39 billion is inconsequential to the U.S. economy considering how recklessly the U.S. government will spend trillions of dollars without thought, and subject them to exponential debt growth. Besides, they've sent Ukraine more than that in aid over the past year.
This is nothing more than a campaign tactic for Biden seeing as it's election time. The Supreme Court struck down his insane proposal of forgiving nearly 500B USD in student loans which would have allowed him to spend an unforeseen amount of money and circumvent Congressional oversight simultaneously. Not clear how he has the authority to forgive 39 billion -- assuming it's through executive action, all he did was essentially print 39 billion USD into the economy. Consider it an expensive campaign expenditure.
You do understand that money most likely stays in US and acting as a stimulus package and those people have now more to spend in US products, and that's indirectly driving economy up.
And US has insanely big budget anyway and this is like fraction of a drop in a sea. From outside looking in their taxation doesn't make any sense. They really should tax the rich more for the system to be sustainable.
I understand. As I mentioned, 39 billion isn't a lot of money. But if the U.S. President has the authority by executive action to cancel 39 billion in student debt, how does this conflict at all with SCOTUS striking down the 500 billion Biden tried to cancel earlier? The legal framework seems convoluted so I raise this as an issue because even if it's for a social/economic stimulus, the executive branch should not be in the business of printing money out of thin air.
And by the way, I don't think stimulus packages are a good idea either. The entire idea involves the federal government issuing a loan out to itself on behalf of their constituency. The federal government can never default on their loan so it comes money creation without consequences. Under an economic system where new currency couldn't be minted, then stimulus packages might work.