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.
The idea of friend o48o, that forgiving student debt drives up the economy is similar to the genius that if money is needed in a country, all you have to do is print it. Typical idea of someone who does not understand the basic fundamentals of economics and offers simple and wrong answers to simple questions that have a complex (correct) answer.
I am not going to try very hard to explain that the USA is the country with the highest standard of living on the planet precisely because there are many rich people.