this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024
1895 points (95.4% liked)

Comic Strips

12621 readers
3044 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] AtariDump@lemmy.world 362 points 6 months ago
[–] DarkGamer@kbin.social 202 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (22 children)

More like, "we've invented a cure for cancer, but only people who have cancer right now can get it. People in the future are fucked once again and won't get the cure."

Loan forgiveness without making education affordable going forward doesn't solve the problem. It's pulling up the ladder.

[–] xhieron@lemmy.world 72 points 6 months ago (9 children)

So we should just not let the people currently sick have the cure? 🤔

Even in your analogy, curing any cancer today, even if it doesn't extend to future sufferers, is an improvement over curing no one. Because fuck cancer, and fuck student loans.

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Phegan@lemmy.world 60 points 6 months ago

We should still do good things even if we can't do all the good things.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 23 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

What I don't get, is that what moderates keep saying...

You know, the people that constantly shit on progressives and claim we don't want anything unless it's everything.

Isn't the whole moderate mission to take what we can get now and keep working for more? I'm not saying that's what they actually do, that's just their excuse for not fighting for more.

So shouldn't the ones pushing for loan forgiveness now and fixing the underlying issue later be the moderates?

Instead they say if we can't 100% fix the problem in perpetuity, we can't do anything.

[–] jballs@sh.itjust.works 22 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Exactly. Arguing that you're against helping people now because it doesn't go far enough is ridiculous. Help people now. Then continue helping people. Don't let perfect be the enemy of progress.

[–] jumjummy@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Those unrealistic idealists are so frustrating to argue with. Is this a great first step? YES! Can we do more? Also YES.

Take the win, and use that momentum to drive mode change. Trying to go from 0 to 100 in one step is just not realistic.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TooLazyDidntName@lemmy.world 22 points 6 months ago

Could also be "but we might give the cure to people who have cancer in the future, but nobody knows if the government will allow it"

[–] Daft_ish@lemmy.world 21 points 6 months ago (13 children)

So the people who could get relief should abstain because the door is shut on any legislation as long as the GOP are in power?

Awfully compassionate of you.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] thesporkeffect@lemmy.world 17 points 6 months ago

I'm on board, as long as we forcefully agree that cancelling the loans is a good thing - it's just NOT ENOUGH

[–] NekoKamiGuru@kbin.social 15 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Exactly , rather than only forgiving existing loans that should make education free and also forgive existing loans , and perhaps give people who have already paid off their loan some kind of stimulus check as a kind of recognition that their struggle was just as hard as everyone else's and they deserve a break too.

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (13 children)

What about those of us that didn't go outright because we couldn't afford it nor get the loans?

... I'd still be more than happy if education was made free, but there are A LOT of people the system has fucked and Democrats barely even want to glance at the lowest hanging fruit.

[–] trebuchet@lemmy.ml 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Isn't the lowest hanging fruit exactly what they're targeting, i.e. the people who currently have loans, and the higher hanging fruit all the other circumstances people are mentioning here like already paid off their loans or future student who will get loans or in your case people who forewent becoming a student due to the loans?

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Yew, my point is they are ONLY targeting the lowest hanging fruit.

I bring it up NOT to just poopoo on Democrats, but to offer perspective. An inflatable life raft should NEVER be viewed as a fully functioning, sea-worthy vessel, and inflatable rafts is all Democrats ever offer, let alone fight for.

Yes, that's better than the sabotaged canoe Republicans offer, but again, it's about perspective. Some people are not OK with celebrating a dingy like it's a ship.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 164 points 6 months ago (11 children)

I spent five figures paying mine off two years ago.

Still 100% support my tax dollars paying for people's college. In fact, I'd love that instead of the nine wars my tax dollars are paying for instead.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern 34 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

I'd settle for interest free loans tbh...

And then do it for personal homes, too.

[–] uis@lemmy.world 27 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'd settle for universal housing. And universal education. And universal healthcare.

[–] trolololol@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I don't understand why you need all of that. Let's say we agree, next you'll say people deserve clean water and steer the world away from climate disaster and genocide. You want it all!

