The Biden Administration's Proposed Policy To Reduce Student Debt Is Only Going To Make the Problem Worse
Instead of attacking the student debt crisis at its source, the Biden administration is throwing money at the problem.

On Wednesday, the Biden administration announced it was proposing new regulations for student loans owned by the Department of Education. The proposed rules call for an $85 billion expansion of existing federal student loan forgiveness programs. They would expand eligibility for programs created under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama and end the capitalization of interest on federal student loans in some circumstances.
President Joe Biden's new rules would broaden eligibility for student loan debt relief for borrowers who were defrauded by their institutions, borrowers whose institutions closed, permanently disabled borrowers, and borrowers who take "public service" jobs after graduation.
The administration also intends to ban interest capitalization in some circumstances. Capitalizing interest allows the Education Department to add unpaid interest on student loans to the borrower's loan balance. This increases the size of the debt and future interest payments.
The Obama administration's "borrower defense" program is a loan forgiveness process that addresses the federal student loan debt of people who were allegedly defrauded by their schools. The current policy would be amended to create a "broader and clearer standard for what kinds of misconduct could lead to borrower defense discharges," reads a fact sheet from the Department of Education. The Biden administration's rules would create two new categories of school misconduct that would qualify a student borrower for debt forgiveness: "substantial omissions of fact" by the institution and "aggressive and deceptive recruitment."
The new borrower defense policy language also includes "a presumption that borrowers reasonably relied upon misrepresentations or omissions," and broadens the appeal process for student borrowers whose forgiveness requests are denied. It also states that loan forgiveness will not be contingent on the Department of Education recouping student loan disbursements from institutions that defraud students.
The proposed regulations would also discharge debt held by students whose institutions closed while they were enrolled. According to the Department of Education, the new rules "provide automatic discharges to any borrower who was enrolled within 180 days prior to the closure and who didn't complete their education at the school or via an approved teach-out agreement at another school within one year after the closure of their original school."
Under the Biden administration's plan, a larger number of borrowers would also receive loan cancellation under the Total and Permanent Disability (TPD) discharge. Borrowers who have total and permanent disabilities would no longer be subject to a three-year income-monitoring period, which allows the Department of Education to reinstate loans for borrowers who return to work. The new rules would also "widen the types of documentation and signatures borrowers may submit to demonstrate they are eligible for relief" and allow more types of disability to be subject to TPD discharges.
The Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program is the fourth program receiving substantial changes. Signed into law by Bush in 2007, it allows borrowers who make 120 monthly payments while directly employed full time by a government agency or 501(c)3 nonprofit to have their remaining federal loan balance forgiven. The new rules would require the Department of Education to count payments that were late or larger than the minimum payment and issue a "time-limited waiver so that student borrowers can count payments from all federal loan programs or repayment plans toward forgiveness," including "loan types and payment plans that were not previously eligible."
These proposed changes come in the wake of increasing demands by progressive activists and members of Congress to forgive federal student loan debt. In May, White House officials seemed poised to announce up to $10,000 in debt forgiveness per borrower for millions of Americans. The proposals announced on Wednesday simply expand existing forgiveness programs.
At first glance, all of these loan forgiveness programs may seem to have merit. But they are all trying to paper over problems that the federal government created and that will continue to exist after the new rules go into effect. Forgiving billions of dollars in student loans means billions of federal dollars went to poorly run schools and students who were, in many cases, unprepared for college. While those students may deserve some kind of debt relief—and which very few of them can receive through bankruptcy—the Education Department continues to issue loans to unprepared students in order to attend poorly run schools.
The expansion of benefits offered by the PSLF program spells unique problems for taxpayers and future borrowers alike. Expanding eligibility to more kinds of "public service" workers, including employees of private companies and private contractors, is expected to cost over $13 billion in the next 10 years.
As with debt forgiveness for borrowers who are misled by their schools, PSLF on its face sounds like a good idea. If a student decides to take a career in public service—an essential but presumably low-paying job—then, after 10 years of payments, that student will be rewarded for his service by having a set amount of his remaining loan balance paid. However, those who work in the public sector often have the best job security, health care, and pensions among America's middle-class workers.
