157
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 56 points 2 years ago

Yesterday they made higher education less accessible to non-whites, today they made it harder for the poor...

I wonder if there's a pattern here.

[-] mcc@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 years ago

Why does this make it harder for the poor to access higher education? A debt forgiveness will make current debtors less burdened but will probably make it more expensive for new applicants. Isn't it the other way around?

[-] frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 27 points 2 years ago

Relieving debt for the poor would allow them to spend their money on other things, or save it. Best case scenario, they're able to support their kids' educations and help break the generational cycle of poverty.

[-] FinnFooted@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Honestly, this decision wouldn't probably impact future college attendees. But, there are other changes coming to federal borrowing that likely will. Income based repayment is being restructured and it's looking pretty good.

However, this will probably hurt the economy. A lot of people are about to hit repayment at a period of high inflation. It's not a great economy. And, if a lot of people decide to ignore their student loan bills a la 2008 financial crisis, were in for a global economic doozy.

[-] fuser@quex.cc 7 points 2 years ago

The US has historically low unemployment, but real wages have stagnated for more than 50 years.

The economy is actually pretty great -- for those at the top. Not so much for those doing the real work:

unemployment chart

real wages chart

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] amanneedsamaid@sopuli.xyz 7 points 2 years ago

Yes, higher education is now less accessible to non-whites. Which is good, because affirmative action was never a fair solution to the issue and was simply unfair in principle imo. We shouldn't raise the eligibility of people based on their race, college admissions and race should have nothing to do with one another. Class-based affirmative action actually makes sense instead of deciding off race.

[-] frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 9 points 2 years ago

I agree with you in theory, but striking down AA without a better solution in place is bad. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] planetexpress@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Your whole argument could have been just that last sentence and I’d bet you’d have significantly less downvotes.

Although I’m disappointed by the courts decision I do believe class basis is a better measuring stick for AA. That said, I think there would be a pretty close correlation between the people who benefit now and the people who would benefit if the system was based on socioeconomic class.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] Karate_Jesus420@lemmy.dbzer0.com 51 points 2 years ago

Fuck Trump and his supreme court. We're going to be suffering the effects of Republican stupidity for the next 40 years.

[-] Pacifist@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 years ago

If you need any reason not to believe in god, it's that Trump got to appoint THREE FUCKING SUPREME COURT JUSTICES

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] KingSnorky@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It’s Republican moral bankruptcy and cruelty that we will all suffer. If anyone’s stupidity got us here, it’s the Democratic Party’s stupid leadership since AT LEAST 2000, if not earlier. Republicans have telegraphed their intentions for 50 fuckin years and Democrats continued over and over to attempt reaching across the aisle, trying to pass bipartisan wins, “take the high road,” … all the while the Republican party continued putting their racist, xenophobic, mysoginistic, jingoistic, classist platform out year after year, abandoning all sense of decorum and norms, gerrymandering the fuck out of every district possible, blocking every bill that helps anyone aside from billionaires and corporations, and generally lying and cheating their way to what we have today.

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

since AT LEAST 2000

Democrats: It's just a coincidence that two lawyers who worked on the Supreme Court case that handed Bush the election in 2000 happen to be Supreme Court Justices today!

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 2 years ago

I think, if there's independent historians in the future looking back, they'll be mentioned in the same sentence as Neville Chamberlain often.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] minorsecond@lemmy.ml 44 points 2 years ago

But the forgiven PPP loans are A-OK, right? Fuck this shit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Kururin@lemmy.ml 25 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Unless the dems take back court we would be all living through a nightmare.

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Maybe Hilldawg could have campaigned in Wisconsin or taken seriously that even if she won the popular vote, that the Electoral College actually mattered.

Reminder, she did win the popular vote. The majority did vote for her.

Or maybe Obama could have kept his campaign promise that codifying Roe vs. Wade in law was his first order of business.

[-] BumpingFuglies@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 years ago

This has been the Democrat strategy for a long time now: make wonderful promises they don't intend to keep, then blame everyone else when they don't come to fruition. People keep voting for them despite this obvious fact, because Republicans make terrible promises that they actually try to keep.

We're damned if we do and damned if we don't. The only winning move is to ~~not play~~ flip the table and play a different game.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Spacebar@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Vote! Encourage those around you to vote. Help drive someone to the polls. If you know a young person who's never voted, get them to vote.

Don't care who they vote for, just get them to the ballot box.

The more people vote, the better things turn out for the majority.

[-] 14specks@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Without a socialist party (as in, completely purged and free of all bourgeois influence), there's isn't a whole lot worth voting for at the federal level. Democrats repeatedly show that they are incapable of resisting the Republicans and take L's constantly (see here).

I encourage everyone to instead organize with local political orgs that can eventually build this power. The DSA being the largest currently available (and just as flawed as the other options one may have, ofc)

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] LeZero@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Dont forget to thank RBG, who refused to retire under Obama for some fucking reason, only to get owned by COVID after officiating a wedding for some dumb liberals (while having an immune system shredded by cancer)

Well it gave us the funniest trump interview imo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knlJWu815C0

[-] dingus@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Downvoted by people who refuse to look at when Democrats make stupid decisions that fuck us.

I thought Lemmy was supposed to be full of tankies, not milquetoast centrist capitalist apologists....

[-] LeZero@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

They can downvote away, I will never not shit on Ginsberg (also libtards infect spaces just like right wingers)

[-] 14specks@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 years ago

libtards

I'm onboard with the spirit of the post, but I encourage you to find another insult

[-] sergio 5 points 2 years ago

agree, how do you feel about shitlib?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Empyreus@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

If there is a minimum age in government, there needs to be a maximum. I'm over these 70 year olds running things.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] carbonprop@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 years ago

Wow. The SCOTUS is firing through all sorts of shitty changes this week. They’re like the koolaid man on meth.

[-] 14specks@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago

Gonna be this way for the foreseeable future

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Randy_Bobandy@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Who here still thinks republicans should be allowed to vote and hold elected office and write and pass laws?

Show of hands?

Great, everyone who raised their hand deserves this shit. Everyone wants to hate on Republicans, but when it comes to the voting booth, everyone defends them to the death. Well this is what you get. But DeMoCrAcY is more important than anything and everything, right?

[-] stown@sedd.it 6 points 2 years ago

Come on, you play right into their bullshit propaganda with that message. If they go low we don't stoop to their level. We do not win elections by removing voting rights for those we disagree with - that is an authoritarian tactic.

[-] BunkerBusterKeaton@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago

there isn't really any 'nobility' in 'taking the high road' while marginalized communities continue to get owned and killed. Trans kids are being targeted, women are being targeted, BIPOC are being targeted.

what good is civility? authoritarian leftism is the only way to get results

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] klieg2323@lemmy.piperservers.net 8 points 2 years ago

My "favorite" part of the majority ruling is how the loan forgiveness was struck down because it would harm the loan servicers. Not the government, not the people, the companies that have been contracted to collect the loans. That's who SCOTUS is most concerned with. Should tell us everything we need to know about who's interests are most important - capitalists

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JCreazy@midwest.social 6 points 2 years ago

How many were paid off by the student loan companies.

[-] _max@vlemmy.net 6 points 2 years ago

I was under the impression the student loan companies did not care. They were getting paid regardless.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2023
157 points (100.0% liked)

World News

36743 readers
266 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS