I know there are dads out there who are strangling hostile coyotes with their bare hands, and fending off California mountain lions that are closing in on their young children. But for my money, this guy gets my vote as dad of the year:
I'd dare to call him this election cycle's "Joe the Plumber," or "Ken Bone the debate questioner," but after seeing what happened to those two guys for speaking truth to powerful left-wing office-seekers, I'll resist. I wouldn't wish the inevitable unjustified, full-on colonoscopy from the enraged Democrat Media Complex on anyone.
Still, while I don't need anyone to dox the guy, I would ask that if you happen to know him, please shake his hand on behalf of me and millions of other Americans who still believe personal responsibility is a virtue. With its incessant focus on promoting greed and envy in the electorate, all for their self-serving purpose of political exploitation, there is little that tries the patience of responsible Americans quite like modern liberalism:
- Contrary to common sense, it pretends economic flourishing will be achieved by punishing success with a disproportionately high tax rate and burden.
- Contrary to common sense, it pretends the rule of law will be sustained by granting amnesty to illegal immigrants and giving them taxpayer-financed benefits.
- Contrary to common sense, it pretends personal responsibility will be fostered by "canceling" all student loan debt.
It's truly mind-bending illogic, and that's why it is so refreshing, so invigorating, so satisfying to see it called out and exposed. It's worth noting that Senator Warren had no sensible response to his challenge, and there's a reason for that.
First, despite this socialist scheme to "cancel" student loan debt advocated by both Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, in reality what they are proposing is to transfer the burden of it. After all, in order to remain solvent, colleges and universities aren't going to just forgive the debt and decline getting paid. If anything, these institutions will seize on such a policy and inflate their already exorbitant and unjustifiable costs since "the government is going to cover it."
As this unidentified dad astutely observed, Warren outrageously proposes taking a debt racked up by countless students who may or may not have ever been serious about their education in the first place, and pay it all off with the tax dollars of hard-working, overburdened Americans. In other words, they aren't cancelling a debt, they are playing favorites – subtracting a responsibility from one group of people and loading it onto the backs of another.
The practical consequence of this means responsible Americans (like this dad) who have worked and saved their money to pay for their own schooling or their kids' college education, not only will have shouldered their own burden, but now also will have to indirectly pay for all those who were not as responsible. Ditto that for every American who made the decision to eschew college and go straight into the workforce.
The unanswered questions remains why someone who avoided the unnecessary burden of student loan debt should be forced to subsidize those who chose to take it on? Neither Warren nor Sanders, nor any of their sycophants have mustered the courage to answer that.
For a progressive movement always boasting about its commitment to fairness, this is the epitome of injustice.
And while we're at it, why should this policy be limited to just student loans? What is the logical explanation for not extending this same brilliant strategy to mortgages? After all, if the accepted premise is that those relieved of their student loan debt will spend that money in other ways that stimulate economic growth, could the same not be said about those of us with mortgages? Personally, I know my wife and I would spend a great deal more in economic activity if we weren't shackled by our home loan payment each month. The same could be said of car loans, medical loans, boat loans, credit card liabilities; the list could go on and on.
Of course, a sane mind will immediately deduce the obvious problem with this approach even beyond the galling abolition of personal responsibility that would accompany such rubbish policymaking. The amount of government revenue required to pay for all this "debt canceling" would create a tax burden so heavy that it would instantaneously overwhelm the expendable income of every taxpayer. The thought experiment alone is a silly waste of time.
The entire mode of thinking is fantasy economics preached for the sole purpose of scratching shallow, greedy, immature, itching ears. It doesn't hold up under even the most basic scrutiny, as is evidenced by this 30-second exchange between a responsible American and a shameless panderer.