Nice idea, and yet...

[fridi]

I get it. The students of are our future. Bernie and other progressives like Warren seem to understand that future has to be protected, and not cripple it before it can grow...

Bernie Sanders to unveil plan to cancel all $1.6 trillion of student loan debt

On the other hand, canceling the student loan debt sounds fine, but isn't it just one half of what should actually be done? If the system that allowed all that debt to be accumulated is not reformed, in a few years you're going to need to cancel a similar amount of student loan debt again.

Here's an alternative proposal. Why not more work/study programs, apprenticeships, and some form of service to the country to forgive student loans? These rainbow and unicorn campaigns are not helping progressives much. This is partly how the Trumpster will defeat them in 2020 again. These guys need to wise up if they really wish to win.

Comments

[johnny9fingers]

Retrospective student grants, cancelling loans, dependent upon national service? Excellent idea, especially if national service is extended to include working for the nation in the emergency services or the civil services.

I love this idea. Whether the reality could match the concept is another matter.

[nairiporter]

I suspect that would bankrupt a whole lot of student loan companies.. but I still think it's a nice plan.

Moreover, they wouldn't be able to simply do that. The government would have to buy out all the loans to forgive them.

The tricky part is having a plan for what comes after so it doesn't happen again. The loan companies would close due to lack of business.

Predatory lending should be illegal, period.

Trade school and community college should be affordable to ANYONE. That's what they need to work on. Making it affordable in the first place like it used to be.

[mikeyxw]

Since having a college degree will earn you about $900,000 more in additional income over your lifetime, the average college debt of $37,172 seems pretty sustainable. The idea of giving a big chunk of relief those who are going to earn the most seems unprogressive. It's a huge bonus going mostly to the young and educated, which does explain why the democrats are for it.

Also, as you've mentioned, we should be looking at the system itself. I'm not quite sure why the cost of college has been increasing faster than inflation or even health care costs for the past four decades, but that seems to be something that should be addressed. Somehow it seems the candidates are much more willing to talk about the companies who give college loans than those who are increasing college tuition every year.

[johnny9fingers]

Since having a college degree will earn you about $900,000 more in additional income over your lifetime

Not sure if that's true for social workers, teachers, or government employees. I'm sure it's true of doctors or lawyers or other graduates. Which is why I think that an exchange of national service for tuition seems reasonable. Doctors and Lawyers aren't going to have to bother with being concerned about that sort of thing; but paying back student loans on a teacher's salary may prove problematic; and teachers are a public benefit.

[mikeyxw]

Federal government employees make 50% more than the average private sector employees in the US. If you add in the value of benefits, they make almost twice what the average private sector employee makes. I'm not sure about teachers nationally, but in Seattle, the average teacher is now pushing $100K. There are also quite a few programs to provide grants, scholarships, and such to teachers. Social Workers, well, that's kinda understood going in. I'm not sure how national service for social workers would look different than just a career in social work. Maybe they should get some extra help, but something targeted like this is a very different proposition than what anyone is proposing. Personally, I'd go for a market based approach and if not enough people are going into social work, take that as a sign that social workers need to be paid more.

[johnny9fingers]

Is that the case in the US? Federal teachers earn more than private-school teachers? Not so in the UK. In the UK everyone has healthcare, so those benefits don't really apply - and our civil service employees earn some large percentage of a similar job in the private sector until you get to the higher echelons, where typically folk can double their salary by moving into the private sector.

But as a comparison: secondary school teacher salary in the UK is between £23,720 and £35,008 (London figures are £24,859 to £41,268 (fringes), £27,596 to £43,348 (outer), £29,664 to £47,751 (inner) ). Headteachers earn between £45,213 and £111,007 (London figures are £46,318 to £118,490).

source: https://www.prospects.ac.uk/jobs-and-work-experience/job-sectors/teacher-training-and-education/how-much-do-teachers-get-paid.

Paying back student loans on £35,000 a year is pretty difficult if you want things like relationships, places to stay, or transport... never mind kids etc. And all that for a 70 hour week when you include marking, Ofsted reports etc... Which is why we have a teacher shortage in the UK. (And this is replicated in other fields too; nursing springs to mind.)

[mikeyxw]

That kind of sucks for teachers in the UK. Unfortunately, they are not likely to be covered by Mr. Sanders' plan.

[merig00]

Cost cutting ideas:
At private for-profit institutions, the largest single expense category was the combined category of student services, academic support, and institutional support, which includes expenses associated with noninstructional activities, such as admissions, student activities, libraries, and administrative and executive activities. At private for-profit institutions, these expenses accounted for 63 percent of total spending. By comparison, student services, academic support, and institutional support made up 24 percent of total expenses at public institutions and 30 percent of total expenses at private nonprofit institutions.



https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=75

[airiefairie]

> On the other hand, canceling the student loan debt sounds fine, but isn't it just one half of what should actually be done? If the system that allowed all that debt to be accumulated is not reformed, in a few years you're going to need to cancel a similar amount of student loan debt again. <

His original education (2-4 years state paid) would solve that.

[oportet]

This problem was caused by the students, the government, and the schools. I don't like a solution that let's any of them, much less all of them, off the hook.

Besides, if the left is truly in the pursuit of fairness - what's the plan for those that already paid their loans off? (Or did I just spoil the 2024 platform?)