Blanket student loan forgiveness is redistributing wealth upward

[iemanja]

Claiming forgiving ALL student loan is far is a false claim. It in effect demands that middle income Americans pay for the education of those more privileged than themselves. Most student loan is owed by the upper 40% of incomes, with a substantial share concentrated among the top 20%.

A forgiveness program of $10-15K would cover the majority of people with Bachelors degrees. Forgiving loans above that amount targets those with graduate degrees and higher incomes.

What people are arguing for is the redistribution of wealth upward from middle incomes to those with substantially higher incomes. That is not fair or just. It is the opposite.

Here is some information supporting my position.

Recently released data from the Federal Reserve’s Survey of Consumer Finances confirm that upper-income households account for a disproportionate share of student loan debt—and an even larger share of monthly out-of-pocket student debt payments.

The highest-income 40 percent of households (those with incomes above $74,000) owe almost 60 percent of the outstanding education debt and make almost three-quarters of the payments. The lowest-income 40 percent of households hold just under 20 percent of the outstanding debt and make only 10 percent of the payments. It should be no surprise that higher-income households owe more student debt than others. Students from higher-income households are more likely to go to college in the first place. And workers with a college or graduate degree earn substantially more in the labor market than those who never went to college.

What may be more surprising, however, is the difference in payment burdens. A growing share of borrowers participate in income-driven repayment (IDR) plans, which do not require any payments from those whose incomes are too low and limit payments to an affordable share of income for others. And some borrowers are in forbearance or deferment because of financial hardships. As a result, out-of-pocket loan payments are concentrated among high-income households; few low-income households enrolled in IDR are required to make payments . . .

?w=768&crop=0%2C0px%2C100%2C9999px&ssl=1

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/10/09/who-owes-the-most-in-student-loans-new-data-from-the-fed/

Here’s the breakdown by degree:

No college degree: 8%
Associate’s Degree: 7%
Bachelor’s Degree: 29%
Master’s Degree: 36%
Professional/Doctoral: 20%



https://www.savingforcollege.com/article/who-owes-the-most-student-loan-debt

[kcr]

1. That means the majority of loans are in the lower half of income

This analysis also ignores how the finances of those in the lower brackets are affected more by these loans. It also ignores how quickly college costs are rising. 10,000 for a 4 year college degree nowadays? I don't think so.

[iemanja]

5. That is false

The income scale is demonstrated in my post. Look at it.


College costs rising is another issue.

[FoxNewsSucks]

2. I'm sure this will get an unpopular reaction,

but I agree. Something should be done about the predatory nature of these loans, and banks in general.

There are a lot of people who did without a lot in order to pay mortgages and student loans. Many have no one other than themselves to rely on, and it won't sit well to bail out others. It's not the right way to fix things.

[calguy]

16. I agree 100%.

We did without many of the luxuries we could have enjoyed in order to skimp and save enough to put our two kids through college. And we are by no means in the upper incomes brackets.

It burns my ass to a certain degree to see others now being let off the hook for debt they willingly signed on to. Millions of kids couldn't afford to go to college, and chose another way to make it. It's a slap in their face to see others who took on the debt they didn't, to now see their college degrees will be paid for out of their tax money.

It's not a fair system I will agree, but no one held a gun to their head to force them into debt. It's their responsibility to take care of it, not mine.

[TheRealNorth]

30. I kind of agree with the sentiment....

I would rather see a middle road where the loans were converted to no-interest loans with flexible payback scheduling based upon your income.

The larger issue that needs to be addressed is the cost of college, which has been growing in part because government doesn't help subsidize it like it used to.

[calguy]

57. Absolutely

I would fully support restructuring their loans and only charging enough interest to cover the costs of administering such a government program. I'm not against giving them a break, but I am adamantly opposed to letting them off scott-free.
They borrowed the money. They need to pay it back.

[Recursion]

58. We already have that, the IBR program

As it is any student loan borrower can choose the income-based repayment program, where they pay 15% of their income above 150% of the Federal Poverty Level for 20 years and then the entire loan is forgiven. The interest doesn't really matter at that point because you're not trying to pay the whole loan back.

[TheRealNorth]

123. Not all loans qualify

It's looks like only certain Federal Loans qualify. So if you have private loans or consolidated your Federal Loans through a private company, you are.probably SOL.

[manicdem]

129. I worked my way through college

I attended full time school with a full and part time job so i wasnt a burden in my parents and avoided student loans. I sacrificed a lot of family and friends time, basically putting in 15 hour days.

I know a lot of people on student loans who partied all the time. If forgiveness goes through then i dont get anything out if it, and i actually pay for their loans.

[Johnny2X2X]

3. Some forgiveness is fine

But better ways to pay them back are more realistic.

Biden's Department of Education is trying to make changes to pay back plans right now, Pay As You Earn (PAYE) right now is 10% of adjusted income, the adjustment is 1.5 times the poverty rate income in the US. They're going to change this to 5% and potentially make the adjustment larger than 1.5 times. So they're talking about more than halving the monthly payments for people. Would be life changing for millions.

[Bobstandard]

4. Forgive it all, then...

Forgive all the student loan debt, then make higher Ed free for all.

