Student Loans Again

Yes, this is a re-run, but with all the student loan rage, I thought it might be a good time to run it again.

#

The guy behind a cardboard box lets you bet that you can’t follow the pea he has hidden under one of the three paper cups on top of his box when he shuffles them around. You bet, you lose, next sucker.

I’ve been following the student loan not-a-crisis for a long time and I’ve written about it at length, although not recently. It all seems so hopeless, so useless to see.

If I, an admittedly limited and undereducated observer, could have seen this coming, why didn’t they?

The answer must be, of course, that they did see it coming and it was their intent all along. Like the southern border, they are doing these things for personal financial and personal political gain, with political party gain a side benefit. Might I suggest where the new 70,000 IRS employees could be employed? “Come here, kid.”

__________

Student Loans and the IRS

3–30–10

There’s nothing complicated about student loans. You already knew that, didn’t you? If you want to go to college or any number of other schools, you can save, borrow, get a scholarship or subsidy or go to work to pay the institution that grants you admission. Simple.

The health care bill eliminated banks from the student lending industry and the costs and fees they charged student borrowers. The gummint is taking over the industry, changing some of the repayment rules (to its own detriment, one should note, but that could change) and keeping the profits to pay the costs of its health care legislation. If there are any, that is, after the gummint eschews those fees and charges.

Think about it. The gummint decided to take over a (gummint-funded) private industry, renounced certain of its profit centers and intends for any remaining profits to be used to pay for its health care bill.

This requires a profound suspension of disbelief:

· First, that the gummint should supplant any private industry in a non-national security field.

· Second, that the gummint can run the industry better than the people who were already running it at a profit that could be taxed, keeping in mind that the parts that generated profits no longer exist.

· Third, that it is in the best interest of the American citizenry that gummint should compete in the private sector.

· Fourth, that the gummint won’t use its lending authority to control which students will be allowed to go to which schools.

What vital national programs has the gummint run well and within budget? Medicare, Social Security, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Chrysler? Well, no. Then why should we accept that they can run student lending (or health care or anything else) better than the people who are already running it?

When someone neglects to repay a student loan, who’s going to collect the unpaid debt? The Health Care Bill, of which the Education Bill is a part, already provides for the IRS to enforce its provisions and it allows the disclosure of previously confidential tax information to health care administrators.

May I suggest that the IRS might be well-suited and amply staffed, with its new enforcement employees, to collect delinquent student loans? There are precedents. The collection of delinquent child support payments is just one. (Oh, you didn’t know about that one?)

The problem is that the IRS is very often incompetent and chronically bumbling. There were very good reasons that Congress devoted much of 1998 to investigating its massive internal failures and incompetencies.

Recently the Sacramento IRS office sent two employees to visit a local car wash because of unpaid tax of two cents (yes, $0.02) and accrued penalties and interest of a couple hundred bucks. These are the folks you want to enforce health care premiums and collect student loans?

Or have you heard differently?

Quis custodiet ipso custodes.

Juvenal

__________

Student Loans … Changing the Change

8–24–13

Students (as of that writing) had borrowed nearly a trillion dollars from you and they don’t want to pay it back. Why is that a problem?

We previously looked at the reformed and inferior Federal Student Loan Program on March 30, 2010, at Student Loans and the IRS. See above. Student loan reform was a bad idea then and has been implemented poorly since.

How do we know it was a bad idea? The prez told us so. He was speechifying about student loans last week. In preparation, The White House announced:

“We have to fundamentally rethink how higher education is paid for in this country.” (Thank you, The Atlantic)

But that’s what was supposed to happen in 2010. The prez was mighty proud of his student loan reform back then, part of his Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), Obamacare to most:

“With this bill, and other steps we’ve pursued over the last year, we are finally undertaking meaningful reform in our higher education system," Barack Obama on March 30, 2010

Mr. Obama called it “one of the most significant investments in higher education since the GI Bill.” (Thank you, Christian Science Monitor)

The prez promised us $60Bil in program savings that would be used partly fund Obamacare, part to be spent on community colleges, part for Pell Grants, part to ease stringent repayment requirements and on and on. Wow, who wouldn’t be on board with something as cool as that?

