Unintended Consequences of Obama’s Student Loan Policies

So this week, President Obama’s populist, class-warring, shut-out-the-legislature, ignore-the-long-term-consequences romp through every corner of life turned to the education sector.

His new policies on student loans include greater access to both payment reductions and loan forgiveness.

And, needless to say, his Rose Garden speech oozed election year politics.

As the Boston Herald put it: “This is nothing more than politics as official policy … the president’s shout-out to U.S. Rep. John Tierney, a vulnerable Democrat, at yesterday’s White House ceremony was just one of the clues.”

To be clear, student debt has become a huge problem that demands attention. Alongside other challenges, such as finding a decent job in a stagnant economy, student borrowers face daunting payment burdens that they’re failing to meet at record rates.

But the problem requires more than just a political instinct to bail out a wide swath of the voting public.

In a better world, policymakers would take a cold, hard look at the effects of federally-funded student loan programs, including the good and the bad. Here are a few such observations that you’re unlikely to hear from your president:

1)  Student loans are a fiscal time bomb, notwithstanding the government’s ridiculously flawed cost estimates, which Obama chose not to update despite this week’s policy changes. Official cost estimates ignore the near certainty of continued bailouts, while relying on shoddy accounting practices that you wouldn’t get away with in the private sector. In an editorial published after Obama’s latest announcements, the Wall Street Journal wrote:

Democrats claim to care about inequality, but kids who don’t go to college are in even worse economic shape than college kids, with even higher unemployment rates. Yet when the cost of defaults and debt forgiveness finally comes due, it will be paid by all taxpayers, including those who didn’t go to college. So the townies with jobs will end up paying more in taxes to give former college kids and grad students a break on their student debt.

2)  Skyrocketing college tuition costs are explained partly by extensive public subsidies to higher education, including past enhancements to federal student loan programs that all but eliminated private lenders. Ample government support allows universities the kind of pricing power that other industries only dream of. Obama characteristically framed his preferred policies as a choice between “lower tax bills for millionaires or lower student loan bills for the middle class.” To see the absurdity in this bit of rhetoric, you only need to look up the generous incomes and perks enjoyed by administrators and senior faculty at your local university. Arnold Kling put it this way:

The right way to think about student loans is that they are a gift from taxpayers to the higher education industry, both non-profit and for-profit. Most of the benefit goes to those who work in that industry, not to students. Most of the risk is borne by students and taxpayers, not by those who work in the industry.

3)  Public support for higher education helps to create unnecessary barriers in many fields where advanced degrees are now required credentials. Economics – a frequent topic for this blog – is just one example of a profession where “entry” requires indoctrination in methods that are useless if your goal is to actually understand your subject (rather than maximizing your publication count). Neal McCluskey argues that “cheap college has almost certainly fueled credential inflation, not major increases in knowledge or skills.”

4)  McCluskey’s position is supported by a recent study showing that borrowing for graduate school explains much of the increase in student loan issuance since 2004. The WSJ attributes the surge in graduate school loans partly to “an open spigot of government credit,” while quoting the study’s author, Jason Delisle:

Graduate schools have essentially found a way to capture more of someone’s future income and future spending than what would probably occur if we had some sort of underwriting standards and loan limits.

5)  Data shows that substantial portions of student loan proceeds are used for rent, bills and lifestyle expenses for borrowers with questionable ability to meet repayment obligations. Some of these “students” appear to have little intention of actually putting in the class and study time to obtain a degree. Again from the WSJ: “Even when schools suspect students are over-borrowing, they are restricted by federal law and Education Department policy from denying funds.”

6)  Moreover, reckless decisions about how much to borrow are not only enabled but encouraged by government policies. Back to McCluskey:

In the name of helping them, federal politicians, and many other people, massively oversell higher education to the detriment of students. Perhaps as much as half of people who enter college don’t finisha third of people with a bachelor’s degree are in jobs not requiring the credential [and]; underemployment is even worse for graduate-degree holders…

7)  Special provisions for public sector employees, who can achieve loan forgiveness after only 10 repayment years compared to 20 for those in the private sector, are arguably the most heinous of all student loan policies. They are the political equivalent of a flagrant foul on the producing classes. Those who choose to put their efforts to the test of the market are penalized, to the benefit of public “servants” who live comfortably off the taxpayer without any accountability to the market. Such public sector perks can only be explained by the hubris, sense of entitlement and government-run-amok cronyism of the political class.

. . .

Now, none of our observations and editorial comments are meant to deny that there are many student loan success stories.

We’ve deliberately focused on the risks of federally-funded student loan programs, as these are too often swept under the carpet.

Problems with student loan programs are deep-rooted – thanks mostly to the government’s domination of the market – and were only worsened by Obama’s actions this week.

Bookmark and Share
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Unintended Consequences of Obama’s Student Loan Policies

  1. Jeff says:

    High School Graduates, go to college, graduate and find no job or do find a job but with tiny pay and own major for college debt.
    Take confidence in your gov incompetence to solve the falling US currency, economy woes and national debt and just stay home with your parents and work any job for 1 year and take all your pay and buy gold and silver. The honest economist says the US Currency\Economy is doom to fail between 2014 and 2020. If you own gold and silver you can sell it when the stock market falls and buy a house, car, college, etc.

  2. Jeff says:

    After you graduate from high school and say you work for a year and saved for a year and bought 400 Silver Eagle one ounce coins. This would roughly cost you $9600. It is estimated when the US currency falls and the economy falls and the stock market falls and there is a run for gold and silver, it may go as high sometime before the year 202o is $50,000 for Gold Eagle once ounce coin and Silver Eagle once ounce coint 1/16 of gold or $3125 per ounce. So now Silver only goes $500 per ounce times 400, you know have $200,000 and chances are you will more likely do better than that.

  3. Jeff says:

    Or course if the US currency falls and the economy falls, there will be massive unemployment and all prices of everything else will fall too. Now just imagine you are you are a young person with $200,000 in the bank. It very like you will buy a bank own property of excellent quality for $20,000. During the great depession with the Model T was new it sold $1000, but when it was sold across the country in production is sold for $350. And after the great depression in the 1930s is was advertises to be sold at dealerships NEW for $15. Problem was at the time no one had $15, because most were unemployed.

  4. Jeff says:

    Jim Sinclair: Gold Will be $50,000 per Ounce, Gold Confiscation, Dollar Gets Hammered and More .


  5. Jeff says:

    FYI: I believe most of the people in society are good and intelligent. I also believe this about companies too. So I do not see a future of a out of control crazy mad max society occuring. I do believe different government, different economies all go through up and down cycles and the up and coming one will be the same. If you plan now, you will be succesful.

Comments are closed.