https://x.com/9mm_smg/status/1747712542409933290 bankers are at least capitalists. These trash takes all lead to Marxist solutions. No thanks retards. Iâm familiar with your game. Pay your own debts, freeloaders
Discussion
I agree that the gov should get out of student loans and let the banks do some underwriting. Then these commies will complain that they canât get approved for their sociology degree with their poverty background. Either way they will complain. Basically they want everyone else to fund their lifestyle like the true commies they are
Tax payers should see how these western commies are using this student loan money. I was shocked. They live in nice apartments, go out to eat all the time, itâs like they think they wonât have to pay the money back plus interest. And then 10 years later after nothing but Lâs in the real world, we get these crying takes about how unfair it is. They did it to themselves. Free will. Not my problem. I saw thru it, so I should have to bail them out? Pass. Enjoy the prison you created
There's a balance here. We have laws against predatory lending for a reason. I'm not saying that we need to just give away total debt forgiveness, but I also want to make sure I point out that the lending strategies are predatory and the lenders need also to be held responsible for their crimes against the American people.
High interest rates are not the only way that lending can be predatory, but also lending too much. It can lock people into permanent debt, even at "reasonable" interest rates.
Total and complete unregulated markets are almost as wrong as communism. The state has a responsibility to ensure both the freedom of its citizenry to do business and at a minimum some protection against bad actors by hindering their crime.
Bro this is a retarded take
The extreme amounts of lending for student loans are BECAUSE they are not a free market. Theyâre backed by the government. Thatâs not a free market.
If the government didnât back them, 18 year olds wouldnât be able to get them any more than they can get business loans, mortgages, or credit cards.
Government intervention CREATED this problem
You misunderstand me. I didn't say we needed more government involvement. I agree that the problem is too much involvement. We need to recognize that the government has subsidized usury in the form of predatory lending, and now we need it to recognize its error and somehow fix it.
The government IS the predator though
Look at how the East German officials used to justify the Berlin Wall
It was unfair when the Soviet Union had paid to educate its citizens for them to take their educations elsewhere
In other words⌠we own you
The government is many people and can be replaced. I hope, though not completely expect, that we can reverse some of the damages it caused by putting good people in it.
The part of the government that is the predator lender needs to be cut off, and the replacement government come up with plan to repair the situation in like fashion as happens in other predatory lending scenarios.
Every government is predatory. Itâs the nature of the beast
I'm not an anarchist. I'm a Thomistic minarchist. The state does have a role to play, regardless of our current tyranny.
It is inevitable, sure, and itâs inevitably a predator
It may be inevitable in nation-sized governments, but I disagree in general. A group of heads of households gathering to enhance the lives of their community can't be called predatory. As it grows the attraction of corrupt individuals does increase, but it doesn't mean inevitable. If our states were only 500k-2M people max, it would be a while lot more manageable. This touches on another one of my principles: localism. Smaller is usually better when it comes to power.
I desire security services (and the freedom to defend myself and my property directly).
I do not desire a monopoly security provider. Do you? And if so, why?
Of course I don't want a monopoly of power, even if those who wield it are chosen legitimately by the people. I do, however, believe the people have a right to organize themselves according to norms they endorse and act against those who oppose them. That is government.
Norms such as "murder is wrong" and "theft is wrong" etc. are obvious, so we can say that the people may Agony someone to make determinations about it and carry out appropriate disincentives. Predatory lending is simply another crime we the people should stand against and appoint someone to disincentivize, including against those others we may have appointed in other roles.
May appoint someone*
"the people have a right to organize themselves according to norms they endorse"
What constitutes endorsing a norm? Can 51% of the population impose a "norm" on 49%?
Does someone need to be appointed in order to justly enforce a norm? Should a non-appointed person be permitted to stop a murderer or a thief?
A monopoly State is inherently rotten at the core
The State is a rejection of common law, subjecting some men to the whims of other codified as "law"
The State is a rejection of property rights in favor of coercive taxation which is in principle unlimited power
I take back âretardedâ but do think it all the way through, brother