• DarkGamer@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    166
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    More like, “we’ve invented a cure for cancer, but only people who have cancer right now can get it. People in the future are fucked once again and won’t get the cure.”

    Loan forgiveness without making education affordable going forward doesn’t solve the problem. It’s pulling up the ladder.

    • Xhieron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      So we should just not let the people currently sick have the cure? 🤔

      Even in your analogy, curing any cancer today, even if it doesn’t extend to future sufferers, is an improvement over curing no one. Because fuck cancer, and fuck student loans.

      Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

      • yiliu@informis.land
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Imagine if researchers said: We’re working on a cure for cancer, and in the process we’ve generated a bunch of unobtanium. We can use it as a one-time cure for a bunch of current cancer patients, or we can use it to continue further research towards a permanent, universally-available cure. Obviously, if we use it all up now, we’ll be back to square one and have to start generating it again before we can work on a long-term cure. Which would you pick?

        “Unobtanium” is political will. If we just do a round of bailouts for current loan-holders instead of addressing the root cause of spiraling education costs, we’re just kicking the can down the road. The pressure will be off, a whole generation of 20- and 30-somethings will lose interest in the issue, and it’ll fall off the political radar for another few decades, by which time GenZ+ will be well and truly fucked, since educational costs are only going up and up.

        The absolute worst way to address rising education costs is to encourage a bunch of students to take ridiculously large loans and then wipe them off the books. That means: 1) schools can raise prices to the roof because they know students have access to mountains of cash from loans, and 2) students won’t hesitate to take the loans because they’ll probably just be forgiven eventually. Probably. Maybe. Or maybe it’ll be a millstone around their neck for the rest of their lives…but hey, what choice do they have, that’s just what school costs (because governments make sure students have all the money they need for a bidding war to get in).

        So it amounts to just transferring huge piles of taxpayer money directly to overpriced schools and predatory banks, with no plan to stem the flow. It’s like trying to help your drug-addicted friend recover with a one-time gift of a brick of heroin. They’ll feel great for a while, and they’ll love you for it while it lasts, but it’s only going to make the problem much worse in the long run.

        • TSG_Asmodeus (he, him)@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          We can use it as a one-time cure for a bunch of current cancer patients, or we can use it to continue further research towards a permanent, universally-available cure.

          How is this what’s happening? Who said it’s a one-time-only thing? Who said they can’t also research permanently available cure? Wouldn’t proving that removing the debt is a huge boon to everyone cause people to invest more in the idea of a cure?

        • Xhieron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          “Sorry about your cancer. We have to let you die so maybe cancer researchers will be motivated to try harder for a permanent cure.”

          Get out of here with that bullshit.

          • Welt@lazysoci.al
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Why not contribute something yourself, or address the arguments they’re making instead of dismissing them out of hand?

            • Xhieron@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              The argument is bad and probably in bad faith. If I can paraphrase it in a few lines and demonstrate how ridiculous it is, it’s not deserving of a response.

              You don’t have to attend every argument you’re invited to.

              • yiliu@informis.land
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                Why on earth do you think I’m arguing in bad faith? What do you think my real beliefs & agenda are? Do you know what arguing in bad faith means?

                “Sorry about your cancer. We have to let you die so maybe cancer researchers will be motivated to try harder for a permanent cure.”

                If the US poured it’s full resources into saving John Doe from Birmingham Alabama, who has cancer, they could probably do it. Of course, then those resources (cash, equipment, researchers & doctors) couldn’t be used to help other people, or to perform research towards an eventual cure for everybody. It would be a bad use of resources, right?

                You don’t let John Doe die because you want his death to motivate researchers. But you only have a certain amount of resources, and you have to allocate them in a way that makes sense, and pouring everything into a temporary solution that only affect this one dude (or one batch of student loan recipients) at the cost of a long-term, permanent solution to the root causes of the issue is just…a bad idea.

                • Xhieron@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Why on earth do you think I’m arguing in bad faith? What do you think my real beliefs & agenda are?

                  I think your real beliefs and agenda are that you don’t want student loan forgiveness for anyone, ever, under any circumstances. Maybe you’re bitter because you didn’t go to school or maybe because you did and already paid off your debt. Maybe you have a chip on your shoulder, or maybe you’re just a troll. I don’t really care. It doesn’t matter, because the argument is reprehensible regardless of your motives:

                  We should let John Doe in Alabama die because it’s too expensive to save him.