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] stergro@feddit.de 24 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

The Australian model is also interesting. After your degree you pay a certain percentage of your income to your university for a decade or so. But only if you earn more than the average person.

This means a university gets more money when their students gets good job.

[–] dan@upvote.au 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Other points about the Australian system:

  • The cost of the university course is subsidised by the government. The government pays the majority of the cost, usually around 70-80%. For example, a Bachelor of Computer Science degree at the university I went to (Swinburne) is currently AU$9k/year (~US$5.8k) subsidised vs AU$39k/year (~US$25.4k) full price.
  • The loans for the amount you have to pay are through the government and are interest free. They're indexed for inflation once per year, but this is a much lower increase compared to interest from a bank loan.
  • You only have to pay it off once you earn over $51k/year, like you said. Repayments start at 1% of income and are paid as part of your income tax return.
  • They used to have a program where if you paid $500 or more of the loan upfront, you'd get a 10% discount (so e.g. if you paid $500, it'd reduce your loan balance by $550).

Note that this system only applies to citizens and permanent residents. International students still have to pay the full price. Having said that, Australian universities frequently advertise at college fairs in the USA, as even at the full price plus flights plus accomodation, studying in Australia can still end up cheaper than the USA, and Americans love Australia 🙂

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SupraMario@lemmy.world 23 points 6 months ago (6 children)

The problem is colleges just will keep charging more because they know people will just keep getting them knowing the gov will cover it eventually. The fix isn't to have the gov. Cover some loans, it should be to stop letting colleges be run like a private sector.

[–] III@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Jokes on you, they already keep charging more.

I bet if the government is footing the bill they will demand lower tuition. And unlike lowly poor people, the government is someone they will have to listen to.

You aren't wrong with your point. But both should be true.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] uis@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Agreed. Tanks don't teach, don't heal, don't feed and don't pay pensions.

~~Fucking Putin~~

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 71 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I actually beat cancer. If they suddenly find a cure for cancer now I am going to be so fucking happy! This comment is about student loans...and fuck cancer.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 55 points 6 months ago (2 children)

From the school of “I suffered through [x], so therefore everyone else should suffer, too, even if they don’t need to.”

There’s always going to be a cutoff point where someone has it harder or easier than those that came before. That’s just life. As long as the change wasn’t malicious, just feel good (or whatever is appropriate) for those that benefit from it.

I work in a highly contract-controlled industry, and when things improve there’s always a segment of the group that might be close to retirement or something and gets all pissed that they didn’t won’t realize the benefits of a change that will apply mostly to those that will have longer under the change. They’re the same ones that bitch that new employees didn’t suffer under whatever crappy work rules that might have existed before, too.

So yeah…people that paid off their loans, or guys that I work with that paid for some/all of their kid’s college, bitch about people catching a break on their loans. STFU and be happy that someone else caught a break.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Walican132@lemmy.today 22 points 6 months ago (2 children)

This also needs to go into the cancer he beat is dramaticly easier to overcome than cancer in the future.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Kadaj21@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago (13 children)

I have to wonder if my generation [Millenial] had any effect on university enrollments yet. My kids aren’t quite the age to talk about education plans as I had kiddos later in life @30yo (40 now). I’ll be strongly discouraging uni unless it’s completely unavoidable to what they want to do.

[–] NielsBohron@lemmy.world 12 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm approaching 40 and have three kids from 10yo to 1yo, and I'm still going to encourage them going to college, but in a way that makes sense for them. My wife and I both work at a community college, and there's no way our kids are going to go to a 4-year right out of high school (unless they get a full scholarship for something and already know exactly what they want to do).

Too many students don't know what they want to study, don't value the education, and drive themselves into too much debt. While I highly value the education and skills gained in a bachelor's program, there's no need to be going into debt at a university to take first- and second-year courses when community colleges are effectively free (in CA, anyway)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 8 points 6 months ago (4 children)

I mean the numbers still say that a bachelor's degree doubles or triples your lifetime earnings over a high school diploma. Moreover, an educated society benefits everyone. College is still the right move at every scale. What we need to do is make it a more equitable system.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›