But if that had been true, why would we want to fundamentally rethink the president’s own reforms from which he promised us such miraculous results? Answer: It wasn’t true.

Here are two more answers:

1) The education reform issue was advanced to give the prez a political wedge issue;

2) It provided for the federal government to take over a profitable private sector (although admittedly publicly funded) business activity. You know, like ObamaCare usurped the health care industry.

The wedge issue is a dandy and conservatives have wilted under it.

“Hey kids, want some student loan money (stubux?)? Let me help you out there. Interest rates too high? Let’s cut them in half for a while by borrowing from Social Security. Yeah, I told you it’s bankrupt but what the hey, let’s do it anyway. (Oh, you didn’t know that?) And don’t forget, VOTE DEMOCRAT!”

Rates will go up again, of course. It’s a part of the plan that he doesn’t bother to mention.

Then comes the reason behind the reason: When the built-in failure happens, he’ll blame the Republicans and lead a crusade to “fundamentally rethink how higher education is paid for in this country.” (See above.) He’s doing it right now.

“Changing the change” might actually work if he can get enough of us to forget that the original plan was his, not the Republicans’. “Hope and Change” and all.

Reason #3: Central planning is all the vogue again. The gummint knows better than we do about everything. Therefore, we should do things the gummint way because, you know, it’s a matter of smarter people taking better care of us than we can care for ourselves. Personal responsibility morphs into “it takes a village.” Why should the private sector make a profit?

The gummint has taken over major industries on the grounds that Washington can, and therefore should, run them better than the private sector. The gummint took control of crop production during the Great Depression. Wiki notes of a Woody Guthrie song:

*In addition to being a lament for the braceros killed in the crash, the opening lines of “Deportee (Plane Wreck at Los Gatos)”:

“The crops are all in and the peaches are rott’ning, The oranges piled in their creosote dumps,” is another protest by Guthrie. At the time, government policies paid farmers to destroy their crops in order to keep farm production and prices high. Guthrie felt that it was wrong to render food inedible by poisoning it in a world where hungry people lived.

A popular refrain is “Government, stay out of my bedroom.” True that, and the exact same sentiment applies to everything else in our lives — including crop production — except for the powers and duties conferred on the federal government by the Constitution. “Stay out of my doctor’s office,” works, too.

Our Founders feared that a powerful federal government would threaten the freedom of Americans. The Constitution tells us what the government can do, but that wasn’t enough.

The Bill of Rights tells us what we can do. Nowhere is there a mention of gummint doing anything just because it feels like it. Hello, Obamacare. Oh, that’s right, it’s a tax. Who knew?

Cars, banking, health care, student loans, crony capitalism loans to politically connected fat cats for solar panels and batteries that never worked or were never competitive or never existed. Choose your industry. Which one is working better than before gummint took it over?

Next up: Gummint rates schools and directs students to the ones it thinks are best by increasing the amounts of individual student loans for them. No, really. (Thank you, BusinessWeek.)

* * * * *

“The bottom line is we’re not broke, there’s plenty of money out there, it’s just that the government doesn’t have it.”

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN)

July 25, 2013

The Tucker Carlson - Vladimir Putin Interview

It seems I forgot to post this the other day. Chalk it up to old age, I suppose. I hope you have watched  Tucker Carlson interview Vladimir Putin by now. If you haven't, it's a must-see. Try YouTube. 

#

Let me begin with this disclaimer: I believe Vladimir Putin to be an irredeemable murderer and repressor.

Putin showed himself to be a genius-level student of Russian and world history. I fancy myself a dabbler in the same. I was fascinated by his recall and ability to place facts in context, back to the ninth century in Russia. What a fine professor he would be.