And I say this as one who paid for my own and my kids university education at great sacrifice. I won’t feel cheated, I’ll feel vindicated.

[iemanja]

8. In other words, make the middle income American subsidized the privileged

Redistribute wealth upward. That is what you are arguing. It is a patently unfair position that demands the education of the privileged be paid by those with less income. It is an unfair, anti-egalitarian position.

I'm fine with transitioning to a system that provides publicly funded--not free, because there is no such thing--education. But how that works in other countries is that rigorous entrance exams determine the minority that can attend publicly funded schools. Those countries also have tax rates around 50%, not for the rich but for average incomes. They also tend to pool their resources for nationally provided health insurance. They are fine systems, but they differ dramatically from our own.

So you can decide that you want that kind of system--and figure out how to make it law--but what you can't pretend is that you will do it without cost for the average workers. Taxing the rich won't cover it.

[Bobstandard]

10. I beg to differ

Taxing the rich won't cover it.

It sure could.

[iemanja]

13. Then why isn't that the solution in European countries

that have such systems? Why are their average tax rates so much higher than ours? You do realize that Americans pay substantially lower taxes than most of the developed world? And by Americans I mean middle-income Americans too.

It's easy to argue for a situation that you think carries no cost for you. That, however, is not how it works.

[Bobstandard]

20. I find it possible to support situations that...

I find it possible to support situations that provide no benefit to me even if it costs me. I also realize that supporting some ‘situations’ will provide benefits for some who don’t need it or deserve it along the way to benefiting those I think do. That doesn’t paralyze me into inaction.

[inthewind21]

25. Imagine

If workers of the past has said "Wait, I didn't get a 40 hour work week, it's not fair that other will so NO, it's not fair NO ONE should" Boggles the mind.

[iemanja]

98. Tell me where I have argued that?

You have profoundly misrepresented my argument. The blanket student loan forgiveness argument is the equivalent of saying that workers earning $15 hour had to pay for a raise for those earning $30 an hour.

[iemanja]

28. I'm not arguing for inaction

I support student loan forgiveness up to $15k. I see no social good for forgiving the rest. The argument that I won't be able to find a doctor if I refuse to pay back the student loans of someone making hundreds of thousands a year doesn't persuade me. I don't have trouble finding doctors now. Now rural areas are different, and I can imagine a program that forgives loans for public service jobs or going to neglected areas.

[LonePirate]

36. The number of people with loans making hundreds of thousands a year is surely small.

Those people are not carrying six figures of student loan debt for years and years.

If you have any information that these people making $200K or more a year are still saddled with a mountain of student loan debt which they cannot repay, I would love to see it.

People struggling to pay off student loans are those making five figure yearly incomes and maybe low six figures if they are living in a high cost metro like NYC, LA, SF.

[iemanja]

95. The blanket student loan forgiveness argument

Insists all student loans be canceled, regardless if the borrower can pay or not.
Those with lower incomes are likely to earn less in student loans and will have typically borrowed for an AA or Bachelors degree. Biden proposes forgiving $15k in loans, which would cover most of those people. There is also a federal program for limiting student loan payments to 10% of adjusted gross income for those with lower incomes.

[Ms. Toad]

96. Those loan repayment programs already exist (and have since the 70s)

Rural areas

Native American Reservations

[iemanja]

101. Yes, I knew some did

but not to what extent. Thank you for the links.

[Ms. Toad]

104. I was once married to a doctor -

and helped him figure out how to become a doctor without the burden of massive debts (in the late 70s). The last time I spoke with him (about a decade ago), he was still serving the community the loan forgiveness program placed him in. So it is not only a means to an end for the new doctors, it also (at least sometimes) results in enticing a doctor to a community in need long term.

[iemanja]

108. That's great

and that community has a reliable doctor.

[Doremus]

21. Rolling back just one of the latest billionaire tax cuts would cover all outstanding debt.

"Redistribution of wealth," "forced to subsidize the privileged"

These sorts of talking points could have come directly from the repuke hate speech spin machine. Complete with the "tax rates around 50%" canard.

[iemanja]

32. Yet there is no passable provision for rolling back those tax cuts

The argument is that Biden should unilaterally forgive student loans, absent congressional approval, absent tax increases on the wealthy. Advocates for blanket loan forgiveness know those tax cuts cannot be rolled back, yet they demand Biden cancel all student loans within the existing tax structure.

Your claim that my opposition to redistributing wealth upward comes from "a repuke spin machine" is not only insulting, it's patently false. You may not like the data, but it is factual. Your position insists that those with middle incomes pay for the privileged. That is an inegalitarian position that privileges those with higher incomes over median wage workers, which is not in keeping with Democratic principles.

That you find a position inconvenient doesn't make it false or "repuke talking points." Perhaps you should think of a rational response that takes in account the data?

[leftieNanner]

6. We sold our house and moved to a less expensive place

so we could put our kids through college. It was rough, but we did it. They don't have college debt.

When my older child started talking about grad school, I think I kind of panicked. Then she explained to me that the program she wanted to enter would have zero tuition and would pay her a stipend. (exhale)

No all families have this ability.

Question though. If it's the graduates who are trying to pay back these loans (not their well-off parents), isn't it still difficult for them?

