Yesterday the Strib was falling over itself to document the breathless reception Tim Pawlenty (Hockey-hair — MN) was receiving in Washington and how the rumor mills kept kicking up his name as a possible second fiddle to John McCain (Angry Old Man — AZ).
TPaw’s political ambitions have been detailed over and over again, from CityPages cover stories to gossip in the Washington rags, and again on Friday on this blog. Thankfully the Strib in the midst of fawning over Pawlenty owns up to the fact that during the midst of a session he thinks it’s more important to skip to New Hampshire and stump for an unpopular and broke candidate than it is to stay home and take care of business.
The Strib article points out that Minnesota is going to get a lot of attention in 2008, from one of the most vulnerable Republican senators in the country, the 2008 RNC and our status as a battleground state in the Presidential race, which makes you at least wonder; since the NRSC already has boots on the ground tracking Al Franken and Mike Cirisi is there an RNC staffer giving the Governor his morning apple, brushing that flowing mane and whispering in his ear what a pretty pony he is?
Sean,
I think the title could be “What a Petty Post”. So is it a slow news day? Can’t find anything of substance to talk about in the world? Maybe you are just trying to move on from the DFL’s disastrous session and galvanize the Democratic faithful with something you know they all hate, hockey hair.
WOW, Tim Pawlenty is so good at Governating by veto he deserves National recognition. I want one of them there veto-ers.
These vetos require no intelligence, no diplomatic skills, and most importantly, no conscience.
A clone of George W Bush. Does he really represent Minnesota?
I’m no Pawlenty fan….but ya gotta admit he played this session incredibly well…and with an air of incredible ease… Here’s looking for some elected officials who will promote transit and roads revenue generation with the same kind of drive Pawlenty has for no new taxes. It’s odd though one would think the well-healed people of the State and corporations would start pushing this too. Afterall they can’t build roads on their own…or create mass-transit. Road deterioration is an economic equalizer - it lowers quality of life for all…ya hit that pot-hole in a BMW or a Chevy…doesn’t matter what your driving you’re going to feel it.
Pot holes and increased litter…the state is looking dingy under TPaw rule…our state needs to shine in many ways to stand out in fly over country…I work with Wisconsinites AND they laugh at our roads. Really pathetic…I bet people like Kerosene Hat still have orange shag carpeting in their livingrooms…
Nitro,
Maybe it was the fact that the DFL leadership was almost completely incompetent that it took almost no effort to thwart their efforts. The fact that Senate and House leadership more or less hate each other almost guaranteed the DFL plans would go nowhere. Some diplomatic skills by the Democrats there eh? Pawlenty on the other hand won reelection by getting people to vote for him that also voted for Klobuchar and most likely Kerry. He also has an approval rating almost double Bush’s in one of the most liberal states in the country. You can dislike his policies but you are in deep denial about his abilities.
Of course, you don’t have to be the most astute statesman in the world to veto legislation. All it takes is knowing how to spell and how to meet a deadline.
It is just that sort of mindlessness that gets a politician mentioned for something like the Vice Presidency. Governor Pawlenty has not had to offer any initiatives of his own, come up with any new ideas, or display any leadership (THAT would be the day). He can veto bills left and right, without thought to the consequences, and look like a hard guy. It’s a governing style made for Time magazine. Unfortunately, that’s how candidates get selected.
Ruthie,
Since you’re so good at throwing zingers around, if you took off that orange shag you keep on top of your head (the shag that covers your eyes and your ears), maybe you would know that Pawlenty proposed building $1.7 billion worth of roads this year. All in one year and in one bill. Your pals in the DFL rejected building roads in favor of pushing for higer taxes and more social spending — just as they rejected property tax relief in favor of the same things.
Sean,
I’d also like to second Kerosene Hat’s thoughts. Since joining MNPublius, you’ve offered nothing but petty jabs. To quote your hero Walter Mondale (who quoted Clara Peller in the Wendy’s ads), “Where’s the Beef?”
Anyone can make fun of Pawlenty’s hair (note that he didn’t pay $400 for any of his haircuts unlike a certain limousine liberal running for President) or try to paint a genuine war hero as “an angry old man.” Come up with something worth reading and worth discussing. Otherwise this blog will creep further and further into irrelevance.
$1.7 billion - much of it in bonding! Borrow, borrow, borrow! What’s up with the GOP? It used to stand for common-sense basic investment. It used to support pay as you go - generate revenue for essential needs. Yeah Pawlenty had a package to offer - one that stuck it to future generations….in 20 years let others pay for the asphalt we put down today.
