• blueshades@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I do agree with you about the core of what you’re saying, that in the end it’s a good thing to help people. For sure. But when talking about public funds you have to keep in mind priorities. In this case I can see how this doesn’t seem like a priority to some people, money is not unlimited and these funds could be used for something else. I would personally be more on board if this program targeted students who are about to get loans, I just think it would have more value to society in general than helping someone who is 10 years into their loan and not struggling financially.

    Now as I said I’m not an expert on US public finance so if you tell me that these funds couldn’t be used somewhere else anyway and would be wasted in less important projects then sure I’d revise my opinion.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The argument against your argument is that often the admin costs of means testing exceed any dollars saved. I don’t know the metrics for this, but that certainly is a factor.