Very complex issue.

Thanks for posting this information.

[iemanja]

11. Yes, I think it probably is difficult

for people with some degrees, but there are federal programs to limit payments to 10% for incomes to a certain level. I imagine is it more difficult for people just above that level. Some posters here, however, argue that we should forgive the loans of doctors earning in the hundreds of thousands, and they claim we'll never find a doctor if we don't. That's a tenuous, unbelievable position. I'm for a limited forgiveness program to $10-$15k, but not a blanket student loan forgiveness because that is an inegalitarian position.

[leftieNanner]

17. I agree

There are programs for both medical and law schools that allow the school itself to diminish the debt if the new doctor/lawyer works in a non-profit or community service kind of venue.

A friend of my daughter's had $250,000 in law school debt and because she worked for a low-income immigration organization, the school wrote off a certain amount of the loans every year. Blanket erasure of med school or law school debt makes no sense.

My daughter got a PhD in Chemistry and because she was working (doing research) there for five years (as opposed to attending classes), she didn't have any tuition.

[Thtwudbeme]

7. NO social program is "fair" to everyone. Can we please drop that silliness as a talking point?

nt

[Scrivener7]

9. Can we stop giving more to the rich?

[LonePirate]

39. What level is rich for you?

The median income in the US is in the mid-$60K range. If you live in a Top 25 metro, it can be a challenge to make meaningful progress on your loans if you’re making below that.

[iemanja]

70. If one makes 100K a year

that's in the top 16.5%. People with upper incomes still think they are in the middle class, when they aren't.

[LonePirate]

74. Depends on the metro where they live.

Yes, $100K would allow them to pay down their loans if they lived in most metro areas and they were not paying down a mortgage. The problem is most people have to choose between a mortgage or loans given the outrageous cost of housing nowadays. Should they live cheaply and/or get married so they can pay off their loans and then buy a house?

[iemanja]

76. Most people in those metro areas

make far less. But yes, cost of living varies a lot.

[LonePirate]

77. A forgiveness amount in the low five figures seems most likely to me.

Nobody on the right wants any forgiveness. Those on the left are split between some and total forgiveness. Something in the range from $10K-$25K helps people without it seeming excessive. The progressive wing will have to shoulder another loss like usual.

[Thtwudbeme]

46. Define rich

A two bedroom condo in Atlanta is about 2500 A month right now. A master's level librarian makes about 50,000 a year. You do the math.

[Scrivener7]

52. Librarians working outside of the corporate arena have always made little money.

You weigh the potential income against the cost of the degree. Or you aren't doing it right.

I would have LOVED to have been a librarian. But I knew I couldn't afford the degree based on the income I would make with it.

[Thtwudbeme]

81. I am a librarian-

So, you are living without a degree you would have loved, and based your choices on income?

There's something very wrong with what you just wrote. We are going to destroy the creativity in this country so people can pay hundreds of dollars in school loans, and then live in a rental that costs thousands a month while getting trapped by the healthcare industry even further.

Lovely

[Scrivener7]

88. No. There isn't anything wrong with what I wrote. There were a number of paths

that I could have followed happily. When I listed those paths that I would love to pursue, Librarian came off the list because, in the cost/benefit analysis, it was simply too expensive.

I chose a different degree that I loved, and that path turned out to be much more joyful and fulfilling than anything else I could have done.

So you can save your superior judgment that "there's something very wrong" with my choices.

No one owed either of us our Master's degrees. If you chose to pursue a degree for which you knew the cost would prevent you from living the way you want to - and if you did not know that, why didn't you? - your decision was not righteous. It was certainly not creative. And demanding that everyone else now should pay for it is entitled.

[Thtwudbeme]

89. All my debts are paid, and I am financially fine. What you wrote is incredibly sad

My thoughts were not all about you. Try to think of the big picture- you know- societal values.

[Scrivener7]

90. OK. So you're very sad for me. Have at it. But this is a discussion about

forgiving student loans.

You gave your degree as an example of how the combination of a librarian degree and the cost of housing make it difficult to make ends meet, presumably to support the idea that student loans should be forgiven.

And yet, you tell us, financially you are doing fine. Glad to hear it, by the way, but then what is your point?

[Thtwudbeme]

91. Read that again. I am NOT sad for YOU

nt

[Scrivener7]

93. OK. Fine, but again, what is your point about the cost of living, the salary

of a librarian and forgiving student loans?

[Thtwudbeme]

127. I was using my job (pretty sure I know the salary ranges there)

as an example. I was using rents in Atlanta because I have a friend that rents condos there.

Does that help? Real life examples?

[Recursion]

62. The median individual income in Atlanta is $36,465

So, yeah, somebody making $50K is not my first concern there.

[Thtwudbeme]

82. Once you get into rent that high

you really aren't looking at too terribly much difference- another grand a month doesn't really go that far in the Southern cities.

[Ms. Toad]

109. But most social programs are structured with the intention of being fair.

Most have income limits, for example. Many have caps on the amount of the benefit.

If we are structuring a new program, it should be structured in a way that is less likely to give a significant benefit to those who benefitted economically from the choice to incur the very debt we are proposing to eliminate (at a cost to the rest of us, in the form of the taxes needed to replace the anticipated debt repayment income).

[leftstreet]

12. Use the leftover Covid $ for this, instead of police depts

shrug:

[iemanja]

14. What do you say about my point of redistributing wealth upward

Are you comfortable with a process that makes middle income Americans pay for the education of those more privileged? And if so, why is that? Do you support upward redistribution of wealth in other areas? If not, how is student loan different?

[Scrivener7]

50. Everyone seems to be assiduously avoiding addressing that.

Hmmmm.....

[Cuthbert Allgood]

15. There is a very clear racial implication for student debt.

Regardless of the incomes they make after graduation, Black households carry more student debt, which pushes down their creditworthiness. Unsurprisingly, then, Black people with a college degree have lower homeownership rates than white high school dropouts. Moreover, research from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis finds that after college graduation, white households receive wealth transfers from their family to help pay for things like the purchase of a home. Black households, on the other hand, transfer their increased post-college income to help their family. Different patterns of intergenerational transfers contribute to nearly three-quarters of Black borrowers’ student loans having a higher balance today than they did originally.

Original from Brookings

[iemanja]

19. Those with lower incomes

However, qualify for the 10% repayment schedule. And I'm not talking about opposing all student loan forgiveness. Biden has talked about forgiving loans up to (I believe) $15,000. That covers most people with Bachelors degrees, with loans above that held by people with advanced degrees.

[bucolic_frolic]

18. Non-degree holders should get something too

Waitresses and secretaries will have degree holders for bosses

[Thtwudbeme]

128. Yep- they should be paid a living wage.

I pretty much thought that was a non-negotiable point.

[Jerry2144]

22. Meanwhile the super rich are laughing

Because they have us bickering amongst ourselves over this while ducking out on paying their fair share. So what if these benefits the middle class or the top 20% percent? You know the top 1% didn’t take any student loans.

And if a married couple who earn $250k per year gets their loans discharged, that doesn’t hurt you and personally would help you since they would use that freed up loan payment to simulate the economy through spending.

I took out loans to earn my degree and paid off all of them. It would have helped me had my debt been forgiven since I could afford a home and nice car sooner. But it is still the right thing

By that logic, why should we vaccinate against a disease since I survived it and don’t need the vaccine? Look at the overall good debt cancellation does. More money in more peoples pockets And less going to the student loan services and private lenders

[iemanja]

35. So what? Because it redistributes wealth upward

which is a blatantly inegalitarian position.

Forgiveness for the upper 5% of incomes does hurt me and all of us who make lower to median incomes because we have to pay for it. (How many people made $250,000 or more in 2021?4, 122,785 workers, or 2.36% of the workforce, made a quarter million or more in income. https://dqydj.com/income-percentile-calculator/ 16.5% made over 100,000K. You can see overall income distribution here. https://graphics.wsj.com/what-percent/

Your argument is equivalent to giving tax breaks to the rich because it supposedly frees up their income. I reject those positions.

My argument is NOT that I paid off my loans and so should everyone else. I said that nowhere, and you would know that if you read my post. What I said is I oppose median income workers paying loans of those far more privileged. Your retort is that they will spend more money, which is identical to the argument for reducing taxes on the rich. I oppose redistributing wealth upward.

[Ms. Toad]

103. You just suggested trickle down economics is helpful economic plan

And if a married couple who earn $250k per year gets their loans discharged, that doesn’t hurt you and personally would help you since they would use that freed up loan payment to simulate the economy through spending.

I doubt you did it consciously - but here it is laid out more specifically:

Trickle-down economics is a theory that claims that benefits for the wealthy trickle down to everyone else. These benefits are tax cuts on businesses, high-income earners, capital gains, and dividends. source

Universal loan forgiveness is, primarily, a benefit for wealthier individuals (your couples making $250,000 or higher) . It does hurt me, since rather than going to fund general safety net programs, a portion of my taxes now will go to pay for that tax break for higher income individuals. (Tax money will need to replace the anticipated income which is lost when loans which generate that incomeare forgiven)

And then those higher income individuals will spend the money, and that benefit will trickle down to me via a stimulated economy.

[Jerry2144]

115. To an extent it is

If Bezos got an extra 10k, he wouldn’t notice it. But anyone at the lower end of the scale would notice that 10k and would spend it. The people who make enough that their needs are met would take the saved student loan payment and send it back into the economy since they don’t have much extra to invest.

There is some dollar amount that would make sense for this write off of loan payments, but it depends upon local cost of living. 100K per year in a small town like Las Vegas, NM is a bunch of money. But 100k per year in Las Vegas, NV is not as much.

Making the plan too complicated for anyone to apply or the government to administer or not generous enough causes it to skip too many people and cause harm you more people than if it were too generous. But this only works if the millionaire and billionaire classes pay their fair share.

[Ms. Toad]

119. So you are endorsing Reagan's trickle down economics.

The fairest way is to forgive loans (and accumulated interest) up to the equivalent of 4-years of tuition at a state school for a first degree.

That leaves those who chose to take out loans to attend private schools responsible for the difference between their more expensive choice, from which they likely benefitted economically, and the cost of public education which should be (but is not currently) available to everyone.