But the Democrats were so pumped to end the session on time - they had no power…they acted like the parent in a toy store who had to make an important deadline - just give the kid wants to get out on time…don’t worry about the consequences…Who cares whether roads deteriorate more and people across all income levels suffer….
Where are the Statesmen/women? I don’t think many elected officials actually understand what it is that they are supposed to do and why it matters that they serve the state well. Pawlenty’s vision is one that is short-term focused…the economic consequences of his tenure will be huge because there is NO real opposition to his “just let up-keep on infrastructure go by the wayside” attitude. Perhaps the best hope is that the few “old school” Republicans get their act together and try to turn things around…
demure one,
You must be opposed to the Faribault State Prison, the Mill Towns Trail, multiple buildings at the U of M, the Twins Stadium and a billion dollars worth of other projects that passed the legislature last year. They were all paid for by bonding. Funny, Democrats don’t care about borrowing when it puts projects in their districts. But when it’s for something really important like roads, they squeal like stuck pigs. Do you know that it would have taken more than 10 years (not including inflation and cost increases) to build the roads Pawlenty proposed in one year? It’s time for people to use some common sense and ingenuity instead of running the government the same inefficient and wasteful way year after year.
P.S. Demure One,
I certainly hope you don’t have a mortgage on your home. It would be a crime to have to pay something over twenty or thirty years. What if you died, your children would be stuck paying for your home.
Chris,
Exactly why I don’t have a mortgage on my home - and exactly why I hate to see the Bush administration continue its irresponsible deficit spending - knowing that my kids and their kids will be the ones paying for it down the road. At least they won’t have to pay for my house. I didn’t buy one until I could pay for it - a lesson learned from my parents and grandparents who taught me the evils of borrowing and immediate gratification.
I’d like to thank all of you for coming and commenting. I do appreciate it.
Well Chris, the good news is that I’m still a probationary poster but I’m sure if you emailed Zack and Matt with your displeasure at my posting they might pay attention to your concerns.
Or not.
The way I like to think of this is, if MNPublius was a boy band, Matt would be the sexy one, Zack the shy one, and I would be the edgy one.
You don’t want to get mixed up with a guy like me. I’m a loner, Dottie. A rebel.
Well the first thing I have a problem with your comment is you continually bring up John McCain’s service to our country as if it was some all healing salve.
John McCain is an American hero. We should tell our sons and daughters of his selfless sacrifice on behalf of our country. His story should a good man tell his son, and in his commitment to our country should be in our flowing cups freshly remembered. (sorry, in my attempt to remember that speech from memory I might have misquoted it)
But that does not mean, and it should never mean that he somehow gets a free pass. It doesn’t mean that he shouldn’t have his record as a legislator and as a national leader under intense scrutiny.
I’m curious Chris, do you remember John Kerry — he ran for President 3 years ago. Remember how he’s an American hero. Three Purple Hearts, and Bronze and a Silver Star — that guy?
Remember how he was called a liar, and a flip-flopper? Remember how in the name of political expedience he was dragged through the mud? That guy?
Or did you forget that? I don’t know, maybe a case of partisan amnesia, because you were strangely silent about it when I brought up previously.
John McCain’s temper has gotten the better of him. Many times. Would you like me to bring all of them up again? And his service, his sacrifice for America doesn’t excuse any of it, especially as he runs for the highest office in the land.
At least you stopped this laughable stuff comparing calling John McCain a codger to assassination jokes.
In regards to something worth reading and discussing, I’d like to take this time to point out that my post about Tim Walz on Friday has 41 comments. In the last 10 pages on MNPublius there are only 2 posts that have more comments, one being the breaking news about Dayton running for Governor.
But who cares about facts when you can be patronizing?
Veritas — ‘College boy’? I’m not sure what you’re talking about, last I checked the College of Hard Knocks wasn’t accredited. You must be thinking of my edjumakated co-authors.
Again, thanks for coming and commenting. I do appreciate it.
Sean
Max,
You are either very wealthy or purchased your home a very long time ago. With a $220,000 median home price and a family of four with an income of say $60,000, of which you could maybe save $25,000 being very frugal, it would take 10 years to save the money outright. In the mean time the family would be paying about $1600 for rent for a comparable apartment. This would mean the family would spend $192,000 in rent while saving to buy their house. They would have been better off paying the interest over the 10 years and living in their own house. Not borrowing to pay for a car, television or other product that depreciates and does not increase your earning potential is usually smart. Borrowing for property and education is often a money making proposition. This also can hold true for infrastructure such as roads.
