Student Debt Exceeds $1 Trillion Any Solution?

[PLC1]

Forcing me, or anyone else, to fully cover, or even partially subsidize, the education (or HC, or food, or housing, etc) costs of others IS Marxist and it IS the moral equivalent of being robbed by street thugs.

But if forcing everyone to purchase HC insurance - Magically - makes the costs of providing HC come down, then why wouldn't creating Education Insurance, and then forcing everyone to buy it, have the same - Magical - effect on the cost of education?

There is no magic involved. It's a matter of health care providers knowing that they are going to get paid. It's not as if they can recall an operation, after all.

Education is not the same as health care. No one is ever faced with the necessity of paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for an educational procedure in order to survive.

Further, your elected representatives passing a law forcing you to pay taxes in order to support a program that they, as elected representatives of the people, have initiated is not immoral, nor is it the same as either being robbed or as having taxes levied without representation.

If we don't like the way our representatives have been spending tax money, we can vote them out of office.

 

[Cruella]

If we don't like the way our representatives have been spending tax money, we can vote them out of office.

That's almost funny. You obviously haven't been paying very much attention to the average voter.

 

[GenSeneca]

It's a matter of health care providers knowing that they are going to get paid.

So "knowing that they are going to get paid" is the "magical" formula for reducing HC costs... Got it.

Education is not the same as health care. No one is ever faced with the necessity of paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for an educational procedure in order to survive.

Why wouldn't having Education Providers "knowing that they are going to get paid" have the same "magical" effect on the cost of education?

Further, your elected representatives passing a law forcing you to pay taxes in order to support a program that they, as elected representatives of the people, have initiated is not immoral, nor is it the same as either being robbed or as having taxes levied without representation.

If we don't like the way our representatives have been spending tax money, we can vote them out of office.

Forcing me to pay IS immoral...

Just as the notion that “Anything I do is right because I chose to do it,” is not a moral principle, but a negation of morality—so the notion that “Anything society does is right because society chose to do it,” is not a moral principle, but a negation of moral principles and the banishment of morality from social issues. The Virtue of Selfishness​

​

Just because you make looting my wallet legal, doesn't make it right, and it certainly doesn't make it moral. Resorting to the use of force is immoral, whether you're a street thug wielding a baseball bat or politician wielding the law, it makes no moral difference.

 

[PLC1]

So "knowing that they are going to get paid" is the "magical" formula for reducing HC costs... Got it.

Of course. If everyone is going to pay for health care, then there is no need to pass the cost of those who don't pay on to the rest of the patients.

Why wouldn't having Education Providers "knowing that they are going to get paid" have the same "magical" effect on the cost of education?

Education providers already know that they are gong to get paid. There is no way for students to come to school, then skip out on the cost.

Forcing me to pay IS immoral...

Because you say so?

What makes you the arbiter of morals?

 

[Cruella]

Of course. If everyone is going to pay for health care, then there is no need to pass the cost of those who don't pay on to the rest of the patients.

We haven't seen the tax forms yet. Understanding Obama's plan of wealth redistribution, I suspect a good chunk of Americans are going to get some type of credit that will give them healthcare without costing anything.