this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2026
230 points (99.1% liked)

politics

28859 readers
1885 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The roller coaster ride for borrowers enrolled in a key affordable repayment plan continues.

On Monday, the 8th Circuit directed a district court to approve Donald Trump's proposed settlement with the state of Missouri to eliminate the SAVE student-loan repayment plan.

The plan has been embroiled in a legal back-and-forth for years. Most recently, a district court declined to rule on the proposed settlement, which some advocates and lawmakers saw as a win for borrowers and urged the Department of Education to carry out relief under SAVE.

However, the 8th Circuit's ruling means that, once approved, the department will move forward with the settlement and require enrolled borrowers to transition to a new plan.

top 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Literally anything to hurt Americans.

Do these dumbfucks realize they live in the nation they're crippling? Is their plan to all move elsewhere as this all collapses?

[–] MJKee9@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Yes. Why do you think Trump kept screaming about Greenland? I haven't looked this up but I bet there's some set of studies out there that says Greenland's going to be the last habitable place on Earth.

[–] frunch@lemmy.world 57 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Yet we're dropping nearly $1,000,000,000 on a way we never should have started.

Oh, well i guess someone has to pay for it 🫠

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 days ago

About a Billion a day over 3.7B in 3.5days.

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I assume it's similar for college, but investing in children's education has a very high rate of return.

All of this money sunk into the war not only will never come back, but it also causes cascading costs from having shipping lines closed down, for example.

I assume it’s similar for college, but investing in children’s education has a very high rate of return.

Them kids can get fucked 😉 - Republicans

[–] Sonicdemon86@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This administration only looks at a week ahead, they don't know about the ROI of 13+ years investments, that is kids going to school.

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I'm gonna have to ask for the reference that shows they look that far ahead.

[–] Derpenheim@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 days ago

bro add 3 zeroes to that. 1 billion is barely a fraction of our budget for killing brown people

[–] ShellMonkey@piefed.socdojo.com 50 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They do hate an educated population.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 22 points 2 days ago (3 children)

But they love the poorly-educated.

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago

They love poors and rubes the same way they love children; by that I mean they love fucking them and destroy their lives.

[–] otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago

the poorly-educated

The intentionally under-educated, you mean. ☝🏼

[–] Akasazh@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They love no thing but the growth of their own bank account

[–] daannii@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago

All these changes to student loans is just going to change things so it's possible to file bankruptcy against them.

Typically it's not possible to get the loans removed via bankruptcy but a few people have done it.

And I think the courts might start allowing it more if all of the loan agreements are no longer being honored on the side of the lender.

When I took out my loans I was told I had multiple options for repayment and that I could do the public service loan forgiveness program (a 10 year program where you work in a lower paying public job for 10 years, make payments based on income and after 10 years the remaining loan is forgiven).

Which is what I had planned to do.

Now I'm in a situation where my loan payments are 2k a month which I can never afford.

Also I spent as little as possible on my education.

I went to community college and state. I worked full time during my associates and bachelor's so I only took loans out for tuition. Then I did my masters in another country because it was half the cost. Then I took out living expenses funds to finish up my doctorate. 5 of the 6 years were funded. So I only took out money on the last year.

I owe 110,000. After interest. It's double. IF I pay 2k a month. If I pay less, that number goes up faster than I could pay it off. Essentially I would never be able to pay it off because it would increase faster than a $500 a month payment. (Even $500 seems high to me).

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's cool. Not like we needed more doctors in this country anyway.

[–] Drusas@fedia.io 6 points 1 day ago

Or nurses, or physical therapists, etc, who now are considered "non-professional" degrees and thus won't be able to take out as much in student loans.

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 33 points 2 days ago (4 children)

What if we all just refuse to pay? We have rent strikes, labor strikes, let's do a loan strike. Fuck this shit. Can't use the degree anyways because AI is fucking up the tech space.

[–] thespcicifcocean@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago

way ahead of you, compadre

[–] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I've been suggesting a debt strike for a long time and nobody ever thinks it's a good idea.