Regarding the Ukraine War, Putin reminded me of many facts that my government has found inconvenient to acknowledge, especially during the post-breakup years and the deliberate failure of the Minsk Accords. He also reminded me that Russia has had a willing partner, the USA, in many activities that I usually ascribe to Russia alone.

I’ve never seen anything like this interview nor ever thought I would. Tucker was at the top of his game and Putin was masterful. I consider the interview to be a major world event and I felt privileged to witness it. It was as if, say, Walter Cronkheit interviewed Stalin live on TV.

Tucker asked a lot of very tough questions about the Ukraine war. To his immense credit, Putin fielded them with knowledge, history, context and aplomb. He made it very clear that the war started in 2014, not 2022, and laid out Russia’s position very clearly. Again, history and context is everything.

I was especially interested in Putin’s thoughts about the Nazis in Ukraine. He said what I’ve been saying all along, with help from my good friend Nik-Nik. Ukraine is controlled by their own Nazi party. Zelensky is just a cute sock puppet for the West to identify with and dole out money to.

If you’re completely uninterested in Russian history (I am not) you could safely skip the first thirty minutes, but he does weave a compelling story, starting there. It should not be missed.

I wonder why Putin gave Tucker the interview. They got along famously, like two old friends over beers. I have seldom seen Putin laughing but he did so rather frequently during the second half of the interview. I can’t think of anyone, anywhere, who can hold a candle to Tucker’s journalism and insight, now or ever. He is brilliant. Putin is a genius. What a match.

Towards the end, Tucker was very pointed about an imprisoned American journalist. I think he even made progress towards a release. Of course, Putin had a very different take on the incident which he eloquently expressed. He was fully informed, so much so that I wondered if Tucker’s questions had been submitted in advance. However, I am convinced they were not. Putin is just that good.

We in the West are conditioned not to expect that from our leaders. Trump may be something of an exception but not to Putin’s level and certainly without his calm. I would give anything to witness a Tucker interview with Xi.

Finally, given a choice between Biden and Putin I would choose Putin every time. His casual ability to handle an unscripted two-hour interview by an unsympathetic interviewer was remarkable. It would have brought Biden to his knees in five minutes.

Don’t forget my disclaimer.

The Myth of White Fragility

Allison Wirtz posits that “white fragility” keeps America “Trapped in a Maze of Inequality.” Hers is an attempt to further divide America into two camps: fragile white people and robust people of color. Disclaimer: I am a white man and I do not agree.

She defines white fragility, hereinafter WF, as something that “refers to the propensity of White people to react defensively and or dismissively to evidence of racism.” Moreover, “Our goal should be to break down the doors of white fragility.”

I have no such goals, probably annoying to Ms. Wirtz. She blithely dismisses opposition to CRT AND DEI, “even though these policies were only scarcely implemented to begin with.” They couldn’t have been wrong-headed, could they?

Ms. Wirtz wants to confront “the colorblind barriers to progress.” That is an odd characterization. Apparently, there are undefined “barriers to progress” and, in fact, they are colorblind. You can see them but they cannot see color. They seem to be behind “the doors” of WF.

It’s hard to know where to start. I’m not physically fragile, so that can’t be it. I imagine that if I take exception to her essay I am, by her definition, reacting defensively or dismissively to her “evidence of racism.” That is a disreputable debate tactic designed to deny an opponent the legitimacy of his argument before he gets a chance to speak. “Racist!” is the common call.

Further, her maze is “of white supremacy.” She recalls America’s dismal legacy of lynching without similarly recalling that it was almost exclusively a single political party that pursued that course. I surmise that it is the party that she votes for or leans toward. Physician, heal thyself.

I strongly agree with Dave Rubin, when he recently said on The View, “We should try our very best to treat people without regard for race both in our personal lives and our public policy.”

