The Biden administration is still talking about delivering on the President’s promise to relieve student loan debt for many Americans. There is continuing discussion on how much debt should be forgiven, how to pay for it, and whether it is fair to all those who have diligently and painfully worked to already pay off their own student loans. After all, if you’re going to eliminate student debt to buy votes, why just limit it to student debt?

Unfortunately for Biden, according to numerous sources including National Review, the executive branch has no generalized power to forgive any amount of student debt. Even Nancy Pelosi confirmed simply that “the president can’t do it. That’s not even a discussion.” The Department of Education came to the same verdict, determining that the executive branch “does not have the statutory authority to cancel, compromise, discharge, or forgive, on a blanket or mass basis, principal balances of student loans, and/or to materially modify the repayment amounts or terms thereof.”

Of course, even if he had the authority, forgiving student debt doesn’t make the debt go away. Reality has a way of breaking into such “freeloading” dreams. It’s pay me now, or somebody else pay me later. But why should some future taxpayer pay off anyone else’s student debt?

Whatever happened to wise warnings of “student beware.” When you get an education and agree to pay the tuition, you ought to realize that you must at some point pay for that education. You signed on the bottom line. Face your real-world responsibilities. Hopefully, you picked a degree major that will ensure a career capable of paying off your loans. Students clearly have some responsibility, but what about the universities that took advantage of the money coming from those loans?

After all, there is ample evidence that student tuitions exploded far faster than inflation when government funds became readily available for student loans. Complaints of excessive tuition increases by students trapped in their programs tended to be met with a less than caring response—pound sand!

Since 2008, the tuition cost or a four-year college degree has increased nearly 25%. In that same period, student debt has doubled, increasing by 107%. 2015 study found that a dollar of subsidized student loans results in a published tuition increase of 58 cents at a typical university, An NBER paper suggests that changes to federal student loans are more than sufficient to explain tuition increases at private nonprofit colleges. And a 2014 study found that for-profit colleges eligible for federal student aid charged tuition 78% higher than that of similar but aid-ineligible institutions.

In short, there is no doubt that tuition was rising faster than the inflation level. Evidence has been clear for decades. In 1987, Secretary of Education William J. Bennett argued that “increases in financial aid in recent years have enabled colleges and universities to raise their tuition, confident that Federal loan subsidies would help cushion the increase.”

Bennett pointed out in 1987 that federal student aid had risen 57 percent since 1980, while inflation had been 26 percent. A 2020 analysis by the Congressional Budget Office brought the numbers up to date: “Between 1995 and 2017, the balance of outstanding federal student loan debt increased more than sevenfold, from $187 billion to $1.4 trillion (in 2017 dollars).” What is the lesson? The more federal aid to students is available colleges raise tuition more. Salaries rise and bureaucracies expand. There are more courses, more dorms, dining halls, lavish recreational centers, and more money for endowments.

Far too many students find that once they begin their education, their schools raise the tuition at such a high rate that their debt explodes. The university builds their endowment, and the “trapped” student is compelled to finish what they started at a cost they did not expect to have to pay. In such a situation, should not the university be responsible for any increased cost above the increase in cost of living during the same time? It’s time for universities to take responsibility for their share of student debt.

The universities that benefited from these loans should have a part in footing the bill. That means universities that raked in millions to inflate endowments should be holding the bag for those who can’t afford to pay their loans. With universities holding hundreds of billions of dollars in tax-free endowments, any government program to relieve student debt should be completely dependent on taxing those university endowments.

It’s time to counter the Democrats’ vote-buying scheme by making lasting changes to the student loan process. That means putting universities on the hook for their predatory behavior. That will go much further than a temporary payoff that does nothing to solve what is causing the problem.

In 2015, Sue Payne, a conservative radio host, was inadvertantly included in internal White House phone call representing the “Task Force of New Americans.” This endeavor was led by Cecilia Munoz and was comprised of 16 members of the Obama Cabinet. The Obama-Biden administration had planned to initiate a “country within a country.”

Obama goal was to quickly grant citizenship to 13 to 15 million illegal aliens. As these “new Americans” came forward, the communities where they would be placed would be designated as “receiving communities.” As these “new Americans” came out of the shadows, existing U.S. citizens would be pushed into the shadows.

It was emphasized that the newly minted “Americans” must be informed of “the benefits they are entitled to” and that they would “navigate not assimilate.” Fortunately these plans did not materialize.