[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago

It's a good idea but it needs broad support. Like physical strikes, they have tools of oppression at the ready - your credit score will tank meaning among other things your ability to get housing is affected. That's a pretty serious, heavy threat. Millions of people need to join in this for the system to be overwhelmed enough. So start talking about it more, IRL too.

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

People like the idea they just don't think it's realistic, which is paradoxically true only because they all think that way.

[–] BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

What if we lived debt free in the first place?

[–] blueduck@piefed.social 0 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Federal debt is subject to wage garnishment. They can just take it out of your paycheck if you don’t pay

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

If everyone stops paying though it would take a long time to take them all to court and make that happen

[–] mx_smith@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Yeah I was coming to say the same, also I’m sure it’s automated so as soon as they dont receive the payment the timer starts before it sends the letter of wage garnishment. So this most likely won’t work unless your working under the table.

[–] Sonicdemon86@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago

They can't take it out if it is under the table or if you don't work.

[–] oopsgodisdeadmybad@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 days ago (3 children)

All those loan companies deserve to erase all debt and pay the borrowers an additional amount so they end up with an entire loan amount to their credit.

Going back for like 40 or so years.

Whoever thought of the concept of making borrowing money profitable has pure capitalism flowing through their veins and they need to suffer.

Getting richer just from being rich is such a sickening thought.

They've gotten away with it and they only deserve to be homeless, cardboard box and all.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 1 points 23 hours ago

Whoever thought of the concept of making borrowing money profitable has pure capitalism flowing through their veins and they need to suffer.

Sadly the concept of interest predates capitalism by several thousand years.

The rise of interest as a concept is unknown, though its use in Sumeria argue that it was well established as a concept by 3000BC if not earlier, with historians believing that the concept in its modern sense may have arisen from the lease of animal or seeds for productive purposes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interest#History

There was a brief moment in time when the Abrahamic religions all took a very dim view of interest.

[–] CapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

All those loan companies [should eat shit and die].

I 100 % agree with this.

Getting richer just from being rich is such a sickening thought.

This too.

Whoever thought of the concept of making borrowing money profitable has pure capitalism flowing through their veins and they need to suffer.

I think that depends on your definition of "profitable". If "profitable" means making people filthy rich, then I agree 100 %. However if "profitable" means making enough for a decent living, I think it can be more nuanced.

In a well functioning system, a bank takes care of your savings, paying you interest on it, and then loans it out to people that need cash, and receives interest on the loans. In a well functioning system, the difference between the savings interest and the loan interest is enough to offset the risk of people being unable to pay their loans back, and also pay the people managing all this a living wage. In a well functioning system, everyone benefits from this.

It does not appear that we have a well functioning system.

(I'm aware of the whole "the system is working as intended and must be dismantled" argument, I'm just adding my two cents of nuance to the idea that loans/banks themselves do not inherently need to be predatory)

[–] oopsgodisdeadmybad@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

Fair enough from that perspective.

I still look forward to pie in the sky type improvement where money has lost meaning. Unrealistic, but ideal.

But from a more realistic POV, your idea is the most ideal version of that kind of system.

But it was directly tied to the idea of getting richer by being rich, so it was more pointing at the idea of getting filthy, oppressively rich by doing so more than just the "having a job at a bank to have a regular life" kind of thing.

[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Should, but they'll die comfortably surrounded by luxury like all the rest of the rich class.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

PEDOnald wants you to be unable to vote and unable to get out of debt. What a peach of a "president".

[–] KulunkelBoom@lemmus.org 4 points 2 days ago

When criminals are in control of the law, there should be no "surprises" when the courts do what the criminals want.

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 1 points 2 days ago

About the other comment I wrote (that seems to be erased but not by me), my problem is that Biden wasn't LEFT leaving enough. MAGAts hate him because he wasn't RIGHT leaning enough.

And I never heard that SC was the one blocking that measure. Just like not many people in the US knows who judge Marchena¹ is.

¹ from Spain.