans. If Wells Fargo decided tomorrow that they were going to exit the student loan business, I don't think there's anything stopping them from doing so.

The government isn't funding the loan, they're guaranteeing it. The banks are private, for-profit institutions.

without government loans, I wouldn't be able to get a loan from the bank without a cosigner. and the rates of these loans from banks are near 10 percent. how does anyone go to college with those kind of choices?

Oh boo hoo.. you don't easily get what you want... oh.. how will the world survive?

Though shit... again.. it is your choice and your responsibility

 

[DiamondDave]

It's ok to spend hundreds of billions on a war that may not have even been necessary, but it's not ok to loan someone money to go to college.

Hey Kevin, if you're reading this thread, I'm interested in your opinion on government underwritten student loans. I know Ron's against it, but it's probably one of the very FEW things I disagree with him on. I don't have a problem with the federal government investing in higher education. If they absolutely MUST spend money on something, it might as well be something they can profit from and get real production out of.

Even Ron said the other day that he doesn't oppose infrastructure spending, just not in the way it's being done in THIS case. If infrastructure spending can be ok, I think student loans ought to be considered as well.

One is a function of the government called military/national defense... one is your personal choice of going to college and how it is paid for... big difference

 

[editec]

Personally... I am all for people getting loans to pay for their college..... but that is not the function of the government, to lend you the money for your personal want or need....

It is the business of the government to insure that the people are educated, no less than it is the business of the government to have a military.

Because as we have seen having an educated public IS necessary to have an effective military.

Now... if they are insured like FDIC... ensuring that the lender will pay out as planned... and that the agreement is lived up to... all well and fine...

It is impossible to declare bankruptsy and get out from under school loans, did you know that?

but the government is not there to pay off the lender if some lazy ass kid or adult decides just not to pay back his or her loan....

Not to worry, that is NOT happening.

now if that means loans of higher risk have higher interest rates, so be it...

Don't know what the rate is now, but I repaid my student loans back at a 7% APR. So the government made money on me, and it made money on the vast majority of people to whom it loaned money.

I fail to see what the problem is.

if it means lending practices are more strict, and banks lend less, so be it.... As the Rolling Stones said "you can't always get what you want"... maybe you'll have to pay for community college with a night job while you go to school during the day, until you work yourself into a scholarship or save up enough to pay for the larger college

The government should also be out of lending you money for your house....

Why?

Seems to me they would be the IDEAL lenders for home loans.

What makes you think private banks can do a better job, especially given what you've seen in the last year or so?

 

[DiamondDave]

Personally... I am all for people getting loans to pay for their college..... but that is not the function of the government, to lend you the money for your personal want or need....

It is the business of the government to insure that the people are educated, no less than it is the business of the government to have a military.

No.. it is not the job of government to educate adults.. It is your responsibility to educate yourself

Because as we have seen having an educated public IS necessary to have an effective military.

Since when? And then are you advocating those who get educated by the government then be utilized by the military?

It is impossible to declare bankruptsy and get out from under school loans, did you know that?

Don't care.... does not mean that the government is still set up to be your personal bank

Not to worry, that is NOT happening.

Yes.. it is... not often.. but it is... and it is written into how the program works...

Don't know what the rate is now, but I repaid my student loans back at a 7% APR. So the government made money on me, and it made money on the vast majority of people to whom it loaned money.

Again, irrelevant... government could make money off of the people in many ways... does not mean that it exists to infringe upon individual rights or take over the personal responsibilities of adults

I fail to see what the problem is.

That much is obvious

Why?

Seems to me they would be the IDEAL lenders for home loans.

What makes you think private banks can do a better job, especially given what you've seen in the last year or so?

What bureaucratic program has shown you that government operates better and more efficiently?

And again... our government was never intended to be such a thing... with it's hands into every last aspect of our personal lives and responsibilities

 

[Paulie]

You can call me whatever you want. You are advocating that one American is deserving of federal help while another is not...and you are deciding by which criteria one is more deserving...salary. That isn't libertarian. Heck, it isn't even American.

I'm advocating that ALL americans are deserving of student loans because they produce a college grad, which is something that is a highly valued commodity in today's world.

I'm not advocating for ANY americans to get government HOME loans, because that doesn't produce ANYTHING. You can always go rent, you don't NEED a house. Someone buying a house doesn't add to the overall production of society, it just gives them a house and adds more debt to their name. Not productive debt like student loans, just DEBT.

If that's not American, then you're saying conservatives aren't American.

I picked ONE government help policy out of ALL of them that I decided I can get behind, and that somehow negates my entire ideology because YOU fucking say so? Fuck THAT shit. You don't get to decide my ideologies and philosophies.

Remember all those things you like to say DON'T make people a liberal? When does someone finally earn their respective proclaimed label in your opinion? When they meet YOUR personal criteria? You're a fucking joke, dude. Seriously.

 

[Ravi]

awwwwww....sometimes facing the truth is difficult, isn't it Pauli?

 

[Paulie]

awwwwww....sometimes facing the truth is difficult, isn't it Pauli?

Facing what truth?

Because I agree with ONE government help program out the MANY, I'm not a conservative, or a libertarian? I'm required to disagree with EVERYTHING, or my entire ideology goes out the door because YOU say so?

Get real. I'll pick my own label and you pick yours, and we'll call it a day.

Don't get me started on your socialism that you say isn't socialist.

I find it hilarious that the chick who proclaims the most around here that labels have no basis because so many things can be different, decides LABELS now.

You're a fucking hypocrit. How's THAT for a label?