Biden signs student loan cancellation

[mikewof]

That's not at all what WVA v. EPA holds.

Do you want a Supreme Court decision that says the President can't forgive student loans without Congressional approval?

West Virginia vs. EPA said that the EPA needs "clear congressional authorization" to regulate carbon because the regulations would lead to significant cost. If you think this doesn't have application to an executive decision that has significant cost, then so be it.

Anyway, I already wrote earlier that with all the support for this thing, a significant challenge is unlikely.

 

[Patriot]

Gov't is the art of what's possible. Your perfect solution is not possible, this was.

Nonsense - you pose the classics false choice between unattainable perfection and a wrong-headed EO. Doing nothing was quite easy to do, and in aggregate we would’ve been better off.

 

[Raz'r]

Nonsense - you pose the classics false choice between unattainable perfection and a wrong-headed EO. Doing nothing was quite easy to do, and in aggregate we would’ve been better off.

Who is "we" in that scenario?
The gov't does many things that help groups of people. I benefit from a mortgage deduction. My mom benefits from SS and Medicare availability. Etc, etc. Looks to me like Uncle Joe just did something for a large group of people. Those people might even vote. Democracy, am I right?

 

[Raz'r]

Do you want a Supreme Court decision that says the President can't forgive student loans without Congressional approval?

West Virginia vs. EPA said that the EPA needs "clear congressional authorization" to regulate carbon because the regulations would lead to significant cost. If you think this doesn't have application to an executive decision that has significant cost, then so be it.

Anyway, I already wrote earlier that with all the support for this thing, a significant challenge is unlikely.

Leftist Populism is just as unworkable as Rightist Populism.... But it does explain your affinity for the orange-haired one. Populists of a feather I suppose...

Left-wing populism​

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Left-wing populism, also called social populism, is a political ideology that combines left-wing politics with populist rhetoric and themes. Its rhetoric often consists of anti-elitism, opposition to the Establishment, and speaking for the "common people".[1] Recurring themes for left-wing populists include economic democracy, social justice, and skepticism of globalization. Socialist theory plays a lesser role than in traditional left-wing ideologies.[2][3]
Criticism of capitalism and globalization is linked to antimilitarism, which has increased in left populist movements as a result of unpopular United States military operations, especially those in the Middle East.[4] It is considered that the populist left does not exclude others horizontally and relies on egalitarian ideals.[1] Some scholars also speak of a nationalist left-wing populist movements, a feature exhibited by the Sandinista Revolution in Nicaragua or the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela. Unlike exclusionary or right-wing populism, left-wing populist parties tend to claim to be supportive of minority rights,[5] as well as to an idea of nationality that is not delimited by cultural or ethnic particularisms.[6]
With the rise of Syriza and Podemos during the European debt crisis, there has been increased debate on new left-wing populism in Europe.[7][8] Traditionally, left-wing populism has been associated with the socialist movement; since the 2010s, there has been a movement close to left-wing populism in the left-liberal camp,[9][10][11][12][13] some of which are considered social democratic positions.[14][15]

 

[giegs]

Do you want a Supreme Court decision that says the President can't forgive student loans without Congressional approval?

West Virginia vs. EPA said that the EPA needs "clear congressional authorization" to regulate carbon because the regulations would lead to significant cost. If you think this doesn't have application to an executive decision that has significant cost, then so be it.

Anyway, I already wrote earlier that with all the support for this thing, a significant challenge is unlikely.

So your response to the judiciary trying to take power from the executive on one issue is for the executive to defer to the judiciary on another issue in fear of some potential future decision? That's pants for hats.

 

[MR.CLEAN]

West Virginia vs. EPA said that the EPA needs "clear congressional authorization" to regulate carbon because the regulations would lead to significant cost. If you think this doesn't have application to an executive decision that has significant cost, then so be it.

That's not what it said. That's what you read someone saying it said. Read it. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf

with all the support for this thing, a significant challenge is unlikely.

i think a challenge is not likely, but a certainty. What qualifies as 'significant'?

 

[mikewof]

That's not what it said. That's what you read someone saying it said. Read it. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf

i think a challenge is not likely, but a certainty. What qualifies as 'significant'?

Read it. When you get to the part about "clear Congressional authorization for the authority it claims" then stop reading, and maybe write something down that will survive the short term memory loss.

Significant challenge meaning a legal challenge, rather than a bunch of political wonks jibber-jabbering on the TV set. I wouldn't hold my breath for a legal challenge on this, the educational industry stands to make a good bit of dough on this ... more debt, more overpriced degrees that students can't hope to pay off with the standard wages.

 

[mikewof]

So your response to the judiciary trying to take power from the executive on one issue is for the executive to defer to the judiciary on another issue in fear of some potential future decision? That's pants for hats.

No. Please follow the thread. Clean asked for a "legal argument", I presented one to him. Pants for hats is what you did in your reply up there.

 

[Patriot]

Who is "we" in that scenario?
The gov't does many things that help groups of people. I benefit from a mortgage deduction. My mom benefits from SS and Medicare availability. Etc, etc. Looks to me like Uncle Joe just did something for a large group of people. Those people might even vote. Democracy, am I right?

