volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
@BeAware@social.beaware.live well, you can interact with the posting. That can be the point.
Just because you can't contact the author doesn't necessarily mean it's not worth talking about.
Well yes, that's exactly what happened.
The federal government financed loans as it considered it a financial investment. It financed the loans knowing that the interest upon repayment would pay for federal programs.
It's BECAUSE the federal government financed those loans through taxation with a plan to pay for other programs that the payments need to keep coming in.
Again, I was a critic of that financing plan, but here we are.
Keep in mind that a government-run universal healthcare system simply makes that government the insurer, moving that government into the position of absorbing health related losses.
As for what loss a corporation can take off the hands of anyone suffering, that's spelled out in the agreement made between the insurer and the insured, and it's up to the individual agreement.
I know insurance doesn't make sense to a lot of people. It's a shame we don't have more financial literacy in the country, but that comes down to failings in our education system and media that SHOULD be helping people understand how to make the most out of opportunities in front of them.
It was an election. If demonstrated the preferences of our population, not the nobility.
@codebyjeff well the key is to realize what the job of the Court actually IS.
The Supreme Court is not there to make scientific judgments. It rules on law, not scientific fact. It has neither the expertise nor the authority to wade into scientific questions.
This example really emphasizes exactly that.
So yeah, he's mixing up similar words, but it doesn't actually matter to their ruling. It's a matter beside the question actually before them.
In other words, because of how the Court actual functions, they don't address the underlying concept in the first place.
Far too many people don't understand matters of civics as in the role of their own Supreme Court.
@ginaintheburg forget Republicans, though: Democrats showed that they had a problem with traditional Democratic voters and independents.
When Democrats run left they lose votes from their own traditional constituencies.
Centrism serves Democrats!
@BohemianPeasant yeah, exactly.
So many of these Court reform proposals are so half-baked, failing to cover obvious circumstances like the one you bring up.
I can only assume the folks proposing these plans know they're not going anywhere, so they don't bother. They're just publicity stunts, not serious attempts at reforming the Court.
@DemocracyMattersALot
@persagen sigh, of course this is more ProPublica muckracking.
No, Leonard didn't remake the Supreme Court. That's not how the US government functions, but governmental procedure doesn't make for the clickbait headlines ProPublica lives on selling.
PP is always selling these conspiracy theories, and they need to knock it off.
The fundamental concept of all insurance--no matter what's being insured--is that the insurer takes on some risk, taking it off the hands of the insured.
Instead of your gambling that you might experience a loss, the insurer ensures that you won't and accepts that they might experience your loss instead.
Meanwhile the employees of a professional insurer work to gather capital, seek reinsurance, and do whatever else they need to do to professionally manage that risk that you probably don't have time to manage anyway.
Folks don't realize that insurance is a form of economic specialization. It's a pretty valuable thing to manage risk for others!
@violetmadder @Hex
@Chesi if they were already paid off then there wouldn't be anything to forgive.
In your example you still have 60k that you haven't paid off.
That's quite a lot that's not paid off!
@Chesi if they were already paid off then there wouldn't be anything to forgive.
In your example you still have 60k that you haven't paid off.
That's quite a lot that's not paid off!
@madrobin Well I think the 8th grade student you mentioned really illustrates what I've been hearing: a whole lot of people being really afraid because they've been really misinformed about how the US government actually functions.
By the 8th grade I would hope that a kid would have enough civics education to know that presidents don't have the authority to ban books like that.
But, a lot of people really don't understand how their own governments work, and that leaves them susceptible to all sorts of crazy conspiracy theories and other fear-mongering, so they end up falling for this stuff.
On the other hand, there is a good bit of the country that goes the complete opposite way, and it's amazing how wide that divide is with people having such opposite ideas about how the government works.
But then, that's how we got this election result.
@ATLeagle it doesn't, though. That's not how any of that works, despite so many special interests misleading the public about how the economy actually works.
You're buying into a lie. I'm sorry.
@pedrobizbikedu The bulk of student loans that we discuss for giving at the federal level are federally funded, that's why we talk about forgiving them at the federal level.
The privately funded loans aren't under the jurisdiction of the federal government, they're a completely different matter.
@sjb honestly I think it's a little worse than that.
So often it seems like Trump can't even come up with his own excuses, so his apologists make up excuses for him and then he says, yeah! That! Obviously that was my plan! while just parroting the excuses that his followers came up with for him.
I think it bears so much emphasis that Trump himself is such a spineless moron that he pretty much does what people tell him to do and then says what people tell him to say, so he does stupid things that people tell him to do and then he says the stupid excuses that people make up, while he himself is just a blob of jello.
@Ponygirl Don't look at me. The federal government decided to tap you to fund federal programs.
Yeah I think that's pretty shitty of them, but it's what we're left with. And you know a lot of the people that were involved in that, we keep reelecting them.
So that's where we are. The federal government is relying on you paying that back because you're a source of revenue to pay for the federal government.
If they let you off the hook then Federal funding goes away.
Again, I thought that was a bad idea at the time. I spoke out about it being a bad idea. But we elected these people, they did it to us, and we reelected them later, so I guess we're cool with it.
@pkraus The federal government treats the loans as a source of revenue, effectively as a tax.
It's not about whether you pay any other tax, it's about saying they don't have to pay their taxes in this case even though the government was relying on those revenues to fund government programs.
@pkraus The federal government treats the loans as a source of revenue, effectively as a tax.
It's not about whether you pay any other tax, it's about saying they don't have to pay their taxes in this case even though the government was relying on those revenues to fund government programs.
A fantastic sign that so many people cheering the murder of the #insurance #CEO are really off base is that so many describe that role as parasitic.
Factually that is wrong.
A parasite doesn't ask for permission to take, it just takes. In stark contrast, we pay for insurance. And these employees are paid, they don't just drain bank accounts unilaterally.
There's plenty of room to criticize insurance, insurance companies, the healthcare system, the political systems that support that, and on and on, but anyone buying into that entirely false perspective of parasitism is losing the argument flat out.
Because right from the start they're showing they don't know what they're talking about, and it only makes it worse that they're jumping from there into killing people.
They don't make a compelling argument for anyone not already in their echo chamber.
@marius_gs I mean, it doesn't though.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