What's more, many professions counted as "public service" are some of the highest-paying positions in the entire job market. Physicians employed by nonprofit hospitals, for example, are eligible for PSLF. However, whether a cardiologist works for a nonprofit or a for-profit hospital, his yearly salary will likely top $400,000. Thus, prospective physicians can take on hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt for medical school, and only pay a fraction of the amount borrowed, while accruing millions of dollars in income over the course of their careers.
When academic deans can assure students that a large debt burden can be discharged by working for a nonprofit or the government after graduation, they can more easily justify exorbitant tuition costs. After all, why worry about borrowing a massive sum if you won't have to repay it? The PSLF solution to high debt burdens for public sector workers has only aggravated the problem and will continue to. Once the government pours funding in the form of debt relief into the market for specific degrees, schools end up using these funds to justify hiking prices, thus generating a bigger student debt crisis. In turn, this enlarged crisis cries out for more government funding.
The solution to runaway student debt inflation is for the government to stop subsidizing tuition hikes. While limited debt relief for defrauded or disabled borrowers makes sense, the federal government needs to start making policy proposals that will attack the student debt crisis at its source—the cost of college attendance.
Student loan debt is a real and pressing problem for America's poorest borrowers, but it is merely an inconvenience for millions of others, including many beneficiaries of PSLF. Solving the college cost problem in the long term requires getting the government out of the lending business.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Fuck joe Biden
"The Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program [was] Signed into law by Bush in 2007"
Fuck Bush.
Only leftists criticize Republicans. Are you a leftist? If not you better withdraw that comment and find a way to blame Democrats. Around here true libertarians are Republicans.
Remember. Sarc isn't on a team. He criticizes both sides equally. He is the one true centrist in the entire world.
Start now earning every week more than $7,000 to 8,000 by doing very simple and easy home based job online. Last month i have made $32,735 by doing this online job just in my part time for only 2 hrs. a day using my laptop. (rea-21) This job is just awesome and easy to do in part time. Start earning more dollars online just by follow:-
.
instructions here:☛☛☛ https://yourjobs85.blogspot.com/
It's not actually that difficult not to be a zombielike bootlicker for the Republican party. All you have to do is have one cool friend.
You and sarc have the exact same talking points. Interesting.
I actually have made $18k within a calendar month via working easy jobs from a laptop. As I had lost my last business, I was so upset and thank God I searched this simple job (phy-10) achieving this I'm ready to achieve thousand of dollars just from my home. All of you can certainly join this best job and could collect extra money on-line visiting this site.
>>>>>>>>>> http://getjobs49.tk
Retarded retard is retarded.
It's revealing the guy who calls everyone a Trumpist turns around and whines about being labelled. Personally I'm shocked he applies this standard only to his enemies while exempting both himself and his allies. Shocked.
WTH is a "true libertarian?"
Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the No True Scotsman logical fallacy?
Perhaps my point is that the people in the comments, the Republicans who attack any non-Republican (especially libertarians) for being leftists, are committing that fallacy by saying you've got to be a Republican to be a true libertarian.
The PSLF is a tiny, tiny proportion of this bill. While the PSLF is not libertarian in any way, it is not a straight forgiveness of loans. A friend did PSLF work. She spent years as a doctor working at an inner city, public clinic for far below market rate. The forgiveness of loans was a repayment for working at a reduced salary. It is not unlike the GI Bill which pays soldiers' college education in return for service in the army, except it flips it around, paying loans in return for service in the inner city.
Again, not libertarian, but also not the moral hazard giveaway that straight loan forgiveness is.
Wouldn't that be a municipal responsibility then?
Yes it ought to be...unless I guess you are talking about working on an Indian Reservation or something.
Again, I think there are a lot of reasons to dislike this bill. I was just pointing out that it is different from the straight giveaways of loan forgiveness.
And FWIW, I have close associations with several rural non profits that do this privately. They lure good doctors out to rural hospitals with the promise that after X years of service, they will pay off loans. Typically, getting a good doctor to a rural practice requires paying ABOVE market rates, because new doctors are willing to work for less in the city to work with prestigious programs or surgeons. But by offering loan repayment, doctors work for below market rates and stay on for a good term of time, then go out into the world loan free, or even better, stay in the community because they can afford to live without $400k in loans to repay.