                  You decided that the financial expense of saving a life is worth condemning a patient to death just like you decided that the imaginary, hypothetical political cost of a change in policy is worth consigning multiple generations to lifelong debt.

                  You should be ashamed of yourself. But whether you are or not, I’m not interested in debating with you.

    • Too Lazy Didn't Name@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      3 months ago

      Could also be “but we might give the cure to people who have cancer in the future, but nobody knows if the government will allow it”

    • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      So the people who could get relief should abstain because the door is shut on any legislation as long as the GOP are in power?

      Awfully compassionate of you.

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        No. That’s mighty presumptive of you. Play the game as the rules are. I’m suggesting loan forgiveness is a half-measure and it never should have been offered by politicians without solving the problem of unaffordable education. Otherwise, this isn’t a solution, it’s just a band-aid on a gaping still-bleeding wound that needs stitches. It doesn’t solve the problem, but it does create inequity.

        • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Cute analogy but here’s one for you. It’s not a bandaid it’s a tourniquet for a massive wound prior to needing full amputation.

          Politics isn’t a zero sum game. You need to cash in on the political goodwill before it evaporates.

          The relief isn’t being offered on the other side. The same side giving relief wants to legislate. Both actions are working towards a common goal.

        • catsarebadpeople@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Lol you really couldn’t help yourself. Just one reply and you reveal that you’re actually just a selfish piece of shit. Maybe just shut up while you’re ahead next time. You’re a garbage person but people don’t have to know on the Internet if you don’t make it so abundantly clear.

          • DarkGamer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            You know adults can usually communicate their point without resorting to insulting those who have different opinions. You don’t seem to have a point, just insults.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      What I don’t get, is that what moderates keep saying…

      You know, the people that constantly shit on progressives and claim we don’t want anything unless it’s everything.

      Isn’t the whole moderate mission to take what we can get now and keep working for more? I’m not saying that’s what they actually do, that’s just their excuse for not fighting for more.

      So shouldn’t the ones pushing for loan forgiveness now and fixing the underlying issue later be the moderates?

      Instead they say if we can’t 100% fix the problem in perpetuity, we can’t do anything.

      • jballs@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Exactly. Arguing that you’re against helping people now because it doesn’t go far enough is ridiculous. Help people now. Then continue helping people. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of progress.

        • jumjummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          Those unrealistic idealists are so frustrating to argue with. Is this a great first step? YES! Can we do more? Also YES.

          Take the win, and use that momentum to drive mode change. Trying to go from 0 to 100 in one step is just not realistic.

          • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Take the win, and use that momentum to drive mode change.

            There’s a difference between a start and means testing tho…

            Those same moderates like to use means testing to erode away support for more, and to get the people who don’t make the cut to vote against it.

            It’s how moderates have been opposing universal healthcare for over 80 years.

            Social Security was supposed to be a temporary compromise to help the neediest while the government worked out the wrinkles for universal healthcare that was for everyone.

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s because moderates are what conservatives claim to be. They are pro-status quo and keeping change as show as possible (as opposed to conservatives that just want hierarchical power structures that let them exercise power over others, no matter what changes are required).

    • thesporkeffect@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m on board, as long as we forcefully agree that cancelling the loans is a good thing - it’s just NOT ENOUGH

    • NekoKamiGuru@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Exactly , rather than only forgiving existing loans that should make education free and also forgive existing loans , and perhaps give people who have already paid off their loan some kind of stimulus check as a kind of recognition that their struggle was just as hard as everyone else’s and they deserve a break too.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        What about those of us that didn’t go outright because we couldn’t afford it nor get the loans?

        … I’d still be more than happy if education was made free, but there are A LOT of people the system has fucked and Democrats barely even want to glance at the lowest hanging fruit.

        • trebuchet@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          Isn’t the lowest hanging fruit exactly what they’re targeting, i.e. the people who currently have loans, and the higher hanging fruit all the other circumstances people are mentioning here like already paid off their loans or future student who will get loans or in your case people who forewent becoming a student due to the loans?

          • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Yew, my point is they are ONLY targeting the lowest hanging fruit.