That leaves those who choose to obtain advanced degrees responsible for the choice to pursue an advanced degree which - again - likely put them in a better position to be able to pay for that choice. (There are choices to pay for these degrees which are less costly than taking out/repaying massive loans - being a part-time student, stipends which pay for many of them in exchange for teaching, service to state entities, taking time to pay off the first loan before incurring a second, working in underserved areas, etc. At worst, if their choices did not benefit them economically they can make income based repayments for 20 years and be done with it.)

Generosity, in this case, has significant financial and social costs which I am unwilling to support becuase they increase the disparity between the haves and have nots, by subsidizing the very choices which benefitted the haves in the first place.

[walkingman]

23. Statistics don't lie. They'll tell whatever truth you want them to.

That's what my Stat professor used to say....I think the best solution to student loans is "public service" of some sort. Military, Local, State, Federal for a few years to get experience in the "real world" and loan forgiveness.

[iemanja]

67. That sounds like a good solution to me. nt

[former9thward]

24. If student debt is as bad as everyone says then ban it.

No more student loans allowed. Or a very small limit like $5,000. And no more. Watch tuition drop like a rock everywhere. And those who can't afford it (and are not getting any scholarships or other aid) can enter the work force. They will be financially ahead of their peers.

[iemanja]

69. I don't think tuition would drop

Universities have to make their budgets, and tuition goes up when state funding goes down (if we're talking about public universities). The U I work at is continually dealing with budget shortages. That won't change with an absence of student loans.

[ret5hd]

26. Is there ANY path...ANY process...ANY structured way...

toward bringing this country into the modern world and provide a college education for our people…

that you (et al) would agree to? Backdating the loan forgiveness back to 1950 and repaying you (et al) everything you paid? Specifying you in particular for a backdated repayment?

There is no way forward for this country. On any front. No one…the politicians, the populace…thinks of what is best for the country. No one thinks about what is best for the environment. Concern is only for “me”.

[iemanja]

40. I'm not concerned with my own student loan payments

their paid off and don't figure into my argument.

What you propose would take a dramatic reshaping of our political and economic system. I don't see that happening in this political climate. We can't even hold on to basic rights.

[ret5hd]

79. So, short answer "no"?

[iemanja]

92. The answer is not no

Propose something to reform education that can get through congress. That's how change can be made.

[Omaha Steve]

27. How about a $10,000 cap on forgiveness?

[questionseverything]

42. President Biden campaigned on forgiving $10,000. Of student loans

He needs to do that quickly ( before mid terms)

And then start looking at what is left

[Recursion]

45. He campaigned on signing a Congressional bill that does that

He's still willing to do that. 10K covers nearly everyone who did not finish their degree.

[questionseverything]

60. If it depends on getting a bill through congress, we are screwed and it's silly to discuss

[mcar]

29. 56% of student loan debt

is for graduate + levels of education. This analysis is spot on.

[Recursion]

31. Blanket student loan forgiveness is a political nuclear bomb that will destroy the Democratic party

44 million American adults have student loans outstanding

44 million American adults do not have a high school diploma or GED

If we simply give $1.6T to the first group, and nothing to the second, we will be absolutely destroyed electorally, and frankly we will deserve it.

Forgive loans for people who were defrauded. Forgive them for public servants and persons with disabilities. Freeze interest. Forgive loans for people who didn't finish their degrees. Forgive loans for people with low incomes.

Any or all of these we can defend. We cannot defend a simple blanket forgiveness of student loans. It would be an electoral disaster.

[iemanja]

38. I agree completely. nt

[Budi]

43. Like last election year's "Defund the Police" slogan that's rarely uttered since, & has been now...

...been now replace with " 100% Stuudent Loan Debt Forgiveness or Else!".

They have presented no way to posssibly make it happen without the courts rejecting it.
And they know it.

Same with M4A.

[Recursion]

44. Bingo (nt)

[Budi]

54. Dime a dozen election year campaign sloganeering, to a targeted demographic.

A populist's m.o. throughout history.

[Recursion]

59. Student loans wouldn't even be an issue if we did them through payroll deductions

That's, frankly, the big mistake. We should have made student loans a levy like FICA and Medicaid.

[betsuni]

65. +1

[Gore1FL]

33. So tax the rich. The issue isn't loan forgiveness being unfair; our taxation system is. nt

[iemanja]

37. Yet those demanding blanket forgiveness

Demand Biden do so unilaterally, without congressional approval or changes in the tax system. And some of those rich you think should pay more taxes are the very people whose loans we are supposed to pay off. If one makes $100,000 a year, they are in the upper 16.5%, yet ordinary tax payers are supposed to pay for their loans. https://dqydj.com/income-percentile-calculator/

[Gore1FL]

41. It is ultimately the right thing to do for the overall economy.

If it takes another election for the tax laws to catch up, I'm OK with that. I am OK with public schools in Beverly Hills, too.

[Recursion]

48. Student loans are one of the few things clawing down the gap between non-college graduates

and college graduates

Take them away and the gap becomes that much more uncrossable.

The rhetorical problem is that the richest third of the US is psychologically incapable of understanding that we are rich.

[Gore1FL]

49. I would think affordable college makes the gap inherently crossable.

This opens the doors to those who would be financially denied and allows graduates to apply their earning power to the U.S. economy rather than a banker.

[Recursion]

51. Forgiving student loans doesn't make college affordable

Debt forgiveness does precisely zero to address college affordability

[Gore1FL]

53. I would assume we would keep doing it. Affordable college is the point. It's not a cash grab. nt

[Recursion]

55. ... no. We would not "keep doing it"

If we did it, Democrats would be locked out of government for 20 years. Maybe we could do it again after that? But we wouldn't be in a position to just do it every year.

[Gore1FL]

56. I don't see affordable college as a losing issue. I therefore reject the 20-year lock out argument.

I refuse to continue a discussion that's based on soothsaying. Have a great day.

[Recursion]

61. Stop. Making college affordable is a great idea

Erasing existing debt doesn't make college affordable.

You need to understand that if you care about this issue.

[Gore1FL]

63. If college was affordable their wouldn't be debt.

Anyways, this discussion ended when fortune telling entered the fray. Have a great day.

[iemanja]

66. Yes!

and that is a better solution than forgiving student loan debt. But still, in this climate, it would be very difficult.

[betsuni]

68. "It doesn't fix the problem" was the reason given for not supporting

the infrastructure bill, but this is the same thing. Cancel All Student Debt doesn't fix the problem. All-or-nothing philosophy I guess.

[Kaleva]

34. It's an updated version of trickle down economics.

[Budi]

47. Its a demographically targeted campaign slogan.

They know damned well it cannot be done as their activists shout, & that's why, like M4A & the now defunct Defund the Police are populist bs.
They have never presented a viable policy plan for any of their slogans.
And they never will.
Because its a campaign slogan.
And that's it.

If Biden did what they are demanding with 100% student loans, they know the courts would soundly reject it.
They know it would be d.o.a.

But that's populism.

[brer cat]

64. I agree.

K&R

[betsuni]

71. K&R

[Sympthsical]

72. Guys, we let the Reagan zombie escape from his pyramid again

Now he's running around with "redistribution of wealth" and making sure middle and lower classes fear having to pay for any social program (because we don't talk about the wealthy and their taxes, shhh).

Can we kill it with fire this time?

[iemanja]

110. The data is what is it

The question is why you expect middle income taxpayers pay for the education of the those with far more privilege. Hurling insults doesn't change the data. It only shows that you can't summon an argument of substance.

Canceling student loan forgiveness isn't a social program. Social programs are need based. The blanket student loan forgiveness argument is the antithesis of need based.

[Sympthsical]

112. The manipulation and framing of data certainly is

What it is.

[iemanja]

114. If you have other data analysis to present

feel free to do so. There is nothing manipulated about this data. The fact is you find it inconvenient because it shows the blanket student loan forgiveness argument for what is it: a demand to shift wealth upward.

[Act_of_Reparation]

73. Let me ask you this:

Are in favor of student loan forgiveness at all?

If so, under what circumstances?

[iemanja]

75. I'm in favor of forgiveness up to $15k

Which covers most of the debts for Bachelors degrees. It will also cover the first 15k of larger loans.

[Act_of_Reparation]

83. What about graduate school?

[iemanja]

111. What about it?

Are you suggesting that going to grad school should be a right, that median income workers without an opportunity for themselves to pursue a degree should pay for the graduate education of those with more privilege? Why?

[Act_of_Reparation]

131. I'm suggesting quite a few things.

The most germane, I suppose, is that graduate school is expensive, and getting through it is more difficult for low-income students than middle and upper class students. This creates a disparity in the graduate student body which, in turn leads to a disparity in our pool of academics. I shouldn't have to explain why diversity in academics is important, but just in case it bears repeating: diversity widens perspective. We, as a society, need underrepresented peoples in medicine, sciences, and social sciences, as this where our health and public policy decisions ultimately originate. Underrepresented people need a voice at that table, and locking them out for financial reasons is harmful to them.

For a concrete example, let's look at medicine and how it has failed underrepresented patients. There's piles and piles of research showing black patients experience worse health outcomes than white counterparts, in part because they are treated by doctors who do not understand their lived experiences and are consequently less empathetic towards them. It could be reasonably argued that it would be better for black folks if there were more black folks in medicine. We should therefore encourage more black people to enroll in medical school, and one way to do that is to remove some, if not all, of the financial burden associated with it.

I'll leave you with this: my institution has cooperative relationships with clinics in the poorest, most remove regions of my state. We work with a guy, a pediatric hematologist/oncologist. He treats kids with bleeding disorders, and anyone with childhood cancer. He's the only such specialist in a three-county radius. He has patients -- all of them extremely low-income -- who have drive as far as three hours one-way to visit his office.

That's not acceptable. I think if you ask any of these patients' parents what they'd rather have, a slightly lower tax burden or lifesaving pediatric care within reasonable driving distance, I think they're gonna go with the doctors.