How is it “forgiveness” to cancel a debt when the loan balance is merely transferred to the general public, by headcount mostly middle- and working-class taxpayers who mostly didn’t avail themselves to vacationing on a college campus, at what then turns out to be someone else’s expense?
Why as a matter of policy would we subsidize people going to work for the government? If we must have a loan forgiveness program, forgive the loans of entrepreneurs who start companies that create jobs.
Bush 2 was a progressive.
Exactly.
More imaginative headlines, Reason. I count no less than 500 articles this week, "The Biden Administrations plan for ___________ will only make ___________ worse."
Totally wrong to say democrats only idea is to throw money at a problem.
When it's not your money, it's always an option.
Not the only idea. According to The Big Blue Book of Government Stuff, here is the core plan:
1. Identify, inflate, or invent a problem.
2. Throw money at it.
3. Throw more money at it.
4. Pontificate.
5. Throw more money at it.
6. Blame Republicans.
7. Throw more money at it.
8. Complain that this problem has not received enough funding.
9. Throw more money at it.
10. Get re-elected.
At least his push to force Americans to green energy has a new proven example of how it works.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/germany-rationing-hot-water-and-heat-report
So, limit when you can take showers. I'm sure this won't impact anyone working shift work.
"Get the hell out of my way."
- some guy... Something Galt
Reason is gaslighting so hard, trying to pretend the effects of these policies are accidental.
"How to not oppose the left/dems while pretending to represent libertarianism"
their constant panic porn articles are a turnoff. Here I thought Reason was a cerebral outlet...amygdala perhaps but not frontal cortex material
Biden is awesome. All his economic policies are awesome. This is a great idea and only wingnuts oppose it.
#TemporarilyFillingInForButtplug
Biden makes everything worse.
*leftists make everything worse
Biden is just a prop
"The Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program is the fourth program receiving substantial changes. Signed into law by Bush in 2007..."
Another small-government conservative drastically expanding the size and scope of the federal government.
Shhhh! True libertarians are Republicans! You're not allowed to say that!
This is your problem sarc. Those of us who aren't on team left criticize these programs on both sides. PLSF is always bad. It is bad now as well.
Instead of agreeing Biden shouldn't be using it you have to try to attack those who have said bidens use is bad including those who said bush's passage of it was also bad.
Yes. This was bad when Bush signed it. It was bad when Pelosi and Reid passed it through the senate. It was bad on all parts. Principled people can say those things. They don't feel the need to victim signal instead.
This was bad when Bush signed it.
Leftist! You voted for Biden! Prove you didn't!
/JesseAz
Youre spiraling a lot lately.
All the leftists here seem to be. It was so important to fight the evil trump it left you with the astounding success of Biden. But you can't admit it. So you do this shit.
"It was so important to fight the evil trump..."
I stopped voting when the country elected a gameshow host for president.
"...it left you with the astounding success of Biden."
Who I didn't vote for because I stopped voting.
"But you can't admit it. So you do this shit."
You can't admit you fuck your mom, probably because you don't. I can't admit that I voted for Biden because it's almost as gross as fucking your mom. What's your point?
Without Jesse you would be nothing. You live for him.
Hey don't point out how literally every commenter here criticized trumps wuflu bail outs
Ah.
Perhaps with your screen name I should assume the tag.
Apologies
Yep. I grew up thinking Republicans were the party of small government and fiscal responsibility. The first presidential election I voted in, I voted for W. Bush. And then I saw what I got for it.
So "both sides"?
Here's your choice:
1) Bad
or
2) Horrible
Really good is not a realistic option, but Trump (R) turned out to be about the best we had in a very long time.
LOL. The last small government fiscally responsible Republican was Calvin Coolidge.
Eisenhower was fiscally responsible having had several real balanced budgets.
Ditto. Except I voted for Reagan. He did cut taxes. But didn't significantly cut spending.
And, like blaming Trump for Pelosi's benefits package, Brandyshit is entirely too stupid to attempt any analysis; TDS-addled infantile 'intellects' are like that.
Reagan, whether you agree with the strategy or not, used an intended temporary increase in defense spending to bankrupt the USSR, which was, at the time, a truly existential threat. And regardless of some revisionist historians, it worked; Gorby knew he had to find a way to get food to the population or face uprisings.
See "The Decline and Fall of the Soviet Empire..." (Coleman), "The Collapse of Communism" (Edwards), and a Conquest title which eludes me tonight.
The TDS-addled asshole Brandyshit has yet to grow beyond the kindergarten "Mommy! He said things I don't like!" stage.
Up yours, Brandyshit.
The democrats broke their promise on spending cuts. Democrats Always break their promises.
At the end of the day, there is no political capital in cutting spending or shrinking the government.
For the rest of my life I guarantee you spending increases and the government grows. Anyone who pushes to limit will quickly be voted out of office.
I get blaming politicians, but at the end of the day, it's the media and we the people who are to blame, as politicians always have and always will pander to what the people want.
…and the role of the media conglomerate central programmers? Voters may deserve what the vote for, but they mostly vote as programmed.
Oh for fucks sake. If you are going to (rightly) vilify big gov conservatives, do it for something they actually did to "drastically expand the size and scope of government". NCLB. Medicare Part D. PATRIOT Act. But not the fucking PSLF.
As signed in 2007, the PSLF paid the loans of some 100 individuals in 2017 (the first year people had been making 10 years of continuous payments in order to be eligible). As of 2019, it was around 600 total applicants. It was a drop in the bucket. A pittance. 99% of the people who applied were rejected.
Trump tried canceling it twice during his tenure. And the admin was sued repeatedly because of the standards they set being to strict.
The "drastically expanding size and scope" happened in 2021 when Biden "temporarily" waived all these restrictions. As of 2022, the program has jumped to over 100,000 applicants getting around $6.2 Billion in loan forgiveness.
As is the usual case, the story is not "conservative creates big gov program", but rather "small gov program ultimately perverted for graft and political gain".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Service_Loan_Forgiveness
Can you call it perverted for vastly increasing in scope if it was always intended to vastly increase in scope? Most programs start small (income tax, Social Security, Medicare), before growing astronomically. This is the plan so it reduces initial opposition, but the designers know something in place is much easier to expand. The only successful opposition comes from preventing the program in the first place.
"Can you call it perverted for vastly increasing in scope if it was always intended to vastly increase in scope?"
There is no indication that when the writers wrote this bill, they expected the specific standards and restrictions to be lifted and for the bill to apply to pretty much anyone who works in the public sector. *shrug*.
There is no indication that when the writers wrote this bill, they expected the specific standards and restrictions to be lifted and for the bill to apply to pretty much anyone who works in the public sector.
Other than expanding definition is what these people have done with every bill they've ever written or supported.
Imagine writing that there's no evidence a business will increase pricing once their product proves successful. The assertion requires a complete and total ignorance of how the world functions.
I find the whole idea of blaming Presidents for bills that they sign kind of silly, unless they actively sought and fought for passage of that bill. Who controlled Congress is much more germane.
Thank you for making a useful distinction.
" including many beneficiaries of PSLF"
"Many" beneficiaries? The rejection rate was 99%, and that's not a fabricated stat.
In 2021, Joe Biden "temporarily" suspended all the restrictions on the PSLF. As a result, some 100,000 applicants have received $6.2 Billion in loan forgiveness.
Gov. Newsom is visiting family in Montana. A California travel ban to the state doesn’t apply, his team says
Left without comment.
That he went is absolutely legal. That his security also went is in direct contravention of the law.
What is the nature of the ban? I thought the commerce clause was actually proposed to keep states from setting up barriers between each other. I know it’s turned into an abominable defacto federal Swiss Army knife to do whatever they want since then, but you’d think the original purpose would still be one of the tools.
IIRC California passed a law that forbade any state government departments from spending money in or on a list of states that they deemed to be oppressive in some way.
Traveling for conferences, etc.
At one point that even included state colleges and their sports teams. I'm not sure if that part of the law is still intact.
Don't worry he hears how much people don't like him when he's at the ranch.
Of course the rules for peasants don't apply to him, he's an aristocrat.
You are looking at the student loan forgiveness from the wrong direction. It is an intended subsidy for colleges and universities, which are the major supporters of the Progressives. It is, as is so often, a transfer of cash to Party members as both reward and incentive.
That some students, mostly also Party supporters, get cash relief is a good side benefit.
The do-nothings in "public service" get their money back while the contractors who do all the work get bupkis. Sounds about right.
"President Joe Biden's new rules would broaden eligibility for student loan debt relief for borrowers who were defrauded by their institutions"
Yeah the federal student loan system's version of "for the mental health of the mother".
This bill is the real fraud. They toss around that word "defrauded" like some end of discussion, when it is a completely vague concept and a sequitur. These young adults owe the federal government money. If they owe that money because they were defrauded, then the appropriate recourse is to go sue the defrauder, and force them to pay you back so you can repay the loan.
Correct
I would love to see a wave of students sue the endowments off of "non-"profit universities.
I bet they are shielded by some law.
Need to get that law overturned.
The real fact is that very, very, very few people were actually defrauded. There were some fly by night schools out there that recklessly promised 6 figure jobs to people and utterly failed to deliver.
But the vast, vast majority of people buying a diploma were never promised anything like that. They were told that people with a diploma make more money than people without, and this is by and large true- even for people who get shit degrees. Go to any university and they aren't selling you "a great career", they are selling a bunch of pablum and hooplah about "enriched minds", "character growth", and "emotional maturing".
Every school out there would easily win in a real court- even some of the more unscrupulous schools. Because even an idiot can put disclaimers and conditions on their sales materials.
This is why the government had to create brand new laws to create special classes of schools that "defrauded" students- because students would have never been able to prevail in court anyways. And because the people writing these laws are largely products of the traditional university system, they made well sure that no traditional university would qualify for the definition of fraud.
Most of the evil "for profit" fly by night schools that chocolate Jesus shut down had better results and lower cost than community collages
What is funny is this law was essentially designed to fail.
The earliest date that public servants could qualify for full cancelation of their loans was October 1, 2017, ten years after PSLF existed. Problems soon emerged. Of the first 28,000 public servants who applied for forgiveness, only 96 were approved.[7] This is a denial rate of 99 percent.
Biden is simply changing how it is enforced to make the forgiveness grants bigger.
“Student loan debt is a real and pressing problem for America's poorest borrowers, but it is merely an inconvenience for millions of others, including many beneficiaries of PSLF. Solving the college cost problem in the long term requires getting the government out of the lending business.”
Student loan debt is a real and pressing problem for America’s worthless grievance degree, public policy, educationborrowers. Solving the college cost problem in the long term requires getting the colleges out of the grievance degree, public policy, education problem-AND- getting the government out of the lending business and public education. FIFY
Yeah, but, even for those of us with productive degrees who are out working in the private sector and actually making the economy go, 'free' government money has been the #1 cause for the tuition rates skyrocketing far faster than normal economic growth / inflation for the past several decades.
The solution is simple: let the students recover the money they paid for their worthless degrees from the universities that granted those worthless degrees. It's just standard product liability and truth in advertising.
And it will make those institutions think twice about continuing to fraudulently sell worthless degrees to teenagers.
Very, very few Universities actually defrauded anybody. They gave the vast number of these kids 4 years of parties and hookups while living in hip urban communal housing.
It is impossible to prove that the kid's failure to earn a living is due to the University's failures to train and the kid's failure to perform.
This whole "defrauded" campaign is a big smokescreen. There are many elite people who are threatened by the fact that education is changing. Many people are moving away from the standard university model, to certifications and non-classical certifications and untraditional job training systems.
No doubt, in many cases, a for-profit work center promised things it couldn't deliver, and should be sued for breach of contract. But in many, many cases these for profit educators are actually doing the Lord's work. I just pulled in nearly a half dozen coders from a boot camp that taught these kids more in 6 months of intensive training than kids I pull out of Carnegie or Northwestern.
The purpose of this "defrauded" campaign is to unfairly conflate "For Profit" with "fraudster". The next step will be to use this as a pretense to ban for-profit schools from getting loans. Then will come private non-profits that are not accredited as traditional 4 year universities.
The goal, as always, is the perpetuation of Elite institutions and its members.
Oh, I disagree. Universities like Yale and Berkeley promised these kids good careers based on their reputation, their highly competitive admissions process, and their educational strengths.
Huh? I am saying that, given that the Obama and Biden administrations held private for-profit institutions accountable, they should do the same with public and private non-profit universities.
Furthermore, regardless of whether the universities are legally accountable to students, all those universities receive public funding. If a (public, non-profit) university produces a large number of graduates who fail to pay back their student loans, we can cancel their public funding, make them ineligible for research grants, and even make them ineligible for accreditation. That's how other federal policy objectives are imposed on universities.
"Oh, I disagree. Universities like Yale and Berkeley promised these kids good careers based on their reputation, their highly competitive admissions process, and their educational strengths."
And believe it or not, Yale and Berkley grads make far more than your average college student, let alone non graduates. 10 years on from college, the average Yale student earns around $110k compared to the national average of $34k. Berkley grads earn $74k.
https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges/connecticut/yale-university/outcomes
"Huh? I am saying that, given that the Obama and Biden administrations held private for-profit institutions accountable, they should do the same with public and private non-profit universities."
No I am not disagreeing with you. My point is that this was never about "defrauding" people. Again, absent a few specific cases, proving that a school is actually fraudulent, is difficult. Imagine trying to prove to a jury that a school was at fault for you not getting a high paying career, and they as a defendant then having the ability to look at all the partying you did in school, all the complaints from employers, all the career counseling opportunities you didn't take. It's like trying to prove that Tony's Pizza defrauded you because it really wasn't the best pizza in town.
The answer to this is not a bunch of nonsense around "fraudulent" schools- which is an attempt by the elites to put competitors out of business. The answer is to turn off the Free Money Loanzzzzzz printer.
^+ as many as you need.
Yet, there are Yale and Berkeley grads who can't get a good job and default on their student loans. That's because the figures you quote are averages and a mix of valuable degrees and worthless degrees.
When Yale or Berkeley offer degrees in social work (median pay: $50000) costing a quarter of a million dollars or more, that is fraudulent. And when Yale or Berkeley grant STEM degrees to people who lack the skills that those degrees ought to represent, that's fraudulent too.
A jury doesn't have to prove that any more than a jury has to prove rape for a Title IX case. In the case of student loans, this would be particularly simple and direct: any school whose student loan default rate is more than two sigma higher than the mean simply cannot accept students with federally guaranteed student loans anymore.
It's not a "money printer" when the students actually repay it. And the loans exist because universities lobbied the federal government for it.
In any case, we should indeed get rid of government backing of student loans. But until that happens, we can and should hold universities accountable that charge massively high fees to students who major in degrees that won't allow them to repay their loans.
Just swap out "to reduce student debt" for "fill in the fucking blank"
I'd appreciate it if Bernie bros would read the room for once, but what are you going to do about the granola-munchers? You don't explain going along to get along to people who don't shower.
It's mildly amusing to me that, after all of the lecturing about how bad Democrats are for being realists, the Bernie bros have become just another special interest group looking for a handout. They're reduced to threatening the country with ruin if they don't get a $50,000 check cut to each of them personally signed by Joe Biden. The happy socialist utopians are extorting the president for cash and calling it a domestic agenda.
Tertiary education should be cheaper and more universally available, and it's a pressing national priority. People with high school diplomas only, and I'm just going by observation here, are easily manipulated by political hucksters. Republicans have exploited the less educated and turned them into a fascist movement shouting slurs at every minority in view. Ignorance has become a national security matter.
“….. shouting slurs at every minority in view.”
Lol. Yeah, I see this all the time. And when they’re not shouting slurs they’re shooting trannies at the behest of Dave chappelle.
“…a national security matter.”? Damn. You’re a sick dude, tony.
On a 2022 episode of “Real Time with Bill Maher”, Paul Begala suggested another solution. Let those with student loan debt perform public service to reduce their debt (ie: military, peace corp or some other kind of public service).
Only if it reduces the growth of "public servants."
and borrowers who take "public service" jobs after graduation.
We see the Dems top priority of using taxpayer funds to support its own political activists. But the primary function of this bill has nothing to do with borrowers, it's to protect academia from financial pressure. Academia is the left's most reliable source of activists and propaganda and thus Dems will do anything to protect it.
The only way to reduce overall student debt is to stop making student loans.
