4 ms·

I agree with the article's diagnosis: the system is out of control, with no market forces are in place to keep costs in check. It's unsustainable for students t

I agree with the article's diagnosis: the system is out of control, with no market forces are in place to keep costs in check. It's unsustainable for students to take on this level of debt. I'm not sure I agree with the solutions though. Making student loan debt dischargeable doesn't make a lot of economic sense. We're talking about 17-year-olds with no income and no collateral. Why would any lender want to be in this business? Who will lend to students if the debt is dischargeable? The article's solution is to essentially make the school the co-guarantor of the loan, such that the school absorbs part of the financial impact of student default. Ok, but now the school has a direct financial stake in the student's overall finances. Do you really want to have that kind of relationship with your school? Do you want an admissions process that is partially trying to decide if you're financially responsible? Do you want your school pressuring you to choose a more lucrative major? Do you want communications from your school reminding you that it's important to be making good financial decisions? If your school is co-guarantor of your loan, it's their business to make sure you're going to repay on time. There has to be an element of responsibility that falls to the borrowers themselves. It's true that a 17-year-old does not have the experience to know for themselves how much debt is reasonable, especially when they cannot necessarily predict their future earnings. But there has to be some incentive to borrow less. I don't think it's healthy if student can borrow with abandon, safe in knowing that they can just discharge the debt in a few years if it doesn't work out. Ideally students would be voting with their feet, and would make it clear to colleges that the cost of tuition is a significant factor in their decision. But I guess prestige and tradition are so powerful that people will want to go to name-brand colleges no matter the cost.

robswc 2y ago
> Do you want an admissions process that is partially trying to decide if you're financially responsible? Do you want your school pressuring you to choose a more lucrative major? Do you want communications from your school reminding you that it's important to be making good financial decisions? If your school is co-guarantor of your loan, it's their business to make sure you're going to repay on time. I wouldn't particularly enjoy this... but at the same time, the alternative seems to be students that "don't know what they're doing" taking out loans over $100k to get degrees that are not in demand. These people will then claim they were ignorant of the true cost, job prospects, potential salary, etc. The elephant in the room is that many degrees simply don't leave students with a lot of earning potential. I never understand why the discussion seems to trend (not implying your comment did this) towards how we can pay for these degrees or make them affordable. It sounds harsh but I don't know how to see it any other way.
next_xibalba 2y ago
> Do you really want to have that kind of relationship with your school? Do you want an admissions process that is partially trying to decide if you're financially responsible? Do you want your school pressuring you to choose a more lucrative major? Yes. These schools need to eliminate or drastically reduce the economically useless degrees that they have produced in such grotesque surplus for the past 40 years. They should absolutely have an incentive to produce an education that is useful to society. They’ve miseducated Americans for generations on the lie that all education is inherently good.
freshtake 2y ago
FWIW, most of my friends in undergrad would openly flaunt the way they were spending their student loan money (weed, video games, new spoiler for their car, etc.). This was not the exception, as far as I could tell. So the age thing goes both ways - 17 year olds are too young to make smart financial decisions, both about whether to get a loan, and how to spend it.
stefan_ 2y ago
Why do brands market to young people? Why do people buy stocks that make no profit and never have? It's never about today.

robswc 2y ago

> Do you want an admissions process that is partially trying to decide if you're financially responsible? Do you want your school pressuring you to choose a more lucrative major? Do you want communications from your school reminding you that it's important to be making good financial decisions? If your school is co-guarantor of your loan, it's their business to make sure you're going to repay on time. I wouldn't particularly enjoy this... but at the same time, the alternative seems to be students that "don't know what they're doing" taking out loans over $100k to get degrees that are not in demand. These people will then claim they were ignorant of the true cost, job prospects, potential salary, etc. The elephant in the room is that many degrees simply don't leave students with a lot of earning potential. I never understand why the discussion seems to trend (not implying your comment did this) towards how we can pay for these degrees or make them affordable. It sounds harsh but I don't know how to see it any other way.

next_xibalba 2y ago

> Do you really want to have that kind of relationship with your school? Do you want an admissions process that is partially trying to decide if you're financially responsible? Do you want your school pressuring you to choose a more lucrative major? Yes. These schools need to eliminate or drastically reduce the economically useless degrees that they have produced in such grotesque surplus for the past 40 years. They should absolutely have an incentive to produce an education that is useful to society. They’ve miseducated Americans for generations on the lie that all education is inherently good.

freshtake 2y ago

FWIW, most of my friends in undergrad would openly flaunt the way they were spending their student loan money (weed, video games, new spoiler for their car, etc.). This was not the exception, as far as I could tell. So the age thing goes both ways - 17 year olds are too young to make smart financial decisions, both about whether to get a loan, and how to spend it.

stefan_ 2y ago

Why do brands market to young people? Why do people buy stocks that make no profit and never have? It's never about today.