[iemanja]

132. Now you want us to pay for doctors?

Who already receive cancellations of $40,000 in student loans for working in underserved, especially rural areas? Are you suggesting they won't have doctors if we don't give them a free ride? We manage to find doctors now. Blackmailing voters into paying for the loans of some of the richest people in America doesn't cut it. Doctors who make over $410,000 a year are in the upper 1%, yet you think they don't have enough? Doctors who make over $200,000 a year are in the upper 5%. https://dqydj.com/income-percentile-calculator/ Yet according to you, they need us to pay for their lifestyle. This is precisely why I made the argument I did. Paying for the rich is against any notion of fairness or egalitarianism.

I can see a program that means tests for loan forgiveness, but wealthy doctors aren't going to cut it. If you don't happen to see that amount of money as wealthy, you have no concept of the income distribution in this country. Many people struggle to pay for housing, yet you want them to subsidize the upper 5%-1%.

[Act_of_Reparation]

133. I just told you there is one pediatric cancer doctor for three counties in a remote region.

And your response is "pay him less".

I strongly suspect you are not arguing in good faith and see no reason to continue this conversation.

[gulliver]

78. Paying back student loans is part of the bargain

Obviously, you can change a bargain, but you don't do it stupidly. You bargain. What are students getting? What did they already get? What will they get? What will the people who work and who subsidize students get? Where does reciprocity fit in? Where does mutual gratitude and mutual respect fit in?

I would argue that sometimes you want to subsidize even middle- and upper-middle-income students if the bargain is good. It works just like anything in capitalism. Say there is a shortage of neurologists or dentists or nurses. Why not forgive students in those fields some of the cost of their education as an incentive?

Empathy is not the only reason to forgive loans, in other words. All the reasons should be used. And reasons not to forgive loans should also be considered.

I'm for free education ultimately, and I hope that's where it's headed. But that's not where it is now. And if we blow it and let the hotheads run away with this issue (or any issue), then we will get to our goal much more slowly, if at all.

[David__77]

84. It would by disproportionately paid for by the wealthiest quintile actually.

The chart is important to the discussion of distribution.

Old chart basic point applies. The benefits of forgiveness apparently would skew toward lower income groups compared with distribution of tax paid by income group.

https://www.brookings.edu/?simplechart=the-top-20-of-households-get-more-than-half-of-all-pre-tax-income-and-pay-an-even-larger-share-of-all-federal-taxes

[iemanja]

94. Is this a eulogy for the fairness of our current tax system?

Because it says nothing about student loans.

Most people in the lowest income groups don't have student loans because they have never had the opportunity to attend college.

[Johnny2X2X]

85. The rich have a great trick

Get the poor to hate on the upper middle class. People who took out large student loans are by and large not rich, the rich don't need student loans. Getting the people who have a half a slice of pizza to make enemies of the people with a full slice while the rich have the other 14-1/2 slices all for themselves is quite a sleight of hand.

[Celerity]

86. +10000000000000000

It is the age-old game, practised for thousands of years, but perfected by the British Empire (I was raised in west London, an area of extraordinary wealth and power forged by this), called 'let's have you and them fight whilst we sit back and gain power and wealth from your conflicts'.

[Johnny2X2X]

87. And I'm one of the people the op is talking about

I was the first person in my family to graduate college. My parents couldn't help me with a dime towards tuition or living expenses, I worked to make the rent while going to class full time. Got an engineering degree, it was worth all of the hard work, and allowed me to join the middle class. But I am strapped with an enormous amount of student loan debt. I am not looking for a handout, I just want better options to repay.

I am just living the life that most blue collar Americans used to live, decent home, income that allows retirement savings, modest car. But because that blue collar life has been snatched from most people by Conservative policies, they're looking for someone to blame, and the rich are all too happy to offer people like me up. I am not rich, I am just paying my bills and getting by like everyone should be able to do. Trust me, I went to college with a ton of rich kids, they aren't strapped with debt because it was all paid for. They didn't have to work during college, they just got their degrees and went to work for mommy and daddy's companies.

And because my work pays some tuition, I was able to earn my Masters without taking on much more debt. So yeah, I have an advanced degree, still can't afford my payments, guilty as charged. Just give me reasonable options for repayment and don't let a 3rd party make money off from it, that's all I ask.

[iemanja]

97. Funny, because people who earn above the median income

take out the most student loans, or rather that education they took loans out for their graduate degrees pay higher salaries. 60% of all loans are held by the upper 40% of incomes. The issue with Americans is that they can earn far in excess of the median income and still consider themselves middle class, which they aren't.

[Johnny2X2X]

102. Middle Class is defined as $52K to $156K

Then problem is America is that the median income is too low now and that has caused the middle class to get smaller.

Median income in the US for individuals in $45K, so the median is falling short of the middle class.

People at the upper middle class, $120-156K are not rich, that's still less than my dad made in the 80s and 90s adjusted for inflation when he was a GM diemaker. You make $125K a year, you're still barely getting ahead. People just accept less and less nowadays. The upper middle class are not the enemy.

People's solution can't be to pull more people out of the middle class with Student Loan payments, because if we're poor, so should you be too.

What is rich? Top 1%, that's almost $600K in yearly income in the US right now. I doubt those people owe student loans. Top 5% is $265K, I doubt those people owe student loans at that income level either. $150K a year is not rich, it's middle class.

[iemanja]

107. defined by whom?

$156k is in the top 8% of all incomes. 410,000 is in the top 1%.

