[wat0n]

I even said in my post it's politically unworkable. Americans worship their shitty system. You'd have to start with significant constitutional reform.

Many countries have cheaper and more effective education, alternatives for non college bound students, and higher degrees of social mobility but Americans are exceptional therefor fuck learning from others.

The American government at this point is one of the oldest continuing regimes in the world. It turns out pre-industrial consistutions are less than ideally suited to govern post-industrial societies. The shitty American education system is a victim of it.

Getting Americans to agree to that type of taxation would be easier than amending the Constitution.

I don't find it odd that Americans like their Constitution. It's proven to be very adaptable.

[Fasces]

It's not just about taxation - creating a federal curriculum and distributing funding across state borders is currently flatly unconstitutional. Effective reform for the national education system would require outright constitutional amendment.

[Mike12]

Anyone realize 30% of us even have 4 year degrees, so we all have to hear from disparaging majorities, who already looked up the top suicide cause of college deaths. Whats the game, paying hacks 1,000s to explain themselves. Well sum'bitches told me to stop the highschool job search for it then you barely can even resume the highschool job search so whatever their game is, whatever their aim is. I failed at mechanical/electrical engineering there's no upper average and universal quite like accounting to finish though, so how about that , move those numbers.

[Puffer Fish]

But wouldn't the taxpayers benefit from a well-educated workforce and see a return on that investment in terms of additional tax revenue being taken in the future due to the fact people are able to be more productive and innovative because they are better educated? Wouldn't a better-educated workforce be beneficial to the economy?

Is it wrong? It is mistaken?

Well, consider this: If that was really the case, why would government intervention be needed to guarantee these loans?
Wouldn't banks be happy to lend out money if they knew they would get a return on their money?

But everyone knows that no sane or rational investor would lend out money to random people for this. Not unless the government steps in and promises to pay the loan if the borrower doesn't.

Free markets send signals. In this case, what signal is the market sending?

Try finding any actuarial statistics if you can. These loans are costing the government money. That suggests the overall investment might not be worth it.

According to the statistics, 7.8% of all U.S. student loan debt is in default. But that's only part of the story, because there are many former students who are questioning whether all their student loan debt was worth it.

"A new survey found that 54% of federal student loan borrowers said taking on that debt was not worth it."
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/28/majorit ... th-it.html

[Rich]

Getting Americans to agree to that type of taxation would be easier than amending the Constitution.

I don't find it odd that Americans like their Constitution. It's proven to be very adaptable.

I've been saying for decades that the American Constitution is awful, that the United States is actually a failure when you consider it got the greatest piece of real estate in the world and it inherited the most superior English / British culture on the planet at the time. Now I realise that most people are not intelligent enough to understand my argument, or not intellectually honest enough to admit to its truth if they are. Anyway great to see this video come out which fleshes out part of my argument.

The American system is so awful that they couldn't abolish slavery without a civil war and they couldn't abolish apartheid till the nineteen sixties.

[wat0n]

I've been saying for decades that the American Constitution is awful, that the United States is actually a failure when you consider it got the greatest piece of real estate in the world and it inherited the most superior English / British culture on the planet at the time. Now I realise that most people are not intelligent enough to understand my argument, or not intellectually honest enough to admit to its truth if they are. Anyway great to see this video come out which fleshes out part of my argument.

The American system is so awful that they couldn't abolish slavery without a civil war and they couldn't abolish apartheid till the nineteen sixties.

...Yet the American system has also proven to be able to adapt to the new challenges during these last 235 years or so. That's a far better track record than most republics and monarchies.

[Rich]

...Yet the American system has also proven to be able to adapt to the new challenges during these last 235 years or so. That's a far better track record than most republics and monarchies.

No the American system failed to adapt. There was a civil war, seventy three years after signing and an effective new constitution imposed by the victors. The reconstruction amendments were not passed constitutionally. Look at the other Protestant countries, Britain, Sweden, which peacefully allowed Norway to secede, Denmark, The Netherlands, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, by the standards of Protestant countries the US was clearly a failure.

Of course if you look at Papist and Orthodox countries you will see a contemptible history of backwardness, revolution, fascism and authoritarianism. Germany was divided between Protestant and Catholic. Because of this Germany was only ever fully unified under Adolph Hitler hundreds of years late. And even then the South Tirol and German Switzerland lay outside the Reich.

[wat0n]

No the American system failed to adapt. There was a civil war, seventy three years after signing and an effective new constitution imposed by the victors. The reconstruction amendments were not passed constitutionally. Look at the other Protestant countries, Britain, Sweden, which peacefully allowed Norway to secede, Denmark, The Netherlands, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, by the standards of Protestant countries the US was clearly a failure.

Of course if you look at Papist and Orthodox countries you will see a contemptible history of backwardness, revolution, fascism and authoritarianism. Germany was divided between Protestant and Catholic. Because of this Germany was only ever fully unified under Adolph Hitler hundreds of years late. And even then the South Tirol and German Switzerland lay outside the Reich.

But the UK did not allow countries like Malaysia, Israel or (why not) the US itself to peacefully secede.

Whatever happened to its political system then?