Or forgive all of it! See how much easier that is?
Bail out union pension funds…forgive student loan debt. But not trying to buy the midterms. Oh, no.
And shipping strategic reserve oil to China. FJB needs to be impeached but he's lucky the GOP is full of spineless assholes.
Money printer go brrrrr
What the fuck? Become a government suit and have your student debt wiped out. Talk about incentives that only grow government.
Government "Everyone should be able to afford to go to college. Let's do something."
*Cost of college quintuples*
Everyone else: Again with the government "help" eh?
Evergreen
"The Biden Administration's Proposed Policy To X Is Only Going To Make the Problem Worse"
With X being everything they address.
"Instead of attacking the student debt crisis at its source"
Oh Emma. The Feds shouldn't be doing ANYTHING about student debt. Last I read, nothing in the Constitution about education. This is Libertarianism 101.
What does libertarianism have anything to do with Reason contributors?
When the source is federal intervention, the Feds should definitely be doing something about it. And in this case, the student debt problem is absolutely caused by the feds.
Here's how to fix the problem.
1) get government out of the loan business.
2) let student loan debt be dischargeable or payments renegotiated under bankruptcy law
3) put the burden on private loans to make the loan or no loan decisions and no more government backing of loans at all. This will cut out much of the debt that is acquired by those seeking degrees from high cost universities in a field that has little to no demand or even demand but low to mid level paying careers making paying off debt difficult to impossible.
Banks and lenders not wanting to risk not getting paid back for your degree in underwater basket weaving, women's studies, a four year degree in anything ending in 'ology' etc, will go away. About the only way to make money in a career with a degree that is at the bachelor's level is a STEM or business / finance type field or a two year degree nursing or similar degree, or technical certificate in a high demand trade like welding or plumbing.
This would at least force people to get a real degree and just save the bullshit degrees for their minor or they get a bachelor's in a higher paying field and then work a nice career and nickel and dime their targeted bullshit degree in their Gender Studies, Underwater Basket Weaving with a minor in Dryland Basket Weaving.
"...2) let student loan debt be dischargeable or payments renegotiated under bankruptcy law..."
Nope. Too open to manipulation:
Student runs up $XXXX,XXX in debt, gets out of school with no assets, works as a barista, declares bankruptcy.
8 years later (worst case), the slate is clean for someone in their mid 20s, and those of us who are responsible are paying for it, since TINSTAAFL.
This is like that shit commie-kid bailing on his mortgage, hoping the bank covers it rather than the bank's customers.
“8 years later (worst case), the slate is clean for someone in their mid 20s”
You’re really bad at math. Graduation age is 22 to 24. Add 8. Result is not “mid-20s.” And it will be extremely difficult getting a place to rent with a bankruptcy stain. Also affects employment opportunities.
Oh, shucks, I missed some arithmetic pointed out by an asshole.
"And it will be extremely difficult getting a place to rent with a bankruptcy stain. Also affects employment opportunities."
If we accept your assumptions, things could be a little bit more difficult unless you "roomied"
Are you stupid or dishonest, asshole?
Lol. The student loan SWAMP has got its clutches around yet another naive young "conservative".
Emma: Run away from this issue.
You are fighting for the worst big-government, catastrophically failed, red-state-wrecking, UNCONSTITUTIONAL LOAN SCAM IN US HISTORY.
The lending system is failed. Inculcate that. The loans WILL NOT BE PAID. The loans WILL BE CANCELLED.
Don't let your swamp masters control you. This lending scam needs to be taken to the bath, and drown in the tub. That is the ONLY TRUE CONSERVATIVE position to take on this.
To do anything else, like this nonsense you are now peddling (even if unwittingly) makes you a huge LIABILITY to the GOP, and Conservatism generally.
Learn about this loan scam before wagging your fingers at the people being wrecked, and thereby defending it.
OR don't. It's your career.
bit.ly/forrepublicans
Anyone wanna refute this guy?
Lol. What would happen if we somehow ripped $141 Billion from the people of Texas (student loan debt owing), and sent that $$ mostly to Washington DC?
FAILED. LOAN. SCAM.
No mean tweets though, so Reason writers are, in the end, Biden boosters and Biden voters.