Benefitting a relatively narrow group of people, buying their votes at the expense of a much larger group of people, by the stroke of the executive’s pen - notably not accomplished through targeted legislation - got it. If we want legislation to address this issue specifically, then let’s lobby and/or elect representatives who will draft appropriate legislation - democracy, am I right?

 

[Raz'r]

Benefitting a relatively narrow group of people, buying their votes at the expense of a much larger group of people, by the stroke of the executive’s pen - notably not accomplished through targeted legislation - got it. If we want legislation to address this issue specifically, then let’s lobby and/or elect representatives who will draft appropriate legislation - democracy, am I right?

Still waiting on the healthcare plan? How about the infra plan?

 

[giegs]

No. Please follow the thread. Clean asked for a "legal argument", I presented one to him. Pants for hats is what you did in your reply up there.

I'll admit that following this nonsense is a bit trying.

Your "legal argument" in bringing up WV v. EPA doesn't appear to contradict the OGC's interpretation of the HEROES Act or precedents of its use. The HEROES Act allows the Secretary to provide limited relief to borrowers in response to national emergencies. The IBR provisions are in line with previous EO for student debt relief. Unlike in WV v. EPA, Congress has already delegated this specific authority and its use has been repeatedly upheld.

With the different circumstances, invoking the major questions doctrine here would mean the courts are usurping both executive and legislative authority.

So, yes, pants for hats.

 

[veni vidi vici]

…

 

[bpm57]

Democracy, am I right?

So a declaration by Joey from Scranton is now "democracy"..
While SCOTUS returning power to state legislatures is "fascism"

I guess the meaning of words really do change.

 

[Sisyphus]

I've heard that some of these Gen-Zers are going to encounter some of the same problems of the Hikoomori in Japan, that "lost generation" that never found a place because the corporations stopped hiring during their economic meltdown. So higher education restructured due to COVID, and the next generation will slide into the space created when the Millennials retire, but the Gen-Zers will be well and truly fucked by coming of age into an economy that has no place for them.

Hopefully they use the current labor shortage to secure union positions and hold their corporate disobedience as close to their vests as possible.

Do you have some articles/materials that goes into the Gen-Z/Hikoomori comparison, i,d be interested in reading those.

 

[Raz'r]

Do you have some articles/materials that goes into the Gen-Z/Hikoomori comparison, i,d be interested in reading those.

hahahaha

 

[dfw_sailor]

Benefitting a relatively narrow group of people, buying their votes at the expense of a much larger group of people, by the stroke of the executive’s pen - notably not accomplished through targeted legislation - got it. If we want legislation to address this issue specifically, then let’s lobby and/or elect representatives who will draft appropriate legislation - democracy, am I right?

Please quantify the number of taxpayers earning 400k plus, and the number of student loans being reduced by 10k (being both sides of the equation).
Otherwise your argument is just mealy mouthed drivel.

 

[BeSafe]

Do you have some articles/materials that goes into the Gen-Z/Hikoomori comparison, i,d be interested in reading those.

Three post-pandemic Gen Z behaviour trends to watch

How are young people adapting to the post-Covid world?. From Campaign US

www.campaignlive.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/china-lying-flat-stress/2021/06/04/cef36902-c42f-11eb-89a4-b7ae22aa193e_story.html

Some broad reading

 

[Steam Flyer]

And far more people are far less than thrilled to donate by force through higher taxes

How about tax money being spent on wars? How about tax money being spent to advertise cigarettes in foreign countries? How about tax money subsidizing the drilling of oil wells in a year when oil companies are posting record profits? How about tax money being handed back to billionaires?

When you have equal complaint about these things, then perhaps I'll think you're not just whiny RWNJ punk, who is totally in thrall to the hate-spewing media which is shilling for the 0.01%ers.

 

[mikewof]

Do you have some articles/materials that goes into the Gen-Z/Hikoomori comparison, i,d be interested in reading those.

Why both with scholarly reports? Just use @Raz'r as the template of someone who never gets away from his computer and then apply to younger people who still are young enough to have an option out.

 

[mikewof]

I'll admit that following this nonsense is a bit trying.

Your "legal argument" in bringing up WV v. EPA doesn't appear to contradict the OGC's interpretation of the HEROES Act or precedents of its use. The HEROES Act allows the Secretary to provide limited relief to borrowers in response to national emergencies. The IBR provisions are in line with previous EO for student debt relief. Unlike in WV v. EPA, Congress has already delegated this specific authority and its use has been repeatedly upheld.

With the different circumstances, invoking the major questions doctrine here would mean the courts are usurping both executive and legislative authority.

So, yes, pants for hats.

If you were the judge in this case, I guess you could now publish your decision. And as I wrote, I doubt this will even come before a judge, it enjoys sufficient support that not all the centrist Democrats have spoken out against it yet. And with good reason of course, the banking, oil, transportation, nuclear, housing and medical industries all had their own bailout/subsidy plans, the Academic industry now has their turn with this one.

Clean asked for a "legal argument", I provided one. You think it is insufficient? Awesome, get a transfer from your job as Armchair Judge to Actual Judge and make it so. Until then, pants for hats.