Tuesday, August 30, 2022

Allie Beth is Maybe Right Against Biden, But Wrong on Some Else

No, Jesus Didn’t Die for Your Student Loans | Ep 668*
29.VIII.2022 | Allie Beth Stuckey

1:28 Indeed. I stopped two main blogs before they came to that number, because I had no plausible candidate for either Beast of False Prophet.

Only on the third main blog did I actually go that far an beyond, since I had a candidate.

I actually was already doing things when the draft made the total, drafts and published 666, but here is to 666th published post:

28 + 258 (2013 + 2014) = 286 - remainder 386.
386 - 336 = 50 (we're now past 2015)
50 - 27 = 23 (we're past January)
23:rd post in February is : Answering Krzystof Charamsa

"Who is he? / A priest who is not just same sex attracted but confesses to being in a (presumably) sodomitic relationship."

What a coincidence! Or not.

I may have counted wrong, or the post that's 666 back when I wrote it may be so overall:

Some of the Main Suspects (February 9, 2016) - is five posts before the one on Krzystof Charamsa.

1:59 I could perhaps see the episode with Sophia sound off. Subtitled.

I wouldn't want to be judging her, but the scars involve a voice somewhat too deep for a woman ...

7:38 "even if you graduate, you may not have the ticket that graduating once offered"

Student loans are part of it (my Swedish one is pretty close to a Pell Grant).

But only part.

Other parts are:

  • new subjects meant to teach you only a critical attitude with no body of facts tied to something else than that (women studies, race studies ... lot's of subjects ending in "studies")
  • inflation in graduates, meaning they become as employable as farm boys in New York once were ...
  • and lowering of the wage tier where graduate studies are meant as a requisite.

This also works out for the worse for those who studied much and perhaps learnt much (at least the former is my case) but didn't take a Licence or Masters, let alone a PhD.

8:14 Sweden is very different from the US in what you just said.

The medium study loan debt for someone living in Sweden is 143 265 SEK (13 432.62 USD). It's higher for those living abroad. And I have more than most.*

Hence my clear unwillingness to start living off a bad paid unqualified job, instead of my writing, since it would drain what I gain to do that deal.

10:40 I have not been badgering the CSN (our study loan authority) about cancellation.

I have been telling them more than once "I don't have this money you are asking" or "if I paid what you ask, I'd have insufficient on the account for paying rent, if I should find sth"

And I have been badgering moralists - come on and look at my actual work, someone except just myself might profit from making money from it and the voluntary royalties would enable me to actually pay back something!

12:17 This side of the equation does not exist in Sweden.

The most prestigious universities in Sweden - basically as close as we get to OxBridge - are Lund and Uppsala.

The fees for getting inserted as a student (pays for lectures, for student amenities getting opened, for doing exams - I paid inscription during military service to catch up on exams) are set by the government, and no private university, if any even exists in Sweden, is prestigious enough to take vastly higher tuition, possible exceptions for business schools where you may start earning your own money and perhaps pay for all tuition before you even graduate if that's that word.

It could be a more profitable deal to on the one hand this once remit student loans, but for the future limit tuition fees, so that Harvard could be busted if charging what I think you say they charge now ...

13:00 Theatre is not that obscure and often allows some paying back - well, depends on if you participate in casts that are so avant-garde no one sees them too, perhaps.

If I had taken theatre or music - I'd perhaps be more successful now.

15:15 Buying votes - one of the drawbacks with parliamentarian democracies, and presidential republics.

Are you arguing for the kind of régimes that don't have to, like some Fascist régimes and Monarchies?

I am obviously not speaking of racist Fascism (NS + last part of Italian F) or of Antichristian Sultanates, but there were some of some other type!

17:00 It's a great tool, as long as those who handle it use it honestly.

In the Library Georges Pompidou, I had the blog of a Catholic friend from UK blocked, it was called Red Cardigan, and the block reason given was "pornography" ... er, no, definitely not her style.

At a certain municipal cyber facility, my blogs were being blocked for being on blogspot - what was the block reason? Drugs. Blogspot ends in the letter sequence of - yeah three letters - and so obviously all the millions of users of blogspot must be very interested in certain plants of a slightly different variety from the ones used for ropes. And they had such a huge trust in the infallibility of their AI powered filter that they refused to take my correction.

19:01 There was no tax paying involved in the years of Jubilee.

Yes, it did involve property transfer, but it was property transfer of real estate back to original owners, so as to avoid property concentration vs impoverishment.

Like pre-Capitalist laws were in Europe, like in Sweden up to 1860's : you could be in such an impoverished position that you needed to sell - but depending on whether it was where you lived or where you had your shop or whether it was a farm, first, people who cared for you had a right of pre-emption. The different categories could involve family or neighbours or colleagues in the trade, depending on type of property, and they were offered before anyone else was. And within a year of the transaction, you had the option of red-emption, of buying it back not at market price, not to give the one you sold to a profit, but identic price.

19:11 At Sabbatical years, debts were in fact cancelled.

Obviously, either Jubilees or Sabbaticals would be incompatible with certain types of transfers. No government would be able to do Pell Grants if living under Sabbatical years.

And with Jubilees, real estate market value would be going down and down since it was so obviously a lease of property for shorter and shorter time.

20:29 Yeah, if some rich people made student loan debt cancelling charities from their pockets instead of wanting more in them from cancellation by tax payers ...

But in all seriousness, it does also depend on how many lives are bogged down due to student loan debts.

If it's sufficiently many, there is a reason for the state to step in, even if the tax payer doesn't understand the need, and to do this before some of the groups indebted start doing very stupid things.

