Yeah, I read Jobs Lost, Jobs Gained too. It's been out long enough. We all know job prospects are shit in the coming decades. People who don't know that yet are still voting R. But ya don't need a fancy corporate desk job to pay down $40k in 20 years. Garnished Starbucks paychecks will do just fine too.

We agree that Boomers have an incentive (recognized or not) to not let this debt restrict equity creation in younger generations, no? That was my main point, so if that's clear then we're good. I was replying to this: "Relieving their debt will not power consumption (so will say the old rich white people)." Whether the Olds realize it or whether they prefer to grip their withered jewels at us, debt forgiveness would power consumption in their interests.

But so "...because it better be. Everyone's counting on it." wasn't me saying shrug "It'll work out, let's ignore the facts." The situation is grim, and (as you know) this debt doesn't work like other debt. We're all stuck with it until it's (1) paid, (2) collective undue hardship is proven (i.e. debt forgiveness or generational bankruptcy), or (3) we die and/or the loan expires.

As the social/economic realities come to bear and the voting population reflects the people carrying the burden (in unsellable/uncompetitive home equity or debt liability) rather than gaining from it, we might see support shift from #1 to #2. And we'll see some creative politicians who want to keep their jobs and are willing to lie about the arithmetic to do it. Because it might not be subject to hope or threat, but it is subject to manipulation.

We'd still all be fucked of course.