The problem is that colleges will raise the tuition to match the students' borrowing ability. The solution is to eliminate the Federal student loan program completely. Then, you would see tuitions decrease dramatically.

If people can’t figure out simple things like what a woman is how are they going to do the the complicated math that comes with paying your bills?

Loans
 

We paid ours back, I should not pay yours back with my taxpayer dollars. Stop whining and pay it back.

Constitution
 

The Constitution comes first, and was applied correctly to the rule of law. Congress controls the purse strings, not a royal el presidente. The president needs to fall in line, now! He’s an executive, not an emperor.

It does not appear that you are addressing the issue that the Supreme Court was deciding.
They were not addressing any change in selling standard items.
If I sell BBQ, bicycles, lawn service, etc, then I cannot discriminate against anyone who wants to buy those items.

They were addressing sellers creates something unique, and are saying that I cannot be forced to create something that is against my beliefs. If I plan to sell basic Website creation software, then I should sell it to all buyers. If I specialize using my skills, I am allowed to specialize under conditions of my personal beliefs.

Some say that the Supreme Court should not have considered this case because there was no standing. The "standing" was the law that Colorado created.

These facts were stipulated to by the state of Colorado and the plaintiff.

1. Ms. Smith is “willing to work with all people regardless of classifications such as race, creed, sexual orientation, and gender,” and she “will gladly create custom graphics and websites” for clients of any sexual orientation.

2. She will not produce content that “contradicts biblical truth” regardless of who orders it.

3. Her belief that marriage is a union between one man and one woman is a sincerely held religious conviction.

4. All of the graphic and website design services Ms. Smith provides are “expressive.”

5. The websites and graphics Ms. Smith designs are “original, customized” creations that “contribut[e] to the overall messages” her business conveys “through
the websites” it creates.

6. Just like the other services she provides, the wedding websites Ms. Smith plans to create “will be expressive in nature.”

7. Those wedding websites will be “customized and tailored” through close collaboration with individual couples, and they will “express Ms. Smith’s and 303
Creative’s message celebrating and promoting” her view of marriage.

8. Viewers of Ms. Smith’s websites “will know that the websites are [Ms. Smith’s and 303 Creative’s] original artwork.”

9. To the extent Ms. Smith may not be able to provide certain services to a potential customer, “[t]here are numerous companies in the State of Colorado and across the nation that offer custom website design services.”

To use a quote from a previous post - The entire "case" was based on a hypothetical and should never have made it to the Supreme Court.

Although your stated case above is hypothetical, it does not relate directly to the government unless you build more hypothetical conditions.
First, the loan was an agreement between you and a bank. As a buyer you would likely have paid for a Title Search and Home inspection to assure the property was clear to sell. In the agreement to buy, your lawyer would ensure that words were included ensure the seller properly described the conditions for sale.

Sale made. Now you find notice from government about property condemnation. Not likely, since those hazardous waste issues are not instantaneous. But 6 block radii? You are not alone. Starts to sound ridiculous. That is why hypothetical is not acceptable.

To the issue. You take out a loan and you are responsible to pay. If you have valid complaint, call a lawyer. Don't expect government rescue.

I do not see why anyone would have standing if no harm was involved to any party.

Lawyers should have any easy time distinguishing this from their cases.

The court found that she did have standing.

For its part, the Tenth Circuit held that Ms. Smith had standing to sue. In that court’s judgment, she had established a credible threat that, if she follows through on her plans to offer wedding website services, Colorado will invoke CADA to force her to create speech she does not believe or endorse. The court pointed to the fact that “Colorado has a history of past enforcement against nearly identical conduct—i.e., Masterpiece Cakeshop”; that anyone in the State may file a complaint against Ms. Smith and initiate “a potentially burdensome administrative hearing” process; and that “Colorado [has] decline[d] to disavow future enforcement” proceedings against her. Before us, no party challenges these conclusions.

capitalized interest on student loans perhaps?

Richard Sharp? The Richard Sharp who got fired for helping Boris Johnson get over 800 million in donations? I wonder why he’d say that. Lol BBC has also been accused of right leaning.
As for the headline “deals blow” it’s absolutely correct. Couldn’t have said it better.

I would never ever ever ever watch fox or msnbc. My brain might melt. Fox is lie after lie, hence the millions they had to fork over due to the lies they told and msnbc is just so left leaning it’s annoying.

Or it could have said that the decision helps the LGBTQ community.

If you borrow money, you pay it back or get foreclosed on. Doesn't matter if you borrowed too much, paid too much interest. Even though you couldn't afford the payments, YOU borrowed the money.

Hopefully you enjoyed the party at college while the rest of us worked.

My Granddaughter and her parents paid for her college. When she wanted to go on for her Masters she worked and paid for that. So what are they doing for someone like her who paid her own way, are they going to refund her payments?

No, but the secret to becoming wealthy is to pay your own way and stay out of debt. Most people who depend on debt, never become wealthy.