this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2023
131 points (97.1% liked)

World News

32352 readers
412 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] howdy@thesimplecorner.org 1 points 1 year ago

Trump was merely the vessel that that ~~palaptine~~ SCOTUS used to take their power..

[–] Floon@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Roe, Affirmative Action, LGBTQ protections, this is why you should vote in every election, including (perhaps especially) midterm elections. It's the composition of Congress that makes these things happen, and you can't pass on voting if you want to prevent it.

[–] ramblechat@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don’t have kids but am perfectly happy to pay more tax to make education free or cheaper. How can anyone argue that a less educated society is better? The more people that can experience higher education is plainly a good thing. There could be someone out there who could make a medical or technological breakthrough but doesn’t get the chance because they can’t afford to go to college.

[–] Lev_Astov@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I think the main argument is that this isn't the way to go about that. The universities are totally out of control and need to be forced to curb their spending to make things more affordable before we just start handing them public funding like this.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don’t really think anyone in the government has a good solution for this, do they?

Remove the available money? Only the rich go to college. Add more money? The prices go up.

You could try regulating it, but then you just get colleges that refuse to accept government money, while simultaneously asking for the same amount.

I’m sure someone has a solution that would work, but it’s not anyone with the power to implement it, that’s for sure.

[–] freo3579@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

just make public universities cheaper, private sector will feel the competition and lower prices.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

I honestly don’t think so. Private universities are already more expensive, why would they care if that gap widened more?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] GiddyGap@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I always vote for Democrats up and down the ballot. But this just confirms my choice once again. Hopefully the 26 million people the Republicans screwed over will come to the same conclusion.

[–] zombuey@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

they won't they don't care to go anywhere near reality. It would never fit their perception of the world.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CeruleanRuin@lemmy.one 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] drewisawesome14@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Hope y’all are ready for another once in a lifetime market crash.

Prices still haven’t gone down from the pandemic era but wages have stayed stagnant. People are barely getting by as it is, but now they have another 2-600 monthly bill added on top of everything else?

Guess we didn’t learn a thing from 2008.

[–] butwhyishischinabook@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lol I made the mistake of going back to grad school, so more like $2500-$3000 a month for me

[–] drewisawesome14@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Jesus Christ how much did you borrow???

Enough for law school. Actually worked jobs to pay off my undergrad debt just to do so. Womp womp.

[–] MattyXarope@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago
[–] cyd@vlemmy.net -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I know this upsets a lot of people, but the ruling isn't without justification. $450B++ in government spending should not be accomplished through a legal loophole. (Quite aside from the fact that fiscal stimulus is the last thing the economy needs right now.)

[–] KingCyrus20@lemmy.fmhy.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It is absolutely without justification. The language of the HEROES Act allows the Secretary of Education to "waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision applicable to the student financial aid programs under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965." This is not a loophole, it is the law, passed by Congress. And regardless of any foreseen impact on the economy, SCOTUS should not legislate. Otherwise, they're just an activist court.

[–] Raphael@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Another W for capitalism, another L for the worker class.

[–] zombuey@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

most of what's happening in todays world is not a W for capitalism. Modern conservative thoughts on capitalism have long abandoned the necessary regulation of free markets we enforced for 2 centuries. capitalism only works if markets continually divide winners at the top. If you don't bust monopolies then capitalism begins to rapidly break down. We've known that for a long time and only recently stopped. You lose all the benefits of capitalism without that feature. What we have in America isn't capitalism really at all anymore. This whole concept that the government has no role in capitalism and free markets will always correct themselves is a myth and we've known that since before America. John Locke knew that he was a tax collector for the english crown.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›