            I bring it up NOT to just poopoo on Democrats, but to offer perspective. An inflatable life raft should NEVER be viewed as a fully functioning, sea-worthy vessel, and inflatable rafts is all Democrats ever offer, let alone fight for.

            Yes, that’s better than the sabotaged canoe Republicans offer, but again, it’s about perspective. Some people are not OK with celebrating a dingy like it’s a ship.

        • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Again. No one who is for student loan forgiveness is outright against assistance for low wage earners. They are not linked. If its who gets the bite at the apple first than do every thing you can to remove the GOP from power.

          • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            3 months ago

            “They are not linked”, exactly, they’re choosing to leave some people behind.

              • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                3 months ago

                Keep buying the excuses while you’re given crumbs. It really makes it look like you understand just how little you’re being offered…

                • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  It isn’t an excuse. It’s plain as day that the Republicans will do nothing on both matters and they keep getting elected.

    • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Declare that future student loans are also automatically forgiven. You take a student loan tomorrow? You don’t have to pay it back. This, of course, will mean that no one will want to give student loans - which will force the tuition down.

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        At that point why not just cut out the lenders entirely and make college free/publicly funded for all students like they do in Germany? An educated population yields many returns for a society and it will pay for itself with the boost to our economy it would provide.

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          I thought the U.S. government already took all the loans. So wouldn’t the lender be the U.S. government, and the interest goes to paying for the companies managing the loans I would assume. My interest rate on some of my loans went from 2.4% to 4.8% if I remember correctly (was sometime between 2008-2012 time period). I don’t believe students can go to a bank and get private student loans unless there is some loopholes. That said, cancelling student loan debt would simply mean not paying themselves back. Student loans are tax deductible as well, so when you pay them it would essentially come out of your taxes income, so if you could magically pay 10k off one year, it should come off your highest taxes income bracket. I still owe some, but I’d be fine with at least making it free college for AS/AA and 0% interest on student loans past that for all new takers. If they could make it free for BS/BA I’m still fine with being stuck with mine so long as we can figure out how to fix it for the future generations.

    • teejay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      31
      ·
      3 months ago

      Loan forgiveness without making education affordable going forward doesn’t solve the problem. It’s pulling up the ladder.

      You’re 100% correct. But be careful, these folks don’t take kindly to shining a light on their hypocrisy. They signed their names to a legally-binding contract, spent the money, but now don’t like paying it back under the terms they agreed to.

      College tuition is far too high. But without fixing the root cause, tuition loan forgiveness does nothing for everyone before and after, and it actually makes the whole problem worse.

      • my_hat_stinks@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Blaming the people taking the loans is kind of absurd, for many it’s their only option if they want to continue their education. It’s not like they’re taking out loans they don’t need and burning the money.

        “Legally-binding contract” is meaningless too, would you make the same argument against people who signed away their lives before slavery was abolished? Just because it’s legal now doesn’t mean it always will be, or that it must be enforced indefinitely.

        You’re absolutely right that reducing tuition is the right move. Tuition is free where I am and some of the costs I see elsewhere are crazy. However, the options are not necessarily mutually exclusive; you can reduce tuition and help people that have already been shafted by the existing system.

        • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Especially cause a lot of ‘legally binding’ stuff isn’t even actually legally binding. For a recent example look at non competes, a lot of judges don’t even enforce them cause they’re ridiculous and they actually just made them illegal for the little people.

          • Natanael@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Also, given the age and social pressure of the people taking student loans it’s not that straightforward to just say it’s their own fault

      • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        No one (BESIDES THE GOP) is against fixing it through legislation. That is a strawman.

      • trebuchet@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Could you walk me through what you see as these folks’ hypocrisy? I don’t get it.

        Is somebody arguing that loan forgiveness should be a one time thing and no one after them should get it?

        • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          As an outside observer of American politics, it sure seems to me that the current loan forgiveness implementations are rather short sighted ones. Nobody seems to even attempt to reduce the ridiculous education prices, it all seems to come down to bulk payments.

          I’m all for loan forgiveness up to a certain point (I myself have student loans I’d like to see forgiven, despite tuition “only” being €2k a year) but what is happening right now seems rather short-sighted and smells of political bribery.

