Why student loan forgiveness sparks anger: A philosopher, attorney general, sociologist and religious thought expert weigh in

12 comments

1. It took Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin around 30 years to pay off his $100,000 student loan balance. He told CNBC that he wonders why other borrowers should just get their debt wiped away and has battled President Joe Biden’s efforts to cancel the loans.

   The topic of student loan forgiveness sparks heated feelings about fairness, personal responsibility and economic soundness. The Biden administration’s most recent student loan forgiveness proposal garnered a record number of public comments, with [over 148,000 people sharing their opinion](https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/17/2024-07726/student-debt-relief-for-the-william-d-ford-federal-direct-loan-program-direct-loans-the-federal).

   When Marlon Fox, a chiropractor in North Charleston, South Carolina, got his [$119,500 student debt forgiven last year](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/16/he-got-his-student-debt-forgiven-and-then-a-56801-refund.html), he didn’t tell many people his story. He lives in a mostly Republican area where there is [deep skepticism toward forgiving the debt ](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/01/11/gop-presidential-candidates-all-oppose-student-loan-relief-.html)of those who’ve benefited from higher education.

   “They say, ‘Hey, you got your school loans paid off? That’s unfair,’” Fox told CNBC last year.

   Why is the subject of student loan forgiveness so fraught? CNBC asked a range of different experts for their thoughts.

   More: [https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/16/why-student-loan-forgiveness-sparks-anger.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/06/16/why-student-loan-forgiveness-sparks-anger.html)

2. A lot of Americans believe in the myth of pre-tax income. They think God first decides how much money each person gets and then the government decides who to tax and how much to tax them. Of course, this is false. Without the government, there would be no income for anyone, there would be violence and anarchy. Pre-tax income is a myth.

   These Americans will argue against help for the poorest people by saying “I live within my means”. When in reality, high income people are stealing more from society than anyone else. It’s really that simple.

3. Side A would say, help out poor folks who have made poor financial decisions in the past, so they can re-integrate in society and contribute more.

   Side B would say, rewarding bad financial decisions, will only lead to more bad financial decisions.

4. If there was surpluses, it would be one thing. But, with deficits at 6-7% of GDP, it is a nicety we can’t afford, any more than we can afford things like Ukraine etc.

   Where I would spend the money is on primary and secondary education. I see a greater need there. Often we hear that the government needs to be run like a business. Well, no business will do well if they don’t utilize their human resources effectively.

   I see a payback on investing in primary and secondary education. I don’t see that payback elsewhere.

5. Usury should be illegal. Structure all loans without usurious rates. I paid nearly one million dollars for my $350k home. Not once over decades did the useless loan sharks lift a finger to help with anything.

6. I worked as a clerk in a grocery store to pay for my school while I was attending. I saw my friends take out loans and hangout at parties and sports games while I was working. Most still whining about their loans. These loans should have just went to 0% and made them pay the money back. Also the tuition is out of control, state schools should be way cheaper.

7. It’s lizard brain stuff. You’re seeing somebody get something you didn’t get. Animals get angry when that happens. Hell I think you can get *bacteria* to do it.

   You counter stuff like this with critical thinking and media literacy. Which is why teaching those things is so controversial.

8. Pay your own debts.

9. Because most people pay for college somehow and student loans is just one way – and arguably the easiest experience. You were given money to focus on school.

   Forgiving loans selectively favors borrowers over those who spent 5-6 years working and earning their degrees and paid for it by starting their career later in the form of years of missed earnings. It selectively favors borrowers over those who served in the military to get their college paid for. Forgiving loans selectively favors borrowers who paid the minimum or who have not made payments over those who sacrificed to clear their debt more aggressively. Most of those borrowers some want to forgive have reaped substantial benefits over non-borrowers in return for taking those loans.

   Stating the problem as “loans were predatory” is insufficient – the problem could more defensibly be stated as “college is important and good for society and should not have been so expensive”. In the latter case a more equitable solution would be to argue that there should have been aid, and to offer it to all college graduates retroactively based on some calculation of need and merit to give all graduates what we think they should have gotten, not just money for borrowers to pay off their loans. Then arrange appropriate aid for current and future students.

   Of course, “subsidized college is good for society and therefore a worthwhile spend” is a case that needs to be won at a time when such an investment would be stimulative while we are fighting inflation, running high deficits, and seeing countries around the world move away from our currency.

   Also, if we do widescale student loan forgiveness, why wouldn’t anyone considering how to pay for college in 2025 not factor that in. Why wouldn’t they expect their loans to be forgiven? There’s no moral reasoning for why this should be a one-time amnesty – any reasonable person would forget about any option other than borrowing all they could.

10. So when people say “well I paid mine off I suffered for 30 years to pay it off it’s not fair” I say, “when a new treatment for cancer comes out do you think the dead folks would be angry or happy for the people getting the new treatment”. You’d think people would be glad that others aren’t having to suffer the way they did. The system is broken, student loan forgiveness is a temporary treatment until we can find a cure.  

    This is classic loan restructuring not that different from when people got their loans fixed up after the 2008 financial crisis. PPP loan forgiveness. It’s a normal function in a debt based financial system. 

    Edit: I don’t need student loan forgiveness, but that doesn’t stop me from recognizing that it’s a broken system

11. Why should people who did *not* go to college and/or are part of the low/lower socioeconomic class carry the burden of predominately White middle class kids who don’t want to pay their debts?

    Strike the interest or something, sure, but making it everyone else’s burden even if they’re more disadvantaged than the borrowers is patently fuckin absurd.

12. Because people don’t just take out loans for tuition. These loans are unsecured debt. People use them for living expenses. And study abroad programs. And professional baritone saxophones. And choosing to go away to college for the fun party experience rather than commuting to save money. People who didn’t make these decisions have every right to be angry. I say this as a Democrat who continues to support the party. If these loans are forgiven they still get to keep the saxophones. And the memories of Prague.