Warren Buffett: Stop blaming the rich for income inequality

[LegendKiller]

stuff like free universities and investment in vocational secondary schooling would bring up the poor, without them having to learn to manage their finances or anything like that.
Just not having people walking around with huge student debt would be a huge win. I've read articles claiming student debt will be the next banking crisis surprise from america.

And this is just one thing. There's plenty of other stuff you can touch, even without getting people on the dole and thus having negative side effects.

"Free school" shouldn't be free. If you want to go to a "free school" system then we only need to accept the best students, like the rest of the world with "free school" does.

Always like when the Millennials bitch about "free school" in other countries and wax poetic about how great it would be here. The lazy fucks can't even get through school in 4 years here and they wonder why they aren't tested as high as those in other countries. Not addressing that to you specifically, but just a general thing.

I do agree that student loans are a huge problem but 90% of the risk is owned by the government. It won't take any banks down. It'll just keep bogging down generation after generation in debt they can't afford.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I think the theory is with people carrying so much debt that cannot be cleared with bankruptcy it will ultimately mess with cars sales, home sales, investments and other big ticket items because they may not be affordable to many until they are much older than graduates from previous generations.

 

[Jhhnn]

Or maybe we can ascend to an intelligent way of doing things, where you don't have an overweening government that consumes trillions annually. But no, we can't reduce the scope of government you gotta make sure the millionaires who aren't in office can't influence the millionaires in office. As if that will make one fucking whit of difference to the "little guy" if you repeal Citizens United and all the other trivia you so

Please. Govt employment stabilizes the economy. When the Job Creators marched it off a cliff in 1929, the whole thing collapsed on itself, necessitating things like the CCC & the WPA, expanded forest service & BLM management & all kinds of other stuff to keep money circulating among working people, the non-wealthy. As automation & offshoring have advanced, we need more govt jobs if we're to maintain our "work for a living" model of an economy.

If we want everybody to work then we need jobs for everybody & it seems obvious that the Job Creators simply will not provide that on their own.

If rolling back citizens united won't make any difference, why would you object?