          If educational facilities can expect the current attempts at American loan forgiveness to continue, they can double or triple their tuition fees, make billions, and have the American ta payer (which still includes the people taking out the loans! None of this shit is free!) fund their scam.

        • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Don’t get distracted. That argument is already fraught. They straight up lead their argument with a fallacy.

  • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    3 months ago

    I spent five figures paying mine off two years ago.

    Still 100% support my tax dollars paying for people’s college. In fact, I’d love that instead of the nine wars my tax dollars are paying for instead.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’d settle for universal housing. And universal education. And universal healthcare.

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        This is all I care about. I was forced to refinance into private loans because the interest rates on the federal loans were fucking stupid. All I want is the loans to be more reasonable.

      • stergro@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The Australian model is also interesting. After your degree pay a certain percentage of your income to your university for a decade or so. But only if you earn more than the average person.

        This means a university gets more money when their students gets good job.

    • uis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Agreed. Tanks don’t teach, don’t heal, don’t feed and don’t pay pensions.

      Fucking Putin

  • Jo Miran@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    I actually beat cancer. If they suddenly find a cure for cancer now I am going to be so fucking happy! This comment is about student loans…and fuck cancer.

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      Congratulations! I also hope they find a cure for cancer and I would be so happy if they did. I’ve never been diagnosed with it so I have no bearing on this conversation. Fuck cancer.

      This comment is also about student loans. (Which I’ve had and paid and still hope they grant loan forgiveness, tyvm).

  • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    From the school of “I suffered through [x], so therefore everyone else should suffer, too, even if they don’t need to.”

    There’s always going to be a cutoff point where someone has it harder or easier than those that came before. That’s just life. As long as the change wasn’t malicious, just feel good (or whatever is appropriate) for those that benefit from it.

    I work in a highly contract-controlled industry, and when things improve there’s always a segment of the group that might be close to retirement or something and gets all pissed that they didn’t won’t realize the benefits of a change that will apply mostly to those that will have longer under the change. They’re the same ones that bitch that new employees didn’t suffer under whatever crappy work rules that might have existed before, too.

    So yeah…people that paid off their loans, or guys that I work with that paid for some/all of their kid’s college, bitch about people catching a break on their loans. STFU and be happy that someone else caught a break.

    • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m glad I was taught not to begrudge and feel envy of other. I learned later in life that there are some insecure tw@ts who’d like to drag others down.

  • Walican132@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    This also needs to go into the cancer he beat is dramaticly easier to overcome than cancer in the future.

  • Kadaj21@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    I have to wonder if my generation [Millenial] had any effect on university enrollments yet. My kids aren’t quite the age to talk about education plans as I had kiddos later in life @30yo (40 now). I’ll be strongly discouraging uni unless it’s completely unavoidable to what they want to do.

    • NielsBohron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m approaching 40 and have three kids from 10yo to 1yo, and I’m still going to encourage them going to college, but in a way that makes sense for them. My wife and I both work at a community college, and there’s no way our kids are going to go to a 4-year right out of high school (unless they get a full scholarship for something and already know exactly what they want to do).

      Too many students don’t know what they want to study, don’t value the education, and drive themselves into too much debt. While I highly value the education and skills gained in a bachelor’s program, there’s no need to be going into debt at a university to take first- and second-year courses when community colleges are effectively free (in CA, anyway)

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      I mean the numbers still say that a bachelor’s degree doubles or triples your lifetime earnings over a high school diploma. Moreover, an educated society benefits everyone. College is still the right move at every scale. What we need to do is make it a more equitable system.

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Maybe. Depends on how functional you are overall. Turns out I can pass college courses, but not keep a job so well.

        I’m really good at getting high paying jobs, but my executive function is terrible. I can’t keep the jobs.

        People with good executive function tend to not be aware of it as a factor. For them “getting that job” is the big uncertain hurdle on their path to success.

        Not once in my upbringing all the way through college graduation did anyone talk about keeping jobs. It was all about getting the job. I’ve gotten some pretty amazing jobs … and lost them.

      • wieson@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I guess apprenticeships aren’t that common yet in the US, but in many countries you can learn a profession not only at uni. In that case the high school diploma isn’t the last/highest diploma one would get.

    • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Same, I’m going to push my kid to do everything they can local. Because even though I don’t regret the experiences I had at university, it was a massive waste of money for me.

    • TheFonz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      Similar boat. Were lucky we were able to move to Europe so my kid has access through the Erasmus network to any college in Europe really. It’s a different world over here.

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      I can honestly say that I don’t remember anyone claiming tobacco is too big to fail.

      Banks, auto industry, certain other farming segments yes…but tobacco seems like just special interest arguments.

      • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        In this analogy tabacco is the pervayor of cancer. Likened to how banks make predatory student loans. When ever we have to bail out the banks or corporations we are told, “they are too big to fail.”

        As if an educated population is less important than the financial institutions that they uphold.

  • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    I spent five figures paying mine off two years ago.

    Still 100% support my tax dollars paying for people’s college. In fact, I’d love that instead of the nine wars my tax dollars are paying for instead.

  • CoolMatt@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Hi I’m a fucking idiot, how can you beat cancer if there is no cure for it yet?

    I thought there was a cure but I guess not a very good one since some people don’t make it

    Edit: Thank you for the answers, that really cleared it up for me, and I understand cancer a bit better now.

    • Bolt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      A “cure” in this situation means an essentially guaranteed method of treatment. Cancers vary greatly, with some being benign, some being very treatable, and some being extremely deadly (at least with current technology).

      • Digestive_Biscuit@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        Indeed. Beat it, but at what cost.

        My mum beat cancer. She lost parts of her body in the process and chemo changed her physically (her hair and nails never came back the same). It took three years of regular testing to finally be given the “you’re officially cancer free” verdict. Three tense years.

        All that said she’s incredibly lucky not only to have beat it but not to have to live with additional medication due to it. I know somebody who lost a lot more and while is alive now needs a lifetime of medication to “put in” what the partial removed organs no longer produce.

    • cheesepotatoes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      There are some treatments for some cancers with varying success rates. A cure would be a treatment for all cancers that always works.

  • Landless2029@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    I don’t get it

    Edit:

    Ok thanks I get it now.

    People with student loans are mad there are loan forgiveness programs.

    • Bonehead@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I finally paid off my student loans!

      If they suddenly forgive student loans given to people now, I’m gonna be so mad.

    • NounsAndWords@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      I paid off all of my student loans myself, it’s not fair for the government just forgive loans from other people!”

    • riodoro1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      In the US it’s common for people to say that they shouldn’t cancel student loan debts because it would be unfair to people who have already paid theirs back.

    • bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      People who have paid off their student loans are allegedly opposed to the government forgiving student loans for people that are financially burdened by them.

      • apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I worked my ass off to pay off my student loans, and I wish it upon no one. It didn’t teach me shit except fuck capitalism. School should be socialized and free. And fuck cancer!

        • postscarce@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I’m still paying off loans and will be for the next 8 years. I’m ineligible for forgiveness now because I consolidated with a private lender. I hope everyone gets their debt wiped, even if I can’t. Education should be free to begin with.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      People with student loans are mad

      They’re generally not. But a few well-situated op-ed writers working for newspapers with a vested interest in the private loan industry have expressed a great deal of outrage.

    • Sjmarf@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      A common “reason” for why student loans shouldn’t be paid off by the government is that it would be unfair to everyone who has already paid off their student loans.

    • shimdidly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      IDK. Some cringe-lord wants free stuff and wants your taxes to pay for it. Something about cancer.

  • isles@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    3 months ago

    US student finance is for sure broken. I really hate comparing biological ills to social, though. Nobody graduates high school and says “I’m going to go sign up for cancer”. Nobody says “well, if I knew cancer was going to be cured, I would have got it instead of being a plumber!” This metaphor is breaking down rapidly.

    • Stovetop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Nobody graduates high school and says “I’m going to go sign up for cancer”.

      Maybe not in a literal sense, but there are plenty of people who apply for jobs which pose inherent danger to health, including increased risks of cancers, because they need the money.

      No one signs up for college to take on all that student debt just because they enjoy it, it’s seen as an investment in better job prospects to have a degree despite the financial risk of debt. This is at least somewhat similar to how more dangerous jobs pay more, because you take on a risk. You’ve got physical danger and financial danger to consider based on your choice. Sometimes both.