No, Ms. Wirtz. There is no white fragility. There is, however, a need by all to repair the disrupted state of our nation. You, Ms. Wirtz, are one of the disruptors.

Extra! Putin Murders Novalny! Biden Copycats! Read All About It!

Extra! Putin Murders Navalny! Biden Copycats! Read All About it!

It’s the headline you will never read. Proof is required and there is none. Of course, there is none. Russian murderers are professional killers acting under the guise of the highest authority in Russia. It’s the same as the mysterious explosion of Prigozhin’s jet and the murders of journalists on the Kremlin bridge. Proof? What do you mean by proof? We said it. That’s the proof.

Do you remember reporter, truth teller and author Anna Politkovskaya? You can’t be  braver than Anna. She told the truth about Chechnya and Putin and she couldn’t be ignored. Anna was murdered in her apartment elevator for telling the truth. Ponder that for a moment. Murdered for telling the truth. Murder in an elevator is a crime novel staple. For her, it was real.

Before that, Anna was poisoned en route to Beslan to assist in hostage negotiations for the children who were eventually murdered there. The poison didn’t quite work. Poisoned.

Alexander Litvinenko, the KGB/FSB defector, was poisoned in London for telling the truth about the Russian secret state. He accused it of blowing up Moscow apartments, murdering a Russian oligarch, poisoning Politkovskaya and much more. He was an insider telling truths we would otherwise never hear. Poisoned.

The other day, Alexander Navalny, an outspoken critic of the Putin regime, was taking a walk in his gulag camp, Polar Wolf. He fell ill and was taken to the camp hospital where he died. The government won’t release the body for an autopsy. They made that mistake with Litvinenko, where they eventually found the poison. Poisoned.

Eliminating the competition is a timeless strategy. Poisoning is harder to get away with in the US, with our reasonably open and very sophisticated medical technology. Poisoning is ugly and reporters notice, if they’re any good, and it makes good press. If it bleeds, it leads.

You don’t have to kill your political opposition in America, especially if you’re the party in power. Jail is a popular tool of American repression. Always has been. Its spinoff is accusations.

If Biden can orchestrate massive accusations of Trump in multiple jurisdictions, that can work in his favor in four ways:

First, it can cast public doubt on his character, costing him votes;

Second, by keeping Trump busy in court he has less time for campaigning;

Third, prosecutors are on the public fisc with nearly unlimited funding. Defendants must pay-as-you-go and it’s very expensive;

Fourth, it might just anger and frustrate Trump so much that he gives up his efforts at nomination and election victory. That, of course, is Biden’s ultimate goal.

I hope not. Biden jumped the shark here and he’s terrified of the results.

Am I an Anti-Semite? A Reconsideration

Am I an Anti-Semite?
A Reconsideration

 

Merriam Webster: “a person who has a hostile, prejudiced attitude toward Jews.” 

 

Honest self-appraisals are hard. They are suggested to us in Alcoholics Anonymous, not just when we work the twelve steps, Step 4, but ongoing self-appraisals, Step 10. We don’t know what to fix unless we know who we are. That applies here.

 

What am I, if I don’t support unlimited military aid to Israel? Anti-Israel? I don’t think so but I forgive you if you disagree. Hamas is despicable but our endless money drain isn’t doing anything to Hamas leadership, living in their mansions in Lebanon or Iran. We’re paying for the lifestyles of the rich and hostile.

 

Israel is killing a lot of Gazans, that’s for sure. Have you seen the explosions when some of those Israeli bombs go off? Especially the bunker-busters. Apocalyptic. The thing that sticks in my craw (you may have to look that one up) is that many of those bombs are American bombs. We either provide them directly as military aid or we provide huge sums of money to Israel to buy them… from us. A difference without a distinction.

 

Those Gazans who invaded Israel on Oct. 7 deserve no less. I have no pity for them, even while I see Gaza destroyed. But what about the remaining universe of Gazan citizens? Do they deserve the death penalty?

