this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2025
1695 points (98.2% liked)
Comic Strips
19660 readers
1063 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- AI-generated comics aren't allowed.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
No. It is if you tax everyone the same. You don't have to, and you shouldn't.
Any taxes paid by student debt holders that is used to forgive said debt is a wash, that money's going in a circle. Every taxpayer without student debt, however, takes a loss when taxes are used to forgive those debts.
It doesn't matter how much or how little the actual amount of taxation per person is. The fact is, this is literally 'tax cuts for the rich' on a smaller scale, as those with the student debts are statistically much wealthier than the rest of the population, without taxpayer-funded student loan forgiveness widening the gap.
So to get this straight:
You are against making studying more accessable for less wealthy people because that would mean taxing the general public and that is a wealth transfer from poor to rich?
You understand that it would allow poor people to study and consequently make it less relevant how wealthy you are to be able to study. Resulting in much more a merit based system than wealth based system.
You understand that by giving more people access to completing a university degree, you get more people with university degree. So e.g. more doctors, more doctors cheaper prices.
And of course, you can make the tax based on whether or not you have an university degree. Now you could call it a wash but obvious it would a display of great ignorance about the practical options that exists. In such a system, you don't need a loan, so you don't need to pay interest, you don't need someone who is willing to grant you the loan, temporary unemployment would be less of an issue...
And these are the reasons why poor people don't study.
For the wealthiest people*
The point is that if you're a college student, you're already in the richest category statistically; you literally are less in need than everyone else, on average. The same money would be much better suited to give grants to people who have, for financial reasons, never set foot in college to begin with.
Having student loans is no obstacle to completing a degree, this is non-sequitur. No one is expected to pay student loans off pre-graduation.
You've done quite a poor job of 'getting this straight', I have to say—quite a crop of straw men you've assembled.
If you don't have to pay for university as there is no loan to be paid back, the people who can't go for financial reasons can step their foot into university.