Fast Forward to the Present

Jimmy Fallon announced to his studio audience one night that the white population of the U.S. had declined 8.6% in the last ten years, to which his audience responded with boisterous laughter and applause. He was shocked but sought to hide it.

Fallon has said, “The results of the 2020 census just came out. For the first time in American history the number of white people went down,” upon which the predominantly Caucasian audience responded with “glee and elongated clapping.”

“Interesting reaction to that,” Fallon said. Interesting? More like bizarre. How can a plethora of white individuals, not merely those in attendance that evening, but rather untold millions across the nation loathe themselves so completely, that they revel in seeing their numbers drop? Do Japanese wish to see their numbers decline relative to the country’s overall population? Do Chileans? Finns? Jordanians? Tunisians? Tucker Carlson is completely correct on this topic and, as such, is the favorite target of the demented Left.

The Left is Giddy

To be sure, Jimmy Fallon, Jimmy Kimmel, and the ultra-obnoxious Steven Colbert have catered exclusively to ‘progressives’ for upwards of eight years. Progressives populate their audiences, and progressive ‘elites’ dominate their guest spots.

Amazingly, non-hispanic whites in the U.S. today represent only 57.8% of the population, their lowest percentage ever and down from above 80% a mere two score earlier. Is this a cause for celebration? At the Washington Post, uber-RINO columnist Jennifer Rubin joyously greeted the data, citing it as it “fabulous news.”

Concurrently, if you even hint that the demographic decline of white Americans might prove to be unfavorable, you’ll be demonized as a dangerous individual. However, if you seek the elimination of people based on their skin color, and they are white people, this is perfectly okay. Indeed, it’s delightful. It’s entirely progressive! Let us all rejoice!

Self-Hate Abounds

The self-loathing that untold numbers of white liberals have for whites in general is mind-boggling. They have been taught — actually, brainwashed — to regard their ethnicity and skin color as invariably detrimental to society. To them, by virtue of their birth alone, they represent an extreme cultural blight.

This enormous group, tens of millions strong, is comprised largely of Democrats who also happen to comprise the core of cancel culture. These self-loathing guardians seek to financially and politically cremate any person, place, thing, or idea that they regard as offensive to others and, paradoxically, that aren’t necessarily directly offensive to themselves.

Why do white liberals act this way? They are self-appointed care-takers of what they believe is social fairness, justice, and equanimity. At the same time, it’s eye-opening to discover that most minority individuals are flummoxed by what whites seek to cancel, merely because the white majority thinks it offensive to select minorities.

You dislike The Cat in the Hat? On January 21, 2015, Michelle Obama invited The Cat in the Hat characters to the White House to read to young students as part of her ‘Let’s Move, Let’s Read!’ initiative. She noted, “Pretty much all the stuff you need to know is in Dr. Seuss.”

Windmill Jousting

Did anybody in attendance that day, Ms. Obama included, regard these characters to be portraying racial stereotypes? Was anybody offended, insulted, or outraged? Newspaper accounts and photographs indicate that just the opposite was true.

So when did The Cat in the Hat and other Dr. Seuss books, and his various characters, become ‘racist’ as not a single word changed, in any of his books? The quick answer: Self-loathing liberals despise anything which they even remotely suspect somehow disparages minorities.

Ironically, these same self-loathing liberals feel morally superior to everybody else. Thus they exhibit an odd psycho-social phenomenon that researchers will be studying for decades, if not centuries, to come: How individuals, programmed en masse to hate themselves, decided to despoil any aspect of our culture that they believe does not meet their ‘standards.’

Stranger Than Fiction

These obtuse standards become entrenched as part of liberal, Leftist, unassailable doctrine and spread via the internet like kudzu. And who among them can tolerate debate of official doctrine?

Those on the right observe this phenomenon with incredulity. How do so many people so thoroughly come to hate themselves, especially for phantom faux pas (i.e. that they haven’t committed)?

As they proceed with their many forms of boycotts, doxxing, and ostracism, and deepen their embrace of cancel culture, it’s difficult to predict when the dam will break. Self-loathing whites, you see, glean positive strokes and virtue signals from one another. They are giddy to be accepted as a member of the ‘morally superior’ strata of humankind.

Self-loathing liberals are hell bent on their ‘righteous mission.’ Each one knows to the marrow in his, her, or its bones that unquestionably they are on the ‘right side’ of history, when in actuality they are on the maniacal side of cultural and social suicide.

– – – – –