Senate votes 38-56 to strike down student loan bill

That's blatantly wrong.

@killzowned24: I'm sorry but this generation does not have it easy by any means. It used to be that ole Pa could just go to work at a factory pressing metal sheets with no education and make THE SAME income (adjusted for inflation) as a college educated individual could today. Wages have stagnated and job competitiveness has increased exponentially. There's a reason so many people are willing to go thousands of dollars into debt for college and it's not for the **** of it. It's because jobs that used to only require a HS education and a couple weeks of training now REQUIRE AT LEAST a bachelor's degree and probably 2-5 years work experience.

Prove it.

Usually democrats are into passing large, comprehensive bills that no one will be able to read by the time they need to vote on it. How about a bill that actually addresses the cost of college first?

Oh right, because they don't think college is too expensive right now. They want even more funding for it.

It's pretty obvious. If you're saddled with more debt, you have less disposable income for other stuff like houses, cars, and various other products/services. You know, the shit that actually produces economic activity? Basic 101 macroeconomics.

Okay, so draw up another bill that doesn't use a tax increase to offset the cost of this program and I'll support it. That is the main reason Republicans opposed it, after all.

I'm not opposed to students being able to refinance their loans at a lower interest rate. I'm simply opposed to the bullshit you fucking Democrats try to attach to bills in the process.

afaik, it's not even a real increase, more of just actually making sure the rich pay their share of taxes for once, and trust me they will benefit from this bill too. also, calm down m8, I'm not a democrat.

So it's not about helping the students at all. It's about increasing taxes. Good to know. I'm glad the Republicans blocked that bull shit.

It doesn't really matter if you aren't a Democrat. You're supporting a bill that is morally false. If you want to help students make a fucking bill that helps them. If it doesn't cost anything for these students to refinance, I'm fine with that. But don't attach shit that you know Republicans won't agree with and then try and act self-righteous when they refuse to bring it past consideration.

That's the kind of morally bankrupt bull shit people don't like on either side of the aisle.

ROFL@ the irony.

But yea, you liberals have never met a handout you didn't like.

how is the option to refi a fed. student loan a handout?

What exactly is ironic?

Senate VOTES.......DEMOCRACY dead?

Umm (aside from the fact that the senate is a woefully undemocratic institution by design even before republicans started abusing the filibuster), 56 senators out of 100 voted in favor of the bill and it didn't pass. You do realize that one of the basic, if not the most basic principle of democracy is that the side with the most votes wins, especially when that side has a majority of the vote.

Then go ahead and tell Harry to change the rules.

And why don't I click my heels three times to get the senate to disappear? Do you have any other vapid statements that you'd like to make?

I refuse to reason with you because you say stupid liberal shit like "even before republicans started abusing the filibuster"...as if the Democrats don't abuse it. When libtards and right wing nutjobs start realizing the problem is EVERYONE in D.C. and all the lemmings that blindly follow R's and D's maybe we can get somewhere. As long as you continue to point the fingers at the other side and give yours a pass this is what we got.

And this was never a democracy, it is a representative republic, the irony was in your wording.

Exactly. You see, the lemmings do not get this. They do not fix stuff like this when they have power because they abuse it as well. This is Washington politics, not Republican politics.

lol

You're really a piece of work vib

If that is all you got out of this.....yep, I am 100% correct. You don't have shit to refute anything I said so you discredit, like all liberals do. The hell with you.

I know I shouldn't be feeding you because I'm 99.9% sure you're trolling, but I'd say you're dumber than a box of rocks if you're actually serious.

Nah, you're dumb. Sorry.

M8 pls. It is about helping the students and the future economy. also, lol at the pretense that we can just provide services/programs for free. I sure fucking wish the businesses around here did the same.

Sorry, but I can't ignore blatant stupidity.

There is no reason to say there are no reasons to insult anyone. Please try to not generalize.

If thegerg actually went to college, he would quickly discover that you're forced to take a bunch of shitty useless classes that don't pertain to your major; colleges will say they do this because they want their graduates to be "well rounded". Well rounded, my ass. Sure, you might be majoring in nursing, but they'll have you take art and literature on the side along with several other useless courses to drain more money from you and push you deeper into debt. He's obviously never been to a mainstream college. That, or he lives in Europe, where post-secondary education is practically free. Goddamn it.

56 voted in favor. Wouldn't that by itself mean that it should have democratically passed? lol

I hang drywall and make between $80,000- $140,000 a year I also have zero debt never went to school. I also pay only 7% in income tax after write offs. life is all good for a drywaller

Also, I call bullshit if you went to a mainstream college. Not sure how vocational or trade schools work, but if you went to a run of the mill university or community college, I know for a fact that you're full of crap. Only reason I'm feeding you is because this forum is deader than shit on a stick, so what the hell.

Yep. Another way to reduce student debt would be for college to reduce their degree requirements so that people could get the degrees in less semesters or taking less classes per semester (and thus be able to work). I mean honestly why do colleges require the equivalent of an Algebra I class when students already passed Algebra II and Trig in high school? Same could be said of an English 101 class.

Refinancing federal student loans should cost billions of dollars for the federal government? If that's the case, how the **** do banks make a profit by refinancing?

I won't support a tax increase of any kind.