 

I have written “Gaza = Hamas,” based on a long-ago vote and the apparent support of Hamas among Gazans. Now I think the correct equation is “Gaza = people threatened by Hamas.”

 

May I substitute “Israel” for Gaza? Thus, “Israel = people threatened by Hamas.” In both cases, people threatened by Hamas.

 

Imagine yourself in a tented market in what remains of Gaza City today. You announce, “Did I mention that I’m a Jew?” Most shoppers would ignore you while they go about their business of survival shopping. They can no longer buy essential goods and services in Israel like they used to, back when they liked living side-by-side. Clean water was plentiful then.

 

Hamas supporters would be summoned and they would kill you, just for being a Jew. For being a self-declared Jew. They did it on Oct.7, 30 miles away, and they’re on their home turf now. Home field murder advantage.

 

Am I an anti-Semite if I don’t want to further drain the American treasury on behalf of Israel? I maintain that I am not and that it isn’t necessary in the first place. 

 

Am I pro-Russia if I don’t want to further drain the American treasury on behalf of Ukraine? I maintain that I am not and that it isn’t necessary in the first place. 

 

Am I anti-American if I don’t want to further drain the American treasury on foreign entanglements? Korea, anyone? Taiwan? I maintain that I am not and that it isn’t necessary in the first place. 

 

Am I anti-American if I demand accountability for the billions of dollars we spend overseas on projects we don’t understand and whose outcomes are not in line with the outcomes and values we want for America?

 

It’s time for me to be loudly pro-America. Come with me. Husband our limited treasury and use it to make our lives better. Reduce our reliance on foreign goods (hello, Chinese meds) and restore our own economy (hello, American oil).

 

You don’t have to be anti-ANYTHING to be pro-America. My family paid for my share of America, just like yours did, and we have continued paying, in the face of corruption on a scale never before seen here. 

I am loyal to our flag and to the republic for which it stands. I have paid the price and I can stand with my forebearers. I demand to be heard.

 

Come with me. I’m not an anti-Semite.

Gay in Moscow

Sexual Ethnic Cleansing

 

I wrote Gay in Uganda on May 30^th last. I thought it to be a one-off essay because Uganda is so obscenely corrupt and twisted and, of course, a third world, non-white country. All fair reasons to respond that I don’t have the knowledge to comment further.

 

I also wrote there, "I seldom write about gay rights or related controversies, mostly because I don’t understand them and I don’t care that much.” All true. I do not campaign for causes, I do not march, I do not seek a spotlight for any cause. I do understand repression and cruelty and authoritarianism and that’s what I choose to write about.

 

Thus, I am moved to write about the further repression of gays in Russia. Further, because it is already ingrained in much of the populace but now it has the cloak of law. The Russian Supreme Court, rubber stamp toadies of Vladimir Putin, has identified a great enemy of Russia, the “global LGBTQ+ movement.” As if Russia doesn’t have enough external enemies, now they have identified a great internal enemy. Gays. “People who aren’t like us.” Sexual ethnic cleansing. Hello, Uganda.

 

ABC News writes. “Activists have noted the lawsuit was lodged against a movement that is not an official entity, and that under its broad and vague definition authorities could crack down on any individuals or groups deemed to be part of it.” 

 

In America, it would be like suing “the Left” or “the Right,” depending on who is in office.

 

“I deem you queer. You’re under arrest. Prove you’re not.”

 

Reminiscent of, “You look Jewish. You’re under arrest.”

 

It’s a national movement in Russia now. It has to be. It’s the law, permission for every lazy cop in the country to say, “I got a few more again today, chief,” and expect a reward for doing his job. An observer might say, “But at least they aren’t putting them in gas chambers.” A distinction without a difference.

