Biden administration announces partial student loan forgiveness

[Toni]

The comment section is full of a lot of angry people who don't want anyone to have loan forgiveness. I find that surprising since most surveys claims there is over 50% support for student loan forgiveness. The article should be available for anyone to read for at least two weeks, according to WaPo's gifting rules.

Includes a bit of resentment from people who endured crippling student debt and don't like the thought of other people getting out easy.

The problem is people who suffered being responsible dislike seeing others get rewarded for irresponsibility.

So people paying student loans today are "irresponsible" but when you did it, it was a good investment? What a crock.

Wut? Isn’t it about folks who were responsible and paid back their loans resenting that their taxes will be used to write off the loans of others? Is the government going to refund our payments with interest? Or are we just suckers for being responsible?

It’s like people who were children before there were vaccinations available to prevent measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, polio and more resenting kids today who can be vaccinated against these diseases.

 

[Trausti]

The comment section is full of a lot of angry people who don't want anyone to have loan forgiveness. I find that surprising since most surveys claims there is over 50% support for student loan forgiveness. The article should be available for anyone to read for at least two weeks, according to WaPo's gifting rules.

Includes a bit of resentment from people who endured crippling student debt and don't like the thought of other people getting out easy.

The problem is people who suffered being responsible dislike seeing others get rewarded for irresponsibility.

So people paying student loans today are "irresponsible" but when you did it, it was a good investment? What a crock.

Wut? Isn’t it about folks who were responsible and paid back their loans resenting that their taxes will be used to write off the loans of others? Is the government going to refund our payments with interest? Or are we just suckers for being responsible?

It’s like people who were children before there were vaccinations available to prevent measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, polio and more resenting kids today who can be vaccinated against these diseases.

That analogy doesn’t work at all.

 

[southernhybrid]

Or, just make state and community college free, like it is in most civilized countries

Thank you! Unfortunately we have been marching in the opposite direction for the past fifteen years. As other sources of funding fail to keep up with increasing costs, student tuition has skyrocketed to help schools make up the difference. Since this also means hiring fewer and less qualified staff and cutting programs, students are getting a worse product at greater personal cost with every passing year.

I checked yesterday to see how much the tuition was at our local technical college. It's 100 dollars a credit. I guess that's very affordable if one chooses a program that prepares them for a career that has the potential to earn a decent salary. If one has to borrow the money to get them the two year degree, their loan would be far less than the average new car loan, which is usually paid off in 4 to 6 years. Of course it would be good if two year colleges were free or less expensive, like perhaps 25 dollars per credit hour.

The college near me offers many non degree programs like truck driving, a large variety of medical tech skills, plumbing, electrician, a variety of IT tech certificates etc. I think young people need to consider what they want or can do for the rest of their lives to earn a decent salary. Plumbers, electricians, and many other careers that don't require a four year degree are extremely important, and with so many people retiring from those occupations, we will need a lot more.

I wish Americans would realize how valuable these people are. Perhaps more people would enter fields like that instead of being pushed to achieve a lib arts or business degree that might help one develop intellectually, but won't qualify you for a good job in the world that we live in now. Plus, with the internet and free non credit online courses, one can easily develop their knowledge in those areas, if that's what they want.

When I lived in NC during the 80s, I had a neighbor who had a four year degree. He didn't like his work, so he went back to school to become a plumber and then started up his own business. Americans need to appreciate all of these skilled occupations that don't require a 4 year degree. I'm sure there are plenty of people with advanced degrees who don't know how to fix a broken water pipe, repair their washing machine, or change out the electrical outlets in their homes. My point is that college has been pushed on lots of young people who might prefer to do work that only requires a certificate, a two year degree or an internship. There are so many who start college, only to drop out during the first semester. I know I'm going off topic, but it's always bothered me how some liberals with degrees look down on professions that don't require as much formal schooling.

I also wish that vocational programs had not been taken out of high schools. Back in the day, a high school student could graduate with enough courses to become LPNs, cosmetologists, plumbers, etc. I wonder if there's a high school left in the country that still offers vocational training. It seems as if all of those occupations now require community college. One can always go back to college at any point, if they want to change their line of work. My own sister was a high school grad, who decided to go to college when she was in. her late 30s. She obtained two degrees in late 30s and early 40s.

I'm fairly neutral on how much the government should help student loan debt, but I think there are many far more important issues right now. I would prefer that loan forgiveness be done on a case by case basis. I think it would be better to give forgiveness in return for some type of government service or by agreeing to work in an area where your skills are badly needed. Hardship cases should also get help as well as those who were scammed into paying high tuition for schools that don't give them the skills to get a decent job. I've yet to find an adult who doesn't have any loan debt who supports loan forgiveness for everyone. As far as the future goes, it would be great if community and stage colleges were more affordable. The total cost of loan forgiveness needs to be carefully analyzed before any big promises are made. Schools don't have to be free, but they should be affordable.

Most of my friends are Democrats who never went to college and they resent the loan forgiveness for all. I've come to think that it's not popular enough to happen. It seems to be a very divisive issue. There must be a way to compromise and help those most in need while expecting those who have very successful careers to continue to pay off their debt. I strongly support lowering the interest rates to close to zero. Why doesn't the government start from there? That would help a lot. Even in my day, loans were expected to take at about 10 years before they were paid off. If the interest rates were very low, most loans could easily be paid off within 15 years. Imo, compromise is how things get done. If only both sides of the aisle were willing to work together.

 

[Politesse]

Ah yes, the myth of the condescending college professor.

Offering people access to the careers and degrees they want to pursue does not prevent anyone from choosing a diferent path. We are not killing plumbing by making it possible to study history. The reasons why a younger generation is not choosing technical trades has nothing to do with liberal arts degrees being more available to them, and in fact, most trade school certificates are substantially cheaper to earn than full degrees, so if that were a real problem we would already be implementing the solution. We aren't killing plumbers. We're just making it possible for people to study history. If you have options, you can do either of those things, or neither. You can even do both at once, in a civilized society. Nothing about the job of an electrician or plumber is inhibited by holding a history degree, and it might even be useful information at times (the construction of our civil infrastructure occurred during history, as it turns out). But if you don't have options, you'll do the only thing you can, whether or not it is something you either want to do or have any aptitude for.

 

[Trausti]

Most of my friends are Democrats who never went to college and they resent the loan forgiveness for all.

Yeah. It would be a massive wealth transfer from the working class to the middle class and higher. As well, the college graduate gets the income benefit of his degree - paid for by the working class.

 

[Toni]

The comment section is full of a lot of angry people who don't want anyone to have loan forgiveness. I find that surprising since most surveys claims there is over 50% support for student loan forgiveness. The article should be available for anyone to read for at least two weeks, according to WaPo's gifting rules.

Includes a bit of resentment from people who endured crippling student debt and don't like the thought of other people getting out easy.

The problem is people who suffered being responsible dislike seeing others get rewarded for irresponsibility.

So people paying student loans today are "irresponsible" but when you did it, it was a good investment? What a crock.

Wut? Isn’t it about folks who were responsible and paid back their loans resenting that their taxes will be used to write off the loans of others? Is the government going to refund our payments with interest? Or are we just suckers for being responsible?

It’s like people who were children before there were vaccinations available to prevent measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, polio and more resenting kids today who can be vaccinated against these diseases.

That analogy doesn’t work at all.

How so?

 

[Trausti]

The comment section is full of a lot of angry people who don't want anyone to have loan forgiveness. I find that surprising since most surveys claims there is over 50% support for student loan forgiveness. The article should be available for anyone to read for at least two weeks, according to WaPo's gifting rules.

Includes a bit of resentment from people who endured crippling student debt and don't like the thought of other people getting out easy.

The problem is people who suffered being responsible dislike seeing others get rewarded for irresponsibility.

So people paying student loans today are "irresponsible" but when you did it, it was a good investment? What a crock.

Wut? Isn’t it about folks who were responsible and paid back their loans resenting that their taxes will be used to write off the loans of others? Is the government going to refund our payments with interest? Or are we just suckers for being responsible?

It’s like people who were children before there were vaccinations available to prevent measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, polio and more resenting kids today who can be vaccinated against these diseases.

That analogy doesn’t work at all.

How so?

People took out loans. Some paid them back, as agreed. Others did not. So those who breached the agreement would be rewarded while those who were responsible are out the money they repaid. What suckers.

 

[Toni]

Or, just make state and community college free, like it is in most civilized countries

Thank you! Unfortunately we have been marching in the opposite direction for the past fifteen years. As other sources of funding fail to keep up with increasing costs, student tuition has skyrocketed to help schools make up the difference. Since this also means hiring fewer and less qualified staff and cutting programs, students are getting a worse product at greater personal cost with every passing year.

I checked yesterday to see how much the tuition was at our local technical college. It's 100 dollars a credit. I guess that's very affordable if one chooses a program that prepares them for a career that has the potential to earn a decent salary. If one has to borrow the money to get them the two year degree, their loan would be far less than the average new car loan, which is usually paid off in 4 to 6 years. Of course it would be good if two year colleges were free or less expensive, like perhaps 25 dollars per credit hour.

The college near me offers many non degree programs like truck driving, a large variety of medical tech skills, plumbing, electrician, a variety of IT tech certificates etc. I think young people need to consider what they want or can do for the rest of their lives to earn a decent salary. Plumbers, electricians, and many other careers that don't require a four year degree are extremely important, and with so many people retiring from those occupations, we will need a lot more.

I wish Americans would realize how valuable these people are. Perhaps more people would enter fields like that instead of being pushed to achieve a lib arts or business degree that might help one develop intellectually, but won't qualify you for a good job in the world that we live in now. Plus, with the internet and free non credit online courses, one can easily develop their knowledge in those areas, if that's what they want.

When I lived in NC during the 80s, I had a neighbor who had a four year degree. He didn't like his work, so he went back to school to become a plumber and then started up his own business. Americans need to appreciate all of these skilled occupations that don't require a 4 year degree. I'm sure there are plenty of people with advanced degrees who don't know how to fix a broken water pipe, repair their washing machine, or change out the electrical outlets in their homes. My point is that college has been pushed on lots of young people who might prefer to do work that only requires a certificate, a two year degree or an internship. There are so many who start college, only to drop out during the first semester. I know I'm going off topic, but it's always bothered me how some liberals with degrees look down on professions that don't require as much formal schooling.

I also wish that vocational programs had not been taken out of high schools. Back in the day, a high school student could graduate with enough courses to become LPNs, cosmetologists, plumbers, etc. I wonder if there's a high school left in the country that still offers vocational training. It seems as if all of those occupations now require community college. One can always go back to college at any point, if they want to change their line of work. My own sister was a high school grad, who decided to go to college when she was in. her late 30s. She obtained two degrees in late 30s and early 40s.

I'm fairly neutral on how much the government should help student loan debt, but I think there are many far more important issues right now. I would prefer that loan forgiveness be done on a case by case basis. I think it would be better to give forgiveness in return for some type of government service or by agreeing to work in an area where your skills are badly needed. Hardship cases should also get help as well as those who were scammed into paying high tuition for schools that don't give them the skills to get a decent job. I've yet to find an adult who doesn't have any loan debt who supports loan forgiveness for everyone. As far as the future goes, it would be great if community and stage colleges were more affordable. The total cost of loan forgiveness needs to be carefully analyzed before any big promises are made. Schools don't have to be free, but they should be affordable.

Most of my friends are Democrats who never went to college and they resent the loan forgiveness for all. I've come to think that it's not popular enough to happen. It seems to be a very divisive issue. There must be a way to compromise and help those most in need while expecting those who have very successful careers to continue to pay off their debt. I strongly support lowering the interest rates to close to zero. Why doesn't the government start from there? That would help a lot. Even in my day, loans were expected to take at about 10 years before they were paid off. If the interest rates were very low, most loans could easily be paid off within 15 years. Imo, compromise is how things get done. If only both sides of the aisle were willing to work together.

It's easy: higher tax on higher incomes.

As for appreciating trades and including trade schools as part of this plan of writing off student loans/free school: I agree completely.
As someone with a degree married to one of those condescending professors who isn't terribly good at a lot of home repairs, we deeply appreciate those who have skills in plumbing, carpentry, electrical wiring/repair, drywall, tiling, etc. that we do not. We deeply appreciate their skill and their willingness to do what is frankly a lot of hard work that they are unlikely to be able to continue doing into their 60's as many of us in less physically demanding lines of work are able to do. We know just enough to know the limits of our skills and expertise and are willing and even thrilled to be able to hire highly skilled professionals. I don't know anyone who does NOT appreciate the skills and the labor of those who work in trades. Which is vastly different than the fact that too many are far too ignorant to appreciate the skill, labor and hard work that goes into teaching at any level, university level no less than any other level and in some ways, more.

Kids today are very likely to graduate with over $100K in student debt if they attend a state school and have parental help/part time jobs to help pay their living expenses. I can tell you for certain that working one or several low paid part time jobs in order to support yourself while you take classes does indeed take time away from one's ability to focus on what should be your main job: going to school. To do so for 4 or more years and then to still graduate with $100K+ debt is an unfair burden that forces graduates to delay things like marriage, families, home ownership. This is not a choice we had to make when we were young. We merely had to be willing to endure being poor for about 6 years after undergrad years--so for at least 10 years.

It forces students to take jobs for $ instead of pursuing a lesser compensated career in areas where we desperately need people. I'm thinking specifically of areas such as social work, and mental health professionals and preschool teachers/early education instructors but there are others. These, btw, are needed just as urgently as we need more plumbers and electricians and carpenters and auto mechanics.

 

[Toni]

The comment section is full of a lot of angry people who don't want anyone to have loan forgiveness. I find that surprising since most surveys claims there is over 50% support for student loan forgiveness. The article should be available for anyone to read for at least two weeks, according to WaPo's gifting rules.

Includes a bit of resentment from people who endured crippling student debt and don't like the thought of other people getting out easy.

The problem is people who suffered being responsible dislike seeing others get rewarded for irresponsibility.

So people paying student loans today are "irresponsible" but when you did it, it was a good investment? What a crock.

Wut? Isn’t it about folks who were responsible and paid back their loans resenting that their taxes will be used to write off the loans of others? Is the government going to refund our payments with interest? Or are we just suckers for being responsible?

It’s like people who were children before there were vaccinations available to prevent measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, polio and more resenting kids today who can be vaccinated against these diseases.

That analogy doesn’t work at all.

How so?

People took out loans. Some paid them back, as agreed. Others did not. So those who breached the agreement would be rewarded while those who were responsible are out the money they repaid. What suckers.

Having your loan forgiven is not breaching any agreement. The lender forgives the loan. This is not the same thing as the borrower skipping out on the loan.

Kids are born. Some are born when there were no vaccinations against measles, mumps, rubella, polio, chickenpox, etc. They got those diseases and some died or were permanently disabled because of them. Then there were vaccinations and those children whose parents were smart and able to get them vaccinated did not become ill from those preventable diseases. Some kids have stupid parents and unfortunately, they tend to get sick. Even more unfortunately, some kids cannot be vaccinated because they are undergoing treatment for childhood cancers or are otherwise immune suppressed and they get sick and die from things like chickenpox or measles instead of cancer which was in remission.

I grew up (mostly) with indoor plumbing, something my parents did not have as children. That is in no way unfair to them because they suffered from not having indoor plumbing.

My kids grew up with cable tv and cell phones and computers. That is in no way unfair to me because I did not have those things.

Keep in mind that most of those loans were taken out by kids who are too young to legally consume alcoholic beverages or to sign other kinds of contracts. Also, those loans cannot be discharged under most circumstances due to serious misfortune. Some are able to get their loans discharged if they can document permanent disability AND if they remain below the poverty line for a certain number of years.

 

[Trausti]

Kids today are very likely to graduate with over $100K in student debt if they attend a state school and have parental help/part time jobs to help pay their living expenses. I can tell you for certain that working one or several low paid part time jobs in order to support yourself while you take classes does indeed take time away from one's ability to focus on what should be your main job: going to school. To do so for 4 or more years and then to still graduate with $100K+ debt is an unfair burden that forces graduates to delay things like marriage, families, home ownership. This is not a choice we had to make when we were young. We merely had to be willing to endure being poor for about 6 years after undergrad years--so for at least 10 years.

I don’t know why the public universities are not pressured to lower costs. (Oh, wait, yes I do. University employees make large $$$ donations to Dem causes so they cannot be criticized.). Andrew Yang floated the idea of requiring universities to charge a low credit hour if they wanted fed money. We should do that. We already do it with Medicare.

 

[Trausti]

Having your loan forgiven is not breaching any agreement. The lender forgives the loan. This is not the same thing as the borrower skipping out on the loan.

Uh, and what of all those who were responsible and paid? Just fuck ‘em?

 

[southernhybrid]

Ah yes, the myth of the condescending college professor.

Offering people access to the careers and degrees they want to pursue does not prevent anyone from choosing a diferent path. We are not killing plumbing by making it possible to study history. The reasons why a younger generation is not choosing technical trades has nothing to do with liberal arts degrees being more available to them, and in fact, most trade school certificates are substantially cheaper to earn than full degrees, so if that were a real problem we would already be implementing the solution. We aren't killing plumbers. We're just making it possible for people to study history. If you have options, you can do either of those things, or neither. You can even do both at once, in a civilized society. Nothing about the job of an electrician or plumber is inhibited by holding a history degree, and it might even be useful information at times (the construction of our civil infrastructure occurred during history, as it turns out). But if you don't have options, you'll do the only thing you can, whether or not it is something you either want to do or have any aptitude for.

You totally misunderstood my post, which had nothing to do with condescending college teachers. I was referring to Americans in general, especially those who are highly educated. And, young people are often told by their parents or others that they need at least a 4 year degree to be successful. I've read that "trades",a s you call them, are highly respected in Europe, compared to the US. See what you did there. You referred to these "professions" as trades. I refer to them as professions, as in a professional licensed plumber. And, I never said that all Americans looked down on these folks, but I believe one reason why a lot of people who work in skilled professions, ( doesn't that sound better than trades ) are leaving the Democratic Party is because they feel as if they aren't appreciated. That may not be a rational reason to become a Republican, but Republicans have done a good job of pretending they care about these folks.

Still, I regret that you felt like my comment was directed at people like you. It wasn't meant to be perceived that way. I just think that we need to emphasize to young people that there are plenty of career choices available to them, with or without a four year degree. But, let's be honest, a four year degree in a liberal arts subject has little value in the job market these days. It's fine if one plans to obtain a graduate degree in an area that has lots of potential employment options, but whether it's fair or not, a BA in a liberal arts subject isn't going to get you a job, with few exceptions. If one wants to pursue a four year degree these days, with the hope of having a career, one needs to consider areas like IT, engineering, nursing, teaching in a public school etc. Having a 4 year degree in a liberal arts subject isn't going to get you a good job with few exceptions. You might end up in retail or car sales or real estate, if you like sales, but even working in HR, usually requires a degree in HR. I just hate to see people waste their time and money on degrees that won't help them establish a career.

Btw, my college teachers weren't at all condescending. That was the furthest thing from my mind when I wrote that post. Perhaps you were being a bit overly sensitive, not condescending.

 

[Toni]

Having your loan forgiven is not breaching any agreement. The lender forgives the loan. This is not the same thing as the borrower skipping out on the loan.

Uh, and what of all those who were responsible and paid? Just fuck ‘em?

Uh, no.

EVERYONE benefits from having a well educated population. EVERYONE.

EVERYONE benefits from people being able to afford stable housing, marriage, children if they choose. The economy benefits. Society benefits.

Sometimes I purchase something and then it goes on sale: others purchase the same thing for a fraction of what I paid. Good for them.

 

[bilby]

might help one develop intellectually, but won't qualify you for a good job

The idea that higher education should qualify you for a good job is both very recent, and very wrong.

There's nothing about obtaining a degree that prevents anyone from going on to become a plumber, electrician or bus driver; Vocational education isn't an alternative to a liberal arts (or engineering, science or medical) degree - it's an excellent idea to have more than one of these.

Specialisation is a good thing for many people, but it shouldn't be mandatory, nor even a societal expectation; One of the key evolutionary advantages of Homo Sapiens is generalisation - the ability to learn how to thrive in a bewildering variety of different environments and circumstances.

Many people are happy with having a single career that they pursue to the point of excellence, but while that can be a path to great success, it can also be a recipe for disaster - just ask any Yorkshire coal miner.

You are absolutely right that society needs both Liberal Arts graduates and carpenters; But I am not sure why you seem to believe that these should not or could not be the same person.

 

[bilby]

The comment section is full of a lot of angry people who don't want anyone to have loan forgiveness. I find that surprising since most surveys claims there is over 50% support for student loan forgiveness. The article should be available for anyone to read for at least two weeks, according to WaPo's gifting rules.

Includes a bit of resentment from people who endured crippling student debt and don't like the thought of other people getting out easy.

The problem is people who suffered being responsible dislike seeing others get rewarded for irresponsibility.

So people paying student loans today are "irresponsible" but when you did it, it was a good investment? What a crock.

Wut? Isn’t it about folks who were responsible and paid back their loans resenting that their taxes will be used to write off the loans of others? Is the government going to refund our payments with interest? Or are we just suckers for being responsible?

It’s like people who were children before there were vaccinations available to prevent measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, polio and more resenting kids today who can be vaccinated against these diseases.

That analogy doesn’t work at all.

How so?

People took out loans. Some paid them back, as agreed. Others did not. So those who breached the agreement would be rewarded while those who were responsible are out the money they repaid. What suckers.

That's just the sunk cost fallacy.

That someone in the past wasted their money on something is not a justification for continued waste of money by people today.

 

[Metaphor]

The comment section is full of a lot of angry people who don't want anyone to have loan forgiveness. I find that surprising since most surveys claims there is over 50% support for student loan forgiveness. The article should be available for anyone to read for at least two weeks, according to WaPo's gifting rules.

Includes a bit of resentment from people who endured crippling student debt and don't like the thought of other people getting out easy.

The problem is people who suffered being responsible dislike seeing others get rewarded for irresponsibility.

So people paying student loans today are "irresponsible" but when you did it, it was a good investment? What a crock.

Wut? Isn’t it about folks who were responsible and paid back their loans resenting that their taxes will be used to write off the loans of others? Is the government going to refund our payments with interest? Or are we just suckers for being responsible?

It’s like people who were children before there were vaccinations available to prevent measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, polio and more resenting kids today who can be vaccinated against these diseases.

It's nothing like that. If both Billy and Bonita incurred student debt from attending university 2000-2003, then they can both have their education paid for by the government, if that's your plan. If you are going to give Bonita a free ride because she was irresponsible and didn't pay it back, you can give Billy the same ride by refunding him his payments.

 

[Metaphor]

The comment section is full of a lot of angry people who don't want anyone to have loan forgiveness. I find that surprising since most surveys claims there is over 50% support for student loan forgiveness. The article should be available for anyone to read for at least two weeks, according to WaPo's gifting rules.

Includes a bit of resentment from people who endured crippling student debt and don't like the thought of other people getting out easy.

The problem is people who suffered being responsible dislike seeing others get rewarded for irresponsibility.

So people paying student loans today are "irresponsible" but when you did it, it was a good investment? What a crock.

Wut? Isn’t it about folks who were responsible and paid back their loans resenting that their taxes will be used to write off the loans of others? Is the government going to refund our payments with interest? Or are we just suckers for being responsible?

It’s like people who were children before there were vaccinations available to prevent measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, polio and more resenting kids today who can be vaccinated against these diseases.

That analogy doesn’t work at all.

How so?

People took out loans. Some paid them back, as agreed. Others did not. So those who breached the agreement would be rewarded while those who were responsible are out the money they repaid. What suckers.

That's just the sunk cost fallacy.

That someone in the past wasted their money on something is not a justification for continued waste of money by people today.

No, it's not.

So paying for education is a waste of money? If so, then why are you wanting to forgive education loans, if education is a waste of money?

 

[Toni]

The comment section is full of a lot of angry people who don't want anyone to have loan forgiveness. I find that surprising since most surveys claims there is over 50% support for student loan forgiveness. The article should be available for anyone to read for at least two weeks, according to WaPo's gifting rules.

Includes a bit of resentment from people who endured crippling student debt and don't like the thought of other people getting out easy.

The problem is people who suffered being responsible dislike seeing others get rewarded for irresponsibility.

So people paying student loans today are "irresponsible" but when you did it, it was a good investment? What a crock.

Wut? Isn’t it about folks who were responsible and paid back their loans resenting that their taxes will be used to write off the loans of others? Is the government going to refund our payments with interest? Or are we just suckers for being responsible?

It’s like people who were children before there were vaccinations available to prevent measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, polio and more resenting kids today who can be vaccinated against these diseases.

It's nothing like that. If both Billy and Bonita incurred student debt from attending university 2000-2003, then they can both have their education paid for by the government, if that's your plan. If you are going to give Bonita a free ride because she was irresponsible and didn't pay it back, you can give Billy the same ride by refunding him his payments.

If Billy and Bonita both went to university and incurred debt from 2000-2003, they may or may not have incurred the same amount of debt, they may or may not have gone into fields that paid the same, they may or may not have had other experience, life events, etc. Billy may have married a gainfully employed spouse and with two incomes, it’s easier to pay off the debt. Or maybe he inherited a lot of money. Bonita may be single and helping to support her recently widowed father.

In either case, bilby is right: the cost of those loans is a sunk cost.

It was wrong to expect 18 year olds to go into debt in order to obtain an education. It was wrong if they were 25.

Continuing that wrong helps no one.

Education is a public good which benefits everyone.

 

[Metaphor]

The comment section is full of a lot of angry people who don't want anyone to have loan forgiveness. I find that surprising since most surveys claims there is over 50% support for student loan forgiveness. The article should be available for anyone to read for at least two weeks, according to WaPo's gifting rules.

Includes a bit of resentment from people who endured crippling student debt and don't like the thought of other people getting out easy.

The problem is people who suffered being responsible dislike seeing others get rewarded for irresponsibility.

So people paying student loans today are "irresponsible" but when you did it, it was a good investment? What a crock.

Wut? Isn’t it about folks who were responsible and paid back their loans resenting that their taxes will be used to write off the loans of others? Is the government going to refund our payments with interest? Or are we just suckers for being responsible?

It’s like people who were children before there were vaccinations available to prevent measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, polio and more resenting kids today who can be vaccinated against these diseases.

It's nothing like that. If both Billy and Bonita incurred student debt from attending university 2000-2003, then they can both have their education paid for by the government, if that's your plan. If you are going to give Bonita a free ride because she was irresponsible and didn't pay it back, you can give Billy the same ride by refunding him his payments.

If Billy and Bonita both went to university and incurred debt from 2000-2003, they may or may not have incurred the same amount of debt, they may or may not have gone into fields that paid the same, they may or may not have had other experience, life events, etc. Billy may have married a gainfully employed spouse and with two incomes, it’s easier to pay off the debt. Or maybe he inherited a lot of money. Bonita may be single and helping to support her recently widowed father.

In either case, bilby is right: the cost of those loans is a sunk cost.

It was wrong to expect 18 year olds to go into debt in order to obtain an education. It was wrong if they were 25.

Continuing that wrong helps no one.

Education is a public good which benefits everyone.

All of this may be an argument to make tertiary education free from now on (though it should not be free). But none of it is an argument to give Bonita a free ride but not Billy. Billy and Bonita both entered into debt knowing they had an obligation to repay it.

 

[Toni]

The comment section is full of a lot of angry people who don't want anyone to have loan forgiveness. I find that surprising since most surveys claims there is over 50% support for student loan forgiveness. The article should be available for anyone to read for at least two weeks, according to WaPo's gifting rules.

Includes a bit of resentment from people who endured crippling student debt and don't like the thought of other people getting out easy.

The problem is people who suffered being responsible dislike seeing others get rewarded for irresponsibility.

So people paying student loans today are "irresponsible" but when you did it, it was a good investment? What a crock.

Wut? Isn’t it about folks who were responsible and paid back their loans resenting that their taxes will be used to write off the loans of others? Is the government going to refund our payments with interest? Or are we just suckers for being responsible?

It’s like people who were children before there were vaccinations available to prevent measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, polio and more resenting kids today who can be vaccinated against these diseases.

It's nothing like that. If both Billy and Bonita incurred student debt from attending university 2000-2003, then they can both have their education paid for by the government, if that's your plan. If you are going to give Bonita a free ride because she was irresponsible and didn't pay it back, you can give Billy the same ride by refunding him his payments.

If Billy and Bonita both went to university and incurred debt from 2000-2003, they may or may not have incurred the same amount of debt, they may or may not have gone into fields that paid the same, they may or may not have had other experience, life events, etc. Billy may have married a gainfully employed spouse and with two incomes, it’s easier to pay off the debt. Or maybe he inherited a lot of money. Bonita may be single and helping to support her recently widowed father.

In either case, bilby is right: the cost of those loans is a sunk cost.

It was wrong to expect 18 year olds to go into debt in order to obtain an education. It was wrong if they were 25.

Continuing that wrong helps no one.

Education is a public good which benefits everyone.

All of this may be an argument to make tertiary education free from now on (though it should not be free). But none of it is an argument to give Bonita a free ride but not Billy. Billy and Bonita both entered into debt knowing they had an obligation to repay it.

It’s a terrible argument that one must be unfair to Bonita because we were unfair to Billy.

It harms Bonita without helping Billy.

Note: I have no problem if the cost of student loans already paid is mitigated by
Tax relief—means tested.