And one of the basic principles of the United States is that democracy is tapered to ensure that the majority does not ride roughshod over the minority. The Senate is designed in such a way to ensure that the minority party is still able to influence legislation, so that legislation is given adequate debate and thought through rather than just pushed through by a small majority without taking the views of the minority into account (the House is based on the opposite principle).

Also one of the reasons Republicans have filibustered so much legislation is because they want feel the bills have not had enough debate and because often times they are not allowed to offer amendments. Plus It's hard to criticize Republicans for filibustering Democratic bills, when Harry Reid won't bring Republican bills up for a vote -including ones that have already passed the House.

I'm sorry, but in almost every instance I've been able to choose an elective that was beneficial to my major. Instead of taking General Speech, take a class on technical presentations. Instead of the basic computer class, I tested out of it and took a CAD course and a programming course.

Being well-rounded IS a good thing, you have to have something to talk about with your boss over lunch and those arts course can help.

A funny thing about modern college is that students are now paying record high prices yet their is a distinct trend to try to absorb as little information as possible. I'm talking about things like using Chegg and solutions manuals for coursework. If you're going to be "forced" to take classes, might as well take it as an opportunity to learn and expand your mind. Or bitch about it.

How undemocratic should the senate be? It's already extremely unrepresentative of the American public. Its mere existence already serves as a check against the majority. Alexander Hamilton went through great lengths in the federalist papers arguing against supermajorities.

"The necessity of unanimity in public bodies, or of something approaching towards it, has been founded upon a supposition that it would contribute to security. But its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of the government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice, or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent, or corrupt junto, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority. In those emergencies of a nation, in which the goodness or badness, the weakness or strength of its government, is of the greatest importance, there is commonly a necessity for action. The public business must, in some way or other, go forward. If a pertinacious minority can control the opinion of a majority, respecting the best mode of conducting it, the majority, in order that something may be done, must conform to the views of the minority; and thus the sense of the smaller number will overrule that of the greater, and give a tone to the national proceedings. Hence, tedious delays; continual negotiation and intrigue; contemptible compromises of the public good." - Federalist paper no. 22

If you didn't know any better you'd think he was talking about the GOP.

The filibuster in its current form transforms the modern day senate into a completely different type of institution than it had ever been prior. Its too damn bad that republicans aren't getting their bills put up for a vote - democrats control the senate thus they control the agenda. To the victor goes the spoils. American voters didn't elect a republican senate (they didn't really elect a republican house either, but I digress). If republicans want to vote on their bills they're going to have to actually win the senate. That's how it works in literally every other democratically elected legislature in the world. It's not like John Boehner goes out of his way to put democratic bills up for a vote. Don't feed me this crap about minority rights and how its really the democrats who are to blame for republican filibuster abuse. That's all just spin. The real reason for the GOP's excessive use of the filibuster is simple, they want to make it as hard as possible for democrats to effectively govern, and I think most republicans - if they're honest with themselves - are fine with that.

I know I've wondered this before, but I find myself contemplating how the republicans would/will react when they are continually blocked by the minority party on everything they attempt to do in the future. I don't want this to be the future of the democratic party (I want people to work together for the public), but it seems that when one party sets a precedent the other takes said precedent and ramps it up to a thousand while crying that the other guys did it first as if two wrongs suddenly make a right.

Welcome to US politics, my friend!

lol

Alright well thank you for admitting that you have no idea what you're talking about.

The reason why refinancing federal student loans would increase the federal deficit is because refinancing typically lowers the monthly payments paid by the borrower, in exchange the borrower is in debt longer. This can often be to the lender's benefit as well because, among other things, it lowers the risk of the borrower defaulting, and since the borrower is in debt for a longer period of time they collect more in interest over the life of the loan.

Oh I'm well aware that this is sort of how previously taboo actions in politics become acceptable, but this lack of government being able to accomplish literally anything is particularly corrosive to society. Just a few years ago people made graphs of the amount of filibusters used by each congress and how the 112th congress (the last one) blew away all previous ones. These days we seem to have moved from graphs showing the amount of filibustering, which btw a single member of congress can simply email in, to graphs illustrating the amount of legislation getting passed by congress which as you would expect is as record lows.

Don't get me wrong it's great for companies gaining more money since nobody wants to harm them in any way, but we no longer look out for the individuals of society. Eventually this lack of regulation will lead to monopolies (hell it already has looking at the comcast/time warner merger) that further harm not only individuals, but the market that society relies upon.

The irony of it all is that the excessive filibustering by republicans only makes the executive branch (i.e. comrade Obama) all the more powerful. Making congress completely ineffectual creates a power vacuum that was never going to stay unfilled.

The republican strategy in congress isn't only destructive, it's also self-destructive (on a number of levels).

But that isn't the case.

What would happen if 5 million student loans went into default at the same time? The college bubble will be even worse then housing bubble if it were to pop. How would the government be able to handle a major financial crisis with $1 trillion of loans never come back?

It still is always about kickbacks. University administrators inflate the costs, make a ton of money, buy elections for Obama and his cronies, and then Obama facilitates the system by making it easier for kids to get into $10000s in unlimited school debt-money that goes to the school administers.

Do you idiots really not see the cycle? Do you not pay attention to the top campaign contributors?

Your elaboration on the matter leaves much to discuss.