 

The gulags didn’t have gas chambers either but they murdered ten million Russians and others before and during WWII and long thereafter. It’s easy for a Russian leader to murder millions of people. See Poland, Ukraine, Georgia and Chechnya. A few hundred thousand in a country no one has ever heard of here, a few hundred thousand more there and you’re in the big leagues of murder. Tyrant prestige. You rule by fear. “Make it happen or you’re next.” And it happens.

 

Americans tend to have an aversion to over-the-top LGBTQ+ antics. I give you gay clowns performing in grade schools as an example. But being gay? I know of no one who begrudges gays the joys of life. Yes, I know there are some, but few. As I wrote in the same essay, “I’m in the camp of ‘You be you and I’ll be me and let’s both go in peace.’” 

 

Still, I recognize an anti-gay bias in America. I think it has to do with conflating the few who offend with the many normal gays who just want to live in peace. And the fact that it’s so easy to hate those who are different than us.

 

Today, after that odious ruling by the Russian Supreme Court, gays have to hide. Again. They are no longer welcome in “polite society.” Their contributions are unwelcome and ignored. It remains to be seen whether they will be rooted out of their esteemed scientific, intellectual and academic positions. They must be, mustn’t they, to comport with the law? The answer, of course, is yes. But what will happen is a version of “Well, we didn’t mean you. We meant those people outside.”

I cannot not say anything.

* * * * *

"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."

—Martin Niemöller

* * * * *

I cannot stand by quietly.

--Then they came for the gays and I did not speak out--because I was not gay.-- 

Who will speak for me?

—Charles Stromme

* * * * *

Poor Russia. 

 

“Let the denunciations begin... again.”

“Let the pogroms begin… again.”

 

“If I were a rich man… ”

 

Poor us.

 

Hating America

The hatred is working. You can see it in Congress, on campuses and among your neighbors. They hate because everyone is hating.

 

Neighbors? Yes. Someone had to vote in those scurrilous members of The Squad and their sycophants. They were your neighbors, at least somebody’s neighbors in America. 

 

Where did our neighbors’ hatred come from? We went to the same schools, we read the same books, we go to the same churches, we intermarry. Yet some are rabid haters, anti-American by any definition. They are not like us, we imagine. 

 

Yet they are us. Molded of the same clay as we, but they burn with the need to hate someone or something. If they could just hate hard enough or long enough, their lives would be better and they could have the things they want and they could be at peace. If you have to pay the cost of their hatred, well, so what?

 

They are American Narcissists. “Everything for me, I as long as I don’t have to pay. We deserve it. Our moms and our friends told us so. You? Well, no. You’re different.”

 

Many of the American Narcissists have never worked, never created, never farmed or ranched or raised or grown. They still want stuff, though. They still need to feed their broken families. They still need to prove they are worthy; they are good enough; they are as good as… you. But without the work and sweat and sacrifice you endured. The things you suffered to get what you have. Those things are quite inconvenient to them, and why bother if the subsistence checks keep coming? 

 

In AOC’s case, I suspect an insatiable ego coupled with the burden of being cutesy. It’s difficult for her to believe the world doesn’t revolve around her. It always has, from being a cutesy bartender to being a cutesy Congresswoman. But she is still the lightest of Congressional lightweights, a cutesy nonentity among entities, her vote counting only on spending and pork projects.

 

To put a finer point on it, where did AOC’s hatred come from? The Squad’s hatred, their apparent hatred of America?

 

I can almost understand the goofy anti-semite Ilhan Omar, the one who supposedly married her brother. Ilhan is a refugee who sought a better life in the America she hates. She was brought up on hatred and used it to achieve power by hating America. Hitler used it to achieve power, too.

 

Hatred wrecks things, people things, relationships, promises, understandings. The United States of America is a people thing, too. 

 

Enough hatred will wreck the United States. That’s the plan. It’s working.

EDIT: Ron DeSantis, on behalf of the State of Florida, DID send a plane to evacuate Americans. Couple other Americans did, too. The USA? Well, not yet. Same for the billionaires. Too busy?