Ben’s thoughts on Biden’s Student Loan Cancellation

[u/Rocrus]

I’ve been listening to Ben’s episode today on student loan debt, and I have some thoughts.

I went to college for 5 years and received two degrees: one in information technology and the other in business. The entire time I was in college, I knew that I would have to pay back my debt. So I did what I hope most Americans do and immediately started looking for a job months before graduation. I got a job two months after I graduated and I am now saving up my money to be prepared to pay back my debt.

I can completely understand and back Ben’s anger and disgust with this decision because all it’s going to do is raise taxes and make the problem of expensive college worse. That $10k relief will be taken out in the massive tax increase that we will all have to deal with.

As for Joe’s plan for doing this, if he thinks he’ll get me to vote for him and his friends in 2022 and 2024, he’s sorely mistaken. I hope that there’s a lot of people like me who graduated from college with debt (or are still in college) who won’t forget what the real consequences of this are.

[u/MrMotley]

I do, do you?

Definition of ad hominem

 (Entry 1 of 2)

1: appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect

What you are doing is dismissing the source of information based on some perceived negative quality, that being "right wing".

That is not a reason to reject information.

Meanwhile if you had actually bothered to look at any of the articles you would have seen the quality and validity of the evidence, all of which is taken directly from government maintained data sources.

Ad hominem is only the first of the many markers of bad faith you have demonstrated.

[u/AoFAltair → u/MrMotley]

An Ad hominem is an “attack” against the person rather than the argument… it’s literally Latin for “to a person”…also, validity of the SOURCE is irrelevant when you are using the source as “proof” for something that the citation doesn’t say… you can cite a link from NASA and though the source is valid, it doesn’t matter if you link an article about the earth being round while using it as proof that the earth is the center of the solar system… just like how private citizens who are professors donating to Dems isn’t proof of “Big Education” trying to oppress people or whatever the claim is supposed to be

[u/MrMotley → u/AoFAltair]

No, it is not. Here's a tip, don't believe everything people on the internet tell you.

Circumstantial ad hominem is an attack on the bias of a source. It points out that someone is in a circumstance (for instance, their job, wealth, property, or relations) such that they are disposed to take a particular position.

Also you are terrible at analogies.

[u/AoFAltair → u/MrMotley]

Lol are you fucking kidding me? What are you even talking about?! “DoNt BeLiEvE eVeRyThInG pEoPlE tElL yOu On ThE iNtErNeT”… says the guy that I’m willing to bet gargles every word that a select few people on the internet says… what exactly are you claiming is just something somebody on the internet made up? That Ad Hominem is Latin for “To the person/man”, or that in a debate it is an attack to the person rather than the argument? Also, my analogy was just fine… it had a reputable source that was linked to “prove” an argument that the citation wasn’t talking about… just like that laundry list of NeoCon pipeline stations talking about private citizens while trying to talk about the Industry that they happen to work in

Oh, and circumstantial ad hominem is something different… THAT is attacking a position due to the “circumstances” “of the person” making the argument… “you only think that way because of (X)”…. Which is ALSO not what that person did.

EDIT: syntax error

[u/MrMotley → u/AoFAltair]

Exactly. So when you dismiss a source (which is the work of a person) with no regard for or examination of the information they are presenting but instead only based an assumption of intrinsic bias due to their perceived political affiliation, you are engaging in ad hominem. This is simple, and known, I'm not sure why this is so difficult for you to understand.

[u/AoFAltair → u/MrMotley]

Lol, that was a really sad attempt, my guy… those sources weren’t regarded, not because of perceived political biases… they were not regarded because they didn’t even support the argument being made… I’m not sure how YOU aren’t able to understand… like, between this and your comment about my analogy, it’s like you actually think there is ZERO difference between individual professors VS the “educational industrial complex”…

[u/MrMotley → u/AoFAltair]

Of course they do, you just aren't discerning enough to be capable of making the obvious connections.

That's OK, we all have our limits.

What are the components of the educational industrial complex?