https://youtu.be/KxWckALd794

“This deal is getting worse all the time!” is the hallway one, but I thought the same as you!

Unfortunately they’ve backed down already: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/26/world/americas/colombia-us-deportation-flights.html?unlocked_article_code=1.sU4.SJeu.KLeSKsinK61Z

But… I’m not okay with giving up one group, nor excusing genocide. We must be having two different discussions, because I got the impression you were advocating for simply rolling over and giving up.

What I was getting at is that participating in an immoral system, only inasmuch as wasting a little time to vote for a lesser evil, can help us achieve our aims when taking action outside the ballot box. It’s easier to fight genocide against one group than genocide against many groups, right?

Are you suggesting we should just go for a speedrun through the list, then?

Have you tried seeing if any sugary snack give you the same effect? Sounds like the effects of a dip in blood sugar.

For my bills? I do have student debt, but have a job that pays well enough I don’t have to stress about it. I do worry about others that aren’t as fortunate.

And if we can’t afford either, why are you arguing it should be free? If you’re saying you want something that you’re also saying is impossible, why not champion two impossible things?

Good luck trying to articulate your thoughts and positions in the future, because you’ve failed to do so thus far, and I’ve exhausted my patience…so I’m gonna bounce

Making it free for everyone is excellent, specifically because it removes the potential of “the consequences for the choice” of taking out loans.

If you’re operating under the assumption that we can only do one or the other, sure: free going forward is better. I just think that we need to make it retroactively free, too.

You’re not explaining why you think that, beyond wanting to punish people for taking out loans.

Your position is inconsistent, because you’re arguing they shouldn’t have needed to take out those loans.

Again: you’re saying people made mistakes, but I don’t think that’s precisely the case. The majority of student debt isn’t because of people going to incredibly expensive schools for useless majors, you know.

So free University only for majors you deem worthy? Or only for profit minded disciplines? MBAs yes, but art history no?

Besides, economic desperation makes people make poor choices, and I’d wager that most people taking on debt for education don’t consider it a poor choice. Often higher education is key to economic success, but given tumultuous economic conditions in the past decades…things haven’t panned out for everyone, which makes those decisions look worse in hindsight.

You can’t claim everyone with student loan debt has it because they’re a worthless hippie art student. The increase in the number of bachelor’s degrees made it more competitive to get jobs requiring those degrees, meaning people need to get them just to compete…so people wind up shackled with debt.

It’s free to be sympathetic to people who are in a tough situation, even if they bear some responsibility for it. We all do.

But…if you think free public university is a good thing…isn’t not giving loan forgiveness analogous to saying “folks should stay in jail for trumped up marijuana charges until it’s legal Federally”? IMHO people shouldn’t have these loans in the first place.

If we can’t afford loan forgiveness, we can’t afford free public university. We can simultaneously fix the problems of the past while trying to improve things for the future.