As resumption of educational debt repayment looms, more than 7 in 10 borrowers say they are taking on extra work, while half say they don't know whether they'll be able to make payments come October.
Well one big difference is that PPP loans were a one time thing, they are gone now and not coming back for a very long time.
If you paid off all student loans today, there would be more tomorrow, and every day after that. If we do it once, we basically have to keep doing it until school is completely paid for and student loans are no longer a thing.
Forgiving student loans just has a much bigger and longer lasting financial obligation than one time PPP loans.
The problem is that we never bothered to create a system where free education would actually work.
Producers always like to sell their goods for as much as they can get. Normally, a consumer looks at a product, decides if it’s worth the price and then either buys it or doesn’t. If prices are too high, producers are forced to lower them to stay in business.
The current system essentially created a 3 way business transaction that guarantees runaway education costs.
The universities provide a service. It’s really hard to determine the value of that service since there isn’t a liquid market for “an education” or “a Harvard degree” that you can easily look up.
The government then says they’ll cover a percentage of that cost. This is a bit tricky. A normal subsidy is effectively a paying a fraction of the cost. Once you introduce loan forgiveness, either as a frequent or guaranteed event, that fraction effectively goes to 100%.
The student is getting a degree of unknown value but since they don’t have to pay (at least not the whole thing) they’ll just agree to the purchase, even if they don’t personally think the good is worth as much as the provider is charging. There’s no reason to if someone is picking up the bill.
The universities see that their price elasticity of demand (how much their sales suffer when they overcharge) is essentially 0. That means they can raise them with impunity. The end result is that Universities can essentially help themselves to large government grants without any requirement to show the public how we benefit from those grants.
If we consider education to be a public good then we should treat it as such. That would mean that we cancel the student loan program, get rid of tax subsidies for educational institutions and just have the federal government create a competing educational system. Take the money we’re spending on outsourcing education to the private sector and add to it. For the system to work it would need to attract top tier professors and that means good research facilities and salaries. It’s not a complicated idea but it would be a massive undertaking.
As a bonus we’d get some great initialisms. The federal universities would obviously be the FU system. State campuses might have names like FUNY and FUCA.
And yes, the point of such a system is that it would be paid entirely by taxes and would be free to students.
Well one big difference is that PPP loans were a one time thing, they are gone now and not coming back for a very long time.
If you paid off all student loans today, there would be more tomorrow, and every day after that. If we do it once, we basically have to keep doing it until school is completely paid for and student loans are no longer a thing.
Forgiving student loans just has a much bigger and longer lasting financial obligation than one time PPP loans.
It didn’t seem to be an issue when previous generations went to college essentially for free.
The problem is that we never bothered to create a system where free education would actually work.
Producers always like to sell their goods for as much as they can get. Normally, a consumer looks at a product, decides if it’s worth the price and then either buys it or doesn’t. If prices are too high, producers are forced to lower them to stay in business.
The current system essentially created a 3 way business transaction that guarantees runaway education costs.
The universities provide a service. It’s really hard to determine the value of that service since there isn’t a liquid market for “an education” or “a Harvard degree” that you can easily look up.
The government then says they’ll cover a percentage of that cost. This is a bit tricky. A normal subsidy is effectively a paying a fraction of the cost. Once you introduce loan forgiveness, either as a frequent or guaranteed event, that fraction effectively goes to 100%.
The student is getting a degree of unknown value but since they don’t have to pay (at least not the whole thing) they’ll just agree to the purchase, even if they don’t personally think the good is worth as much as the provider is charging. There’s no reason to if someone is picking up the bill.
The universities see that their price elasticity of demand (how much their sales suffer when they overcharge) is essentially 0. That means they can raise them with impunity. The end result is that Universities can essentially help themselves to large government grants without any requirement to show the public how we benefit from those grants.
If we consider education to be a public good then we should treat it as such. That would mean that we cancel the student loan program, get rid of tax subsidies for educational institutions and just have the federal government create a competing educational system. Take the money we’re spending on outsourcing education to the private sector and add to it. For the system to work it would need to attract top tier professors and that means good research facilities and salaries. It’s not a complicated idea but it would be a massive undertaking.
As a bonus we’d get some great initialisms. The federal universities would obviously be the FU system. State campuses might have names like FUNY and FUCA.
And yes, the point of such a system is that it would be paid entirely by taxes and would be free to students.