21:18 Year of Jubilee was not the most frequent cancellation of debts, Sabbatical years were.

During and after a Sabbatical year, it was unlawful to reclaim a debt contracted before that Sabbatical.

If you have heard of Hillel (the first) and Shammai, Hillel was the pragmatist who found ways to get around this. And that type of pragmatism is very probably and in some cases very clearly what Christ is condemning as "traditions of men".

22:11 Borrower being slave to a lender is actually OT law. Our Lord in a parable describes how it worked, but this does not mean it is a legislation point for NT law.

Ver. 7. Servant. He might be sold, &c. Ex. xxii. 3. Matt. xviii. 25. Gell. xx. 1. Plato (Leg. viii.) would have nothing sold on credit. These laws appear to be severe; but they are founded on wisdom, as nothing impoverishes more than the facility of borrowing.

22:03 Did you say 37:1 for Psalms?

In a Catholic Bible, this would be 36:1 (we follow LXX division of the book of psalms).

Here is what it says, adding next verse so you can check it's the right passage:

A psalm for David himself. Be not emulous of evildoers; nor envy them that work iniquity. For they shall shortly wither away as grass, and as the green herbs shall quickly fall.

Wait, 37:21! I heard "one" when you said "twentyone" a bit quickly!

The sinner shall borrow, and not pay again; but the just sheweth mercy and shall give.

This is a question : does this verse mean, borrowing and not repaying constitutes sin, and giving constitutes justice?

Or does this mean the sinner shall be put to need and the just shall be able to indulge his will to show mercy?

Is it a condemnation and a praise or is it a contrast between curse and blessing?

Previous verse : Because the wicked shall perish. And the enemies of the Lord, presently after they shall be honoured and exalted, shall come to nothing and vanish like smoke.

Following verse : For such as bless him shall inherit the land: but such as curse him shall perish.

Given that in OT times not paying back was a threat of slavery, being brought to that was a clear instance of very bad fortune, like after a curse.

And the previous and following verses and context of the whole psalm say this is a contrast between curses for the wicked (who seem to prosper for a time) and blessings for the just (if you go back : even if it doesn't show immediately).

So, when you say the Psalm is condemning the non-payment of debt, you are quotemining.

The Haydock comment is not right now at least speaking to the first part of the verse, only to the second part:

Ver. 21. Give. Having both the will and the power to be liberal. H. --- "He shall lend without expecting any advantage, while the wicked falls into such misery as not to be able to pay his debts. This is not always the order of Providence. C. --- But the just is often enabled by economy to relieve his brethren, at the same time that the libertine wastes his estate, (Bert.) or at least unjustly defers to pay his debts. M.

The commenter M is distinguishing between a just and an unjust deferring of payment of debts.

22:14 Getting quickly out of debt if possible or not getting into it in the first place, is obviously ideal.

I have not looked at offers on loans, sometimes perhaps even big sums, that have spammed me, bc of this.

Here is the Haydock comment:

Ver. 8-9. But that you love one another. This is a debt, says S. Chrys. which we are always to be paying, and yet always remains, and is to be paid again. — He that loveth his neighbour, hath fulfilled the law. Nay, he that loves his neighbour, as he ought, loves him for God's sake, and so complies with the other great precept of loving God: and upon these two precepts (as Christ himself taught us, Matt. xxii. 40.) depends the whole law and the prophets. Wi.

It does not state that the first part is a universal prohibition on remaining in debt when the means of getting out are dauntingly bleak, bordering on suicidal.

23:50 Some taxation actually does. The tithe.

St. Severine of Noricum had trouble convincing people to levy a tithe (10 % of income) which he was mainly using for relief to those impoverished by the then ongoing remake of the Roman world, like onslaught of Barbarians (he negotiated with Odoacar so Romans from Noricum could be evacuated South, to Italy, after he died, and left in peace as long as he lived : his biographer St. Eugippius resettled to Naples).

So, God made miracles on his behalf.

In Sweden, just before the Reformation, we had two taxes. Tithe, paid to the Church - 10 % of income. Part of which was still for poverty relief (2/9 of the cereals tithe). And real estate tax, corresponding to c. 5 % of a typical year's harvest, paid to the crown for defense purposes.

Sum total : 15 % taxation.

24:01 I am indeed working very diligently as a writer, and therefore that verse should not be used to condemn my ways, but rather Wisdom 5:1 - 5 to condemn those who organise an editors' boycott around my writings.

One is taking away my work, not just if one is unfairly gaining from it, but even more, if one is preventing me to gain fairly from it.

24:20 And while I am an ex-convict, it was not for property delinquence - not for stealing.

24:41 God did forbid Israel to charge interest on loans, if the debtor is a brother - a fellow Israelite, or possibly even Edomite or Egyptian.

[withdrawn, since following could not be added]

Now the word poor certainly occurs in both Leviticus 25 and Exodus 22.

However, it is explained as a circumstance leading to the borrowing.

And in a society where having real estate was the default, not having enough money to start one's business clearly counted as poor.

Which (confer Jubilees every 50 years) was a type of society that Israel was.

Can one extrapolate that interest would be OK when lending to a rich person? I'd not say that. Especially, as there is something else than what we call lending that would better describe when taking more would be OK - if the borrower is successful. That transaction, according to St. Thomas, involves what we would refer to as buying and selling back a share to the company owner in his company. If he gets a 10 % boost overall for the company over the time of the loan, he ows a ten % boost to the lender, but if he gets a 50 % set back, the lender also gets a 50 % setback.

* See also:

The Imaginative Conservative : Should We Forgive Student Debt?
By David Deavel|August 30th, 2022

No comments: