Opinion
Lab

See how this opinion breaks down by gender, political spectrum and generation — and who shares your view.

Gender

AGREEDISAGREE
Male
Female
Non-binary
Log in to see how you compare
Share to
https://www.parlia.com/o/student-loan-cancellation-is-bad-policy

5 comments

For
ywang5y ago
Higher education in the United States has become increasingly expensive and put many in debt. Despite this, government-mandated student loan cancellation represents a regressive and ineffective economic stimulus. For that reason, student loan cancellation is a bad policy. The macroeconomic argument for student loan cancellation relies on a boost in consumer spending. When people become suddenly free from their debt, they will spend more income and boost the economy. [1] That argument, however, does not reflect the entire picture. The cancellation represents an ineffective government redistribution of resources. It will result in an estimated $90 billion increase in cash flow, at the cost of $1.5 trillion. [2] In other words, the federal government risks sinking significantly in debt with a limited boost in consumer spending. Such a policy pales in comparison to other more direct and efficient means of government stimulus. Student loan cancellation represents an economically regressive policy. The policy benefits exclusively those with high education backgrounds. The benefits increase proportionally to the amount of education. Unsurprisingly, these people are not the vulnerable group in society. About 75% of the cancellation will benefit people with people from the top 40% income level. [2] The conclusion applies to both universal and targeted cancellation. [3] Since the federal government will have to fund such an initiative with its revenues, the policy directs general government sources into specifically well-off groups. Such a policy does not hold to its progressive reputations. For this reason, student loan cancellation is a bad policy. [1]. Fullwiler, Scott, Stephanie Kelton, Catherine Ruetschlin, and Marshall Steinbaum. 2018. "The Macroeconomic Effects Of Student Debt Cancellation". Levy Institute. http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/rpr_2_6.pdf. [2]. "Canceling Student Loan Debt Is Poor Economic Stimulus". 2020. Blog. Committee For A Responsible Federal Budget. http://www.crfb.org/blogs/canceling-student-loan-debt-poor-economic-stimulus. [3]. Catherine, Sylvain, and Constantine Yannelis. 2020. "The Distributional Effects Of Student Loan Forgiveness". SSRN Electronic Journal. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3739900.
··
Against
AVetsch5y ago
Student loans help people go to college. College is expensive, and the most prominent way students pay for college is taking out loans from the federal government. Since the inception of federal loans by President Eisenhower in 1958, free education has increased. As a result, more students have taken out more loans as the opportunities increase. The average loan grew from $1,000 in the early-1970s to around $7,000 a year in 2020. The total amount of student loan debt has skyrocketed to $1.6 trillion. Since that number is still growing, the idea for cancelling all that debt has gained traction. Although to what extent the student loan could be cancelled remains dissident. Should only some of it be cancelled? All of it? Only those who come from impoverished backgrounds? But who would cancelling this debt help? Obviously, those in a younger age group would benefit the most. Since they have money with newly obtained Bachelor's degrees, they are able to focus more on how they want to achieve their career goals. As for older people, the AARP has reported that student loan debt for adults over 50 raised from $47 billion in 2004 to $289.5 billion in 2018. So, they have much to gain from student loan forgiveness as well. With a nation that boasts an incredibly competitive market, it makes sense that student loan debt be forgiven. With the costs of going to college no longer a factor, individuals will be able to focus their resources and accomplish things that would benefit the market, and therefore the greater good of society. Imagine the number of individuals who would accomplish amazing feats if they were able to obtain a sizeable amount of higher education. CITATIONS Vox. “All Student Debt in the US, Visualized.” YouTube, uploaded by Vox, 6 Aug. 2019, www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXHwelwmQPA. Zinshteyn, By Mikhail. “Student Loan Debt Soaring Among Adults Over 50, AARP Study Finds.” AARP, 26 July 2019, www.aarp.org/money/credit-loans-debt/info-2019/student-loan-debt-report.html.
··
ywang5y ago
**tl;dr: student loan cancellation is an economic stimulus. However, it is not an efficient one.** I do not dispute the benefits of student loan cancellation. The simple principle of the market indicates potential economic growth from the policy. However, a beneficial policy is not a good one, if there are more beneficial alternatives. Student loan cancellation targets only educated groups, who are far from the ones most in need of government help. Like I previously indicated, two-thirds of the benefits from the policy go to the to 40% of the income earners. Aiding this group with tax revenues represents a regressive redistribution. Unless the policy can find unlikely extra sources of funding (military budget cuts, wealth tax, etc), the limited government resources can go to people much more in need of help. Furthermore, the same issue limits the economic benefits of the policy. Aiding those most in need represents the most efficient policy, since they are much more likely to spend the money. Since educated people do not fall into that group, the costs of the policy far outweighs the benefits. The money needed for cancellation far exceeds the money it will generate in the market. Therefore, as a whole the policy does not constitute an effective economic stimulus. As a student, I also find the U.S. education unfairly expensive. The price tag has caused many problems. That said, I try to remember that we students do not represent the group most in need. That sentiment is not matter of oppression competition. Rather the calculation represents one of efficiency. Since the government is operating with finite resources, it would be better to use them on more vulnerable groups and more efficient policies.
··
> "As a student, I also find the U.S. education unfairly expensive. The price tag has caused many problems. That said, I try to remember that we students do not represent the group most in need." What group would you consider to be the most in need? I have some ideas of my own in mind, but I'm curious as to what group you're thinking of, specifically.
··
ywang5y ago
If we stay in the realm of education, a policy like free community college or universal child care would likely deliver more comprehensive benefits (if executed well). These policies target more than relatively well-off college graduates (a strong emphasis on "relatively"). If we look at options within all the welfare programs covered by the federal budget, the options are almost infinite. Programs such as SNAP, TANF, or unemployment insurance all need more funding. Our infrastructure needs urgent updates. These will likely have more spill-over economic benefits than student loan cancellation.
··
Sign up or log in to post a comment.
Are we missing an argument?
Make the case or invite a friend to comment!