Ruthie,
Since you don’t have much else to say then to question my taste in interior fashion I thought I would make myself available to that line of discourse. Do you prefer the eclectic style of designers such as the Eames’ or are you more a fan of the modern renaissance designers such as Karim Rashid? Personally I like the simple and clever lines of a post war rambler with real plaster walls and a coved ceilings to newly built tract homes but have hope for the new style promoted by Dwell magazine and others.
In the end Ruthie you must not know what you are talking about and are therefore forced to make uninformed comments about others who might.
I do have a mortgage - I am not throwing money away on rent. In 20 years much of the asphalt we put down today will need to be replaced - you need to think about what you are buying on credit.
P.S. Chris - my home has more than doubled in value and my mortgage - will be paid off in less than 10 years
demure one,
You know something about economics! Okay, you said your home doubled in value. What do you think the cost of building roads will do in ten years? Because at a nickel or a dime a gallon, it will take a good ten years to build the roads Pawlenty proposed building in one year.
Also, we don’t build roads out of asphalt any more. We use concrete. It lasts much longer. Even if we had to replace the roads every 20 years, what’s wrong with bonding? The metrodome is only 25 years old and it’s being replaced — at taxpayer’s cost. Bonding is a tool to build large projects and be able to pay the cost over time.
Sean,
My point is there is a difference between going after someone’s voting record and making cracks about their age or their appearance. The former is fair game. The latter, while also fair game in this day of gotchya politics, is pretty cheap. John McCain’s temper has nothing to do with his age. You would have a temper too if you were tortured in a Vietnamese prison for five or six years.
I’m not very wealthy (well, I am now, at 54, but I wasn’t 20 years ago). I married and had kids late (in my early 30s), worked two jobs, had an old beater car, lived extremely frugally (yet happily) in a small apartment and saved saved saved. It’s very possible if you have the discipline to delay having everything you want right out of college. You’re right though, I did borrow money for college and it was well spent, although college was considerably more affordable when I was there. Another side effect of tax cuts - making one of the best investments someone can make extremely unaffordable.
Chris,
There is a big difference in bonding for buildings (which have a long life) and roads (which depreciate quickly).
The fact is you don’t understand bonding. You don’t understand finance. You sit on blogs all day long doing the bidding of corporate and republican America. You hear their propoganda and take it as fact. You’re a sad character. Our country suffers because of people like you.
Pawlenty proposed $1.2 billion in bonding for roads. GREAT! We get to pay back all the interest on those bonds long after the roads are worn out and in need of more repair.
Are there any additional bills you would like to stick future generations with? Maybe a nice couch from the Pottery Barn? Anything at Bed Bath & Beyond? How about a fancy car that you gain your status in life from? Maybe an SUV so you can really ruin the roads?
Republican 101 - Borrow, borrow, borrow. Spend, spend, spend. Your kids get the bill…plus interest.
Sean,
So number of posts is the measure of a quality? Why don’t you post one of the conspiracy theories about the Bush administration being behind 9-11 because I’m sure that would get a lot of action. I guess posting here your blogging philosophy is like the the DFL’s on spending, quantity over quality.
Getting people to post is easy. Getting them to post anything worth while is, I hope, the point.
Max,
House prices have more than doubled, a much higher rate of increase than incomes, in the time since you purchased a house. There are plenty of good, economically prudent reasons to borrow money. Most small businesses have to do it to get started and I wouldn’t say that creates a problem. Spending beyond our means is to me the biggest problem we have as a country both on the federal, state and personal levels but to suggest all borrowing is unwise is simply not true. Not borrowing when you should can cause other significant problems. Necessary infrastructure like roads is one place where this can be a wise place to do so. Especially if the interest rate is lower than inflation which is the case for Minnesota.
Kerosene Hat - so do you consider war a worthy investment? Just curious.
Max,
I feel the war was an awful mistake and have thought so from the beginning. The billions of dollars spent will be a drag on our economy for decades and could very well raise interest rates and reducing growth. This pales in comparison to the true loss of the thousands of those killed and wounded.
Tom,
I appreciate your concern for the hill the children will get for our current spending. How about all of the entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? These programs will dwarf all other spending in the not to distant future and constitute a massive payment by the younger generation to their parents and grandparents.
The bonding issue all depends on how long the bonds are for and what they are financing. Real finance and economics are not as simple as you make them out to be. Unless each project is analyzed there is no way to really know if it is a good idea or not.
p.s. Even the biggest SUVs are not nearly heavy enough to wear out the roads appreciably quicker than a small car. I asked a friend who is an engineer for the DOT. And no I don’t have one, I usually ride a moped to work.
Kerosene Hat:
Ok, great. You have a “friend” at the DOT who told you not to worry about the SUV’s weight affecting the roads.
Thanks. Case closed. Thank goodness for your “friend,” I was really confused.
Tom,
Sorry you are so bitter you can’t have a conversation without being an ass. Commercial trucks create almost all wear on the roads, if you have other facts let me know.
One thing is for certain Sean, you have a knack for bringing out the sycophantic, economically dumb, and utterly heartless sheep with your posts. Apparently “Veritas” has something against higher education. Hmmm. And apparently Kerosene Hat is one of those dolts that don’t understand that the most successful social program in the history of the world - not just the country, but the world - is the American Social Security system. He also apparently doesn’t understand that special education accounts for hundreds of millions of dollars saved in the long run, because we are teaching persons of significant disabilities to function on their own in the world. As for Medicare and Medicaid: How bout you propose an option that makes more sense. We’re all ears! Let me guess, you think the market can handle it better.
Alas, the intense conversations here in the comment section is where I find I spend most of my time when visiting Publius. There is something to be said for having the knack to make it happen Sean. However, I will propose that being confrontational for the sake of confrontational is often not a useful tactic, unless there is a broader point to be made.
Been gone for a while, and just revisited this site. Crikey! What happened here? Who are all these mean-mouthed trolls and who took away their calming meds?
Anonoymous35,
Nowhere did I question the success of the social security program, it wasn’t the point of my post and nowhere did I mention special education. I was simply making the point that those programs are going to be the biggest piece of debt paid by tax the next generations and they need to be accounted for as much as borrowed money. You assume that because I challenge the thought process on debt I am not a reasonable and thoughtful person. Maybe if you would respond to what is posted and not make so many assumptions you wouldn’t be reduced to insults.
Anonymous,
Thanks for the comment. As I’m sure you’re aware this is my third actual post for MNPublius and I am still ‘finding my voice’ or some other wishy-washy euphemism for “figuring out WTF I am doing.”
I don’t intend to have confrontation be a daily aspect of my posting, but I’ll probably have a lighter hearted snarky take on whatever is happening at the time. I hope to have a few mind numbingly substantive posts about boring topics to go along with highlighting Gov. ‘One and a Half Term’ Timmy’s run for the Vice Presidency in all of its snarky glory.
I do hope to serve as a lightning rod and conversation starter but I also hope to bring the occasional stilted discourse over suitably serious topics to this blog.
Again, thanks for commenting.
Sean
Tom,
Based on your comment, I can only assume that you just sit and live off of the government and expect everyone to pay your way. Your comment about roads shows you don’t know what you are talking about. Roads don’t have a short life. Between purchasing the right of way and the grading and the fact that new concrete roads last decades, it makes sense to bond for roads when we need them built today. Also, Pawlenty’s bill called for $1.7 billion not $1.2 billion. Raising the gas tax 5 cents would take more than a decade to build the roads and that doesn’t include inflation. Raising the gas tax 10 cents would take more than 5 years to build the roads and that also doesn’t include inflation.
Also, you’re full of crap if you think SUVs damage the highways. Highways ar built to handle 10 ton vehicles. Maybe you should learn more about transportation and highway issues so you aren’t so ignorant in the future.
Veritas - and for all those who f**k it up trying to get rich quick, what should we do with them when they’re all 70 years old with no money?
OTP,
The first step is prevention. Incentives must be in place to make it attractive for people to save. We have to get out of the ponzi scheme mentality where one generation pays for the previous one since this reduces peoples desires to save for themselves. In the mean time we have to provide the promised benefits until they are no longer needed because many have planned on them being there. The reality is some generation is going to pay more than they should at some point. It can only be delayed so long.
Social Security was not designed as a retirement plan in any way shape or form. When it came into existence the age of eligibility was the same as life expectancy. It was a program to provide only the very basics for the elderly who had no ability to work. A better designed program would have taken the changes in these issues into account. But since the AARP has such pull and retirees vote in such large numbers, especially with retiring baby boomers, nobody wants to address these issues. With the current program an African American male with a life expectancy of 66.1 years will only be eligible for a few years of any benefits while having spent a larger percentage of his income on SS taxes because of his lower on average wages. The program is not structurally equitable sustainable or economically prudent even if it was started with the best of intentions.
One Trick Pony,
What you are proposing is trying to protect a small group of people from themselves at the expense of the vast majority of people. You can set up private accounts just like IRAs and 401(k)s already offered by most employers. This means you can give people a limited number of choices of relatively stable investments that will cause their accounts to grow exponentially over their lifetimes. At a 10% rate of return, the portfolio will double every 7 years. This means that when an employee puts $5000 in at age of 25, the $5000 will be $320,000 at age 67 (as $5,000 becomes $10,000 and $10,000 becomes $20,000 and so on).
Public employees in Houston, Texas opted out of Social Security some 25 years ago. Retirees today make double from their private accounts what they would have received from Social Security and that was making investments fixed at a 5% rate of return.
Veritas,
You’re right that people should save more. The problem is that government takes over a third of your income right off the top of your check. Add other taxes (sales, property, gas, etc.) and it makes it really tough for people to be able to afford to save. Not only that but government lets you put so little in IRA accounts that it doesn’t take that much to max out.
Government borrowing is different from human or corporate borrowing.
We humans put ourselves in debt for houses, boats, businesses. We humans die after a reasonable time, and debts MUST be repaid or forgiven. Corporations pay back their debt or go bankrupt.
Government goes on forever. Republicans, (as opposed to Humans) want to put OTHER people, FUTURE people in debt. They want debt to grow forever, and never be paid off. They want to live high on the hog today, on other peoples money. Look at the Bush Debt rung up in the last six years.
What Republicans hope for, is that they can put government in enough debt so that they can actually kill it off. This is part of their stated policy. Government is the problem” (Reagan) want to “drown it in a bathtub” (Norquist) .
People like Pawlenty don’t need to do much to throw a monkey wrench into the wheels of progress. Just say no and say it often. No ideas necessary.
Bob,
Funny you blame Republicans for borrowing. In the last six years, the DFL Senate has proposed bonding bills that were significantly larger than either the House or what the Governor recommended. Last year, the DFL proposed bonding bill was well over $1.2 billion. In the end, $990 million was passed.
I also like how Democrats talk about putting other people (ie. future generations) in debt but then pass huge social spending packages that they want OTHER people (ie. the rich) to pay. Why don’t you ever think about cutting spending?
So if we let people opt out of Social Security, should the government mandate that they invest on their own? Because if it’s not required, I can GUARANTEE you that there will be plenty of people who will decide to buy that bigger house or more expensive car or take that annual cruise instead of investing it (“I’ll save it NEXT year”). Too many people think it’s fine to spend every dime they make and then borrow to spend some more. So I repeat the question, what do we do with all those 70 year olds who are broke? Frankly, this is when the Republican in me comes out - bring back the poor houses - if they’re too irresponsible to save for retirement, they deserve what they get.
Bob T,
All government programs include redistribution of costs. It is about making OTHER people pay for programs. Why would this not include generational redistribution. All Medicare, Medicaid,and Social Security costs are the same way. Bonding for roads is a much smaller amount of money and could actually leave something for the people paying for it while reducing overall government costs.
By the way Republicans are just as human as Democrats, I know plenty of both. Dehumanizing a large group of people is strong sign of bigoted thinking.
I might have implied that Republicans are not humane. I never said they weren’t human.
I apologize for the quip implying that Republicans are different from humans. It was bad humor, and not true.
To Kerosene - I am not opposed to distribution of costs, I am opposed to passing them off to the future in exchange for a perceived gain in the present, because the eventual debt load will strangle government, and that is the stated mission of the Republican party.
It is easy to look generous and prosperous with an unlimited credit card.
The roads we are driving on today were paid for without borrowing. Our parents and grandparents paid for them without burdening us with debt. Why can’t we pay for the ones we need now? Selfishness, plain and simple.
It is clear that people can afford an extra 5 or 10 or even 60 cents in gas taxes. The price of gas at the pump jumps far more than that without affecting driving choices. The extra 60 cents will either go for roads, or it will go to the Oil companies, because the price of gas will rise as to the limit of peoples willingness to pay, no matter what.
Bob T,
You didn’t address the huge generational redistributions in the programs I mentioned. Are they alright? If we pay off the bonding in the life of the roads I don’t have much of a problem problem with it. I support user fees like the gas tax and will back that a 100% as a way of paying for the bonds and ongoing road maintenance. I’d also back that same philosophy for mass transit and almost everything government does. The problem is that most Liberals don’t like user fees because they are the least progressive type of tax, gas tax included.
Bob T,
Where did you study economics? In Cuba or Russia???
Chris
I studied economics at FU .
Kerosene:
Re: “How about all of the entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? ”
Money flows both ways. Taxes pay for education and other programs that benefit the young (like Medicaid). They also pay for programs that benefit the old, like Soc Sec. I support both.
I see America as a fertile society, where people can get rich because of the investments that have been made by previous generations. Some get very rich due to a combination of connections, work and luck. Some work hard all their lives and can’t even reliably pay their housing and medical expenses.
When I hear repubs recite the anti-tax mantra, I hear them saying that they don’t want to invest to maintain this fertile society for the future. They want to suck out what they can and damn the consequences.
If rich people hate taxes so much, why don’t they all move to some low-tax or no-tax country with no social services and a huge underclass? There are plenty of such countries. In those countries, people get rich only because of history or connections. There is no opportunity. Is that what Republicans envision for Americas future?
Bob T.
So apparently you don’t have a problem with generational cost shifting so that part of your argument is nonsense. My problem with programs like Social Security is that the burden on one generation is disproportional to another. Babyboomers had to pay only for the smaller generation before them who had shorter life expectancies and a much less extravagant life style on average. The GenXers are a smaller population that will have to pay for the huge babyboom generation as they live longer and demand more services. Meanwhile that same generation is going to have to clean up Iraq, the environment the national debt and rest of the mess created by the “Me” generation while they continue to support increased “investments” that will induce higher taxes and or a larger debt.
I’m not anti-tax, I’m anti-spending. 26% of the united states work force works for the government at some level, it is simply too much to willingly sustain for the rest of us while paying off all the other crap.
Chris,
I haven’t been able to respond for a bit..job…family..community responsibilities - ya know. But what’s this “we don’t use asphalt anymore” nonsense?!? You must have a very limited area in which you roam…that or you just randomly post any little notion that enters your head as fact on blogs…hmmmmm
demure one,
I drive all over the state. We use concrete to pave freeways. Concrete roads last for a very long time when compared to asphalt. I’m assuming you live in the Twin Cities. Ever drive the new portions of 494? All of the new construction is concrete. Same as on I-35 from the Iowa border to the Twin Cities. As the old road beds are replaced, they are replaced with concrete not asphalt.
Bob T.,
As ignorant as you are about economics, I wouldn’t expect a different answer from you. The “F” in “FU” probably stands for the grades you received as much as anything else.
KHat:
Yes, I read some further postings in this thread and I think I may have misread some of what you said. Sorry about that. I actually am just a bit sensitive about people who (not you it seems) get on their “do it yourself” horse and try to sell people the lie that the best society is the one in which we all “pull ourselves up by our bootstraps”. Anyone who has taken a basic introductory economics course and a comparative government course, preferably not at University of Chicago, knows that the “bootstrap theory”, if you will, is nothing but hogwash.
I think you point was more geared toward the hell that debt really is, and I am total agreement on that. As a matter of fact, if I were tasked with doing my college education over again, I would not have gone to a New York music conservatory and instead stayed in state and paid a lot less for school. Instead, I have two degrees from two different schools and I am basically forever in debt. Why? because I can’t possibly afford to pay back the college loans in terms that actually pay down the principle, given that my chosen profession is not one that is a profit maker. I work for the environment and better government. I am actually one of the few who make a livable salary at it that includes health coverage, but I doubt I will make much more than I am making now, maybe ever.
So you can imagine my brissle at these survival of the fittest scumbags like Friedman and the like.
Hopefully that clarifies things.
Peace
A35,
You were able to choose your profession and it appears you picked one that is a luxury. Most people in the world can’t do that and complaining about the debt you choose to incur sounds awfully shallow. Living beyond your means is one thing if you have no way of providing the basics for yourself and family. Overspending on education in a way that you will never be able to pay for is something that has consequences. I can be amiable to a system that provides the basics for all people but our society has to realize we can not all have everything we want without cost. Empty SUVs on the freeway and doctoral degrees in dance are both luxuries that society as a whole should not have to pay for.