What Robert Applebaum Wants

You may or may not have heard of the fledgling, but growing, movement to forgive student loan debt to stimulate the economy.  It’s one of the several hot topics that have been thrown about, along with the legalization of marijuana (especially for the state of California), that aim to stimulate the economy.

Haters are sometimes misled, I believe, by the impact of the popular title which grants its origins to a facebook group.

“Forgive Student Loan Debt!  What a bunch of free riders who want to ‘forgiven’ for their trips to Jamaica!”

“Kids don’t work for anything these days!”

There are some aspects I’d like to bullet point before I turn to Applebaum’s organization:

• As students and alumni are aware, whether public or private, tuition rises each year.
• Demand for higher education levels is not new.  As we have seen over the past few decades, a job that one could have gotten by with a high school diploma is now granted instead to those with undergraduate degrees.  Likewise, graduates of MA or specialty programs are slowly replacing those with undergraduate degrees.
• The government has spent hundreds billions bailing out car companies and banks; trillions “liberating” Iraqis.  Why not stimulate our own economy by focusing on the loosening the binds on our own educated citizens?

Applebaum writes:

Forgiving student loan debt would have an immediate stimulating effect on the economy. Responsible people who did nothing other than pursue a higher education would have hundreds, if not thousands of extra dollars per month to spend, fueling the economy now.

His proposal is quite intriguing.

But that’s all well and good, how might this relate to the issues on this blog?

He noted a couple things that stuck out to me in his proposal:

The driving factor in today’s economy is fear. …

This proposal will immediately free up money for hardworking, educated Americans, giving them more money in their pockets every month, addressing the very real psychological aspects of the recession as much as the financial ones.

Fear is indeed an issue here.  Fear of the Other, fear of inadequacy.  What this plan is suggesting is a complete overhaul of the financial system that keeps a significant percent of the educated class tied down.

I have noted in the forums several people saying their own personal stories of having gone to a public university for undergraduate degree,  and that their “friends” who went to “Ivy League” schools and ended up saddled with debt are “getting the last laugh”.  Okay, well only one person wrote that specifically, but the sentiment is resounding.

This is not about punishing those who didn’t end up with loans, its about trying to reorganize the economy to restore and create jobs.  Fear is what is driving so many people to save their money: if we alleviate some of that burden for the educated class, I agree with Applebaum that it would be like a shot of adrenaline to the system in which you, and I, necessarily live.

Further, it is my personal belief that a constant focus on personal funds (or lack thereof) drastically hinders one’s ability to relate to others.  If we can wipe some of that debt away, it would free up the attention spans of people to obviously spend their money elsewhere, but potentially allocate their attention to service, further education, and health.

And does not generosity beget generosity?

It would open up a portal of possibilities: new ways of engaging the world for those with higher educations.

I welcome comments here.  I also recommend you check out Robert Applebaum’s site to read his work for yourself, and/or the Huffington Post article in which he was interviewed, released on June 30th.

Swedish parents keep 2-year-old’s gender secret

What an interesting family.

And the conversation below the article is extremely revealing.  It’s interesting — for current lack of a better synonym — how the respondents focus on one issue or another, taking the actual story (which is necessarily minimally representative of truth) into consideration.

HOT TOPIC: “GENDER?” -> START RIDICULOUS RANTS/PRAISE NOW.

One of the many that stuck out:

“I think it’s a great idea if the parents not give a child stereotypical ideas about how they should behave, because of their gender, let them play with both dolls and trains, etc. but to deny a gender completely, this will severely mess them up. Children learn about themselves through their basic facts and figures, at first. They establish who they are by understanding their identity, and yes, gender is a big part of that. It doesn’t matter what stereotypical ideas others might have and display to the child, as long as their parents can give them solid foundations, it shouldn’t matter.

This is a child’s life, not some social experiment! I remember the Brenda/David study from psychology, do they want their child to end up the same way? These people are not taking their responsibility as parents seriously.”

(My emphasis.)

It didn’t sound to me, that the parents were “denying gender” — in fact, it seemed like the parents allowed the full spectrum, so that the child can pick and choose what they like for themselves.

My only thing might be that their peers would necessarily influence the outcome.  It wouldn’t be absolutely their choice.  This may be a response to those who call their parenting decision “gay”: that those two people alone will not reflect the developed individual.

If that logic works, no straight couple would raise a queer child.  And everyone knows that has potential to happen.

Any thoughts?

Gimundo Highlight

Just wanted to bring attention to a really great site for finding “good news”.

Gimundo serves up some really great, feel-good tidbits everyday.  You even have the option to having a newsletter come direct to your inbox Monday through Friday.

In addition to having some great stories, they also have links to eco-friendly sponsors and videos that will give you tingles.  The good kind.

Here’s a link to my personal favorite article (so far), entitled “Five Ways to Give without Spending a Dime“.