Affluent Americans greatly underestimate their wealth relative to the rest of the nation.

https://dqydj.com/income-percentile-calculator/

[Johnny2X2X]

113. The problem is that only 8% make that

$156K is upper middle class right now, the fact only 8% of the country are enjoying that is THE PROBLEM!

Realize that adjusted for inflation, $156K was $70K in 1990. Basically any union auto worker in the country in 1990 was making what today is top 8%. The solution isn't to drag the upper middle class down, the solution is to make it bigger.

People have gone to school to realize the American Dream, something their parents took for granted they'd be able to afford simply by working full time. Don't snatch the dream away from those people, try to help make the dream available to many more people.

[iemanja]

116. The uber concentration of wealth at the top does indeed

determine why so many incomes are far lower. Nonetheless, living in the upper 8% is more privileged than 92% of the country. So why should the majority pay for the comfort of the few? We oppose tax breaks that bring about that kind of economic dynamic. Why should student loans be different?

Do you have a source for your numbers about inflation and auto worker pay?

When people took out loans, they did so under the expectation that they would have to pay them back. That said, canceling the first $15k of student loans would cover most of those borrowers, who typically pursued an undergraduate degree. It's the blanket forgiveness for large loans typically owed by those with upper incomes that I oppose.

Another option I would support is to means test student loan forgiveness.

[iemanja]

99. How do you define rich?

[leftstreet]

124. +1

[Politicub]

100. Cap forgiveness at the average amount for in-state tuition for a state school

This would be fair.

People have a choice in which schools to attend. I didn’t have the means for a private college, so I didn’t consider them as a possibility.

[Scrivener7]

105. This is a good idea. I'd be for that. An undergraduate degree.

You'd have to expand the state schools to make this work. In my state, they have become so competitive due to cost that most can't get in.

But expanding the state schools and starving the private schools a little would be a good thing too.

[Ms. Toad]

106. Thank you for documenting what I've been suggesting in these threads -

that forgiving loans beyond that required to cover tuition at a state university benefits those who least need it - those who chose to go into significant debt to further their career opportunities (either by attending a private school or by seeking 2nd, 3rd, etc. degrees).

We should not be taxing those who scrimped and saved, sacrificed their standard of living, or skipped college altogether to pay off the massive educational debt of those who made, and who have benefitted from, expensive educational choices.

(Speaking as someone with 3 degrees - one from a fancy private school, two from state universities. I was aware at the time, and continue to be aware, that my choice to go to a private school for my first degree was a luxury. No one, outside of my family, should be asked to subsidize that choice.)

[madville]

117. My question is what happens to future loans?

Say they forgive most of them today, what happens to loans taken out tomorrow? Will people take out additional and maybe larger loans with the expectation they will be forgiven at a later date?

[Alhena]

122. Yes, and what about parents who have a college fund for their kids? They'd be stupid to use it for

college now, since the expectation will be that a future president will try to score political points by canceling debt.

Except what if he doesn't? Kids will get stuck with loans.

We need predictability in laws so that people can plan accordingly. This just leaves it to the whim of the president to wait until an important election is coming up or whatever and cancel then. This is no way to run a country.

[asa4ever]

118. The problem with forgiving student debt is what about students starting college next year.

[Politicub]

121. Isn't this making the perfect the enemy of the good?

Because, in an ideal world, loans could be forgiven (up to the amount of the cost of attending an in-state, public institution for an undergraduate degree), AND future students would be entitled to tuition-free public college for undergrad. And, publicly funded community college for a trade or college prep should also be the policy of the US.

[iemanja]

126. Do you mean publicly funded education?

Because nothing is free.

Student loan forgiveness up to $15k would cover most everyone with a Bachelors or AA degree. Loans above that are held by people with graduate degrees, which is not in keeping with what you outline in your own post. Blanket student loan forgiveness above the $15k Biden has suggested would be paying for advanced degrees, and it would be tax payers who have never enjoyed such opportunities paying for those who make far more than themselves. It's not a just proposal.

We can imagine a "ideal world" where education at public universities is publicly funded. That's how many European countries operate. They also have rigorous exams in which only those who perform at the highest level can receive that education. (Sometimes students who don't make that level go to tuition charging private colleges and universities). Residents of those countries also pay around 50% of their income in taxes. Such systems also typically have universal health care. They are fine systems, but the kind of dramatic reform that is unlikely to pass congress in the US, especially in this current climate where equal rights for women and voting rights are being stripped away.

[asa4ever]

130. I am all for having free in-state public colleges and universities.

That is not going to happen all at once. If there is going to be some kind of student debt forgiveness now, shouldn't it continue until we have free in-state schools? There have to be limits on debt forgiveness although I am not sure how much and to whom it should apply. Actually, I would rather it was called government funded instead of free since it is being paid for.

[alphafemale]

120. "My Great Grandma died in child birth"

No one ever knew if the baby was a boy or a girl because it was buried inside her.

Modern childbirth advances and a woman going home to her other children with a healthy infant is a slap in the face to her suffering."

Ridiculous. But that is exactly what some of you sound like.

[iemanja]

125. Your comment

In no way engages with the data or my argument. Your point is a non-sequitur.