Wednesday, September 14, 2011
A Student Loan Stimulus?
It’s a nifty idea, even though it’s politically DOA. Divided among 1100 community colleges, it works out to between four and five million each. That’s certainly helpful -- no argument there -- but it’s not enough to add much capacity. Even a smallish, not terribly cutting edge classroom building will run at least ten million. It would help tremendously with certain kinds of deferred maintenance, but that tends to be too inconspicuous to hold much political appeal. And the stimulus would take an awfully long time to work through the system. “Shovel-ready” is a myth; we don’t get to shovel-readiness unless and until we’re serious, at which point the decision has already been made. First there’s the environmental impact, the ADA compliance issues, the retrofitting, the bid process, yadda yadda yadda. In other words, it’s a helpful long-term idea, but the short term payoff isn’t there politically or economically.
The helpful folks on Twitter pointed out a much better idea: use the money to forgive interest on student loans. (And I say this as someone whose loans are paid off.)
The student loan stimulus would do a world of good for people in their twenties and thirties, who are struggling badly as a group at exactly the times when the economy is counting on them to start both careers and families. Reducing their monthly (and total) loan payments would give them more spending money immediately. And unlike a one-shot tax refund, the reduction in loan payments would be permanent, so the money would be more likely to go into increasing aggregate demand. (One-shot windfalls are likelier to be saved.) Without demand, hiring just isn’t gonna happen.
Although we usually hear about mortgage debt -- understandably -- student loan debt is uniquely insidious. Unlike most consumer debt, it cannot be discharged in bankruptcy. Unlike mortgage debt, there’s really no collateral to sell if needed. (You can’t really sell your degree and get your money back.) If you dropped out of college before finishing, you have the worst of both worlds: loan payments and not even a degree to show for them. Forgiving the interest would be an act of mercy for the folks in this category, and there’s no shortage of them.
One could object that the bulk of the benefit from this program would accrue to Gens X and Y, but since their tuitions were dramatically higher than their predecessors’, even after inflation, this really just levels the field a bit. And given the reality of who takes out loans, it’s not immediately obvious that this would be regressive. If anything, the folks it would be likeliest to help would be the strivers who are working their way up. (The wealthy didn’t take out student loans.)
President Obama has mentioned wanting to increase the percentage of Americans with post-secondary education. If the interest forgiveness were projected forward as well as backward, that would make post-secondary education a lot more accessible even in the face of state cuts. And if the loans could be used for vocational training programs as well as traditional degrees, the payoff over time could be really dramatic.
Or we could throw a few billion more at banks and wars. That always works.
No. Back to basics. Demand creates jobs. A one-off bonus for someone already wealthy will just be added to the pile. A sustained hundred dollar a month improvement for someone making thirty thousand a year will get spent, probably quickly. This is a remarkably easy way to get money circulating quickly, and to give some struggling people some much-needed breathing room. Even better, it would encourage more people to get post-secondary education, leading to a higher productivity payoff over time.
President Obama, given the choice, I’ll forsake the construction money in favor of forgiving student loan interest, and I don’t even have any loans myself anymore. It’s the right thing to do. Waddaya say?
But, it won't happen. Tea partiers and their current Republican dupes are much too hostile to education.
Furthermore, I would not limit that idea just to CCs. Although I'll take your word that your CC's alumni have 5 million in accumulated interest, sorting that out from post-transfer loans would be a nightmare. Treat that as separate from the construction idea.
I don't buy your assertion that no one has any idea how to build an ADA compliant classroom or renovate an existing one without 5 years of public hearings. This isn't a highway going through your neighborhood. The utterly incompetent states (mine, R government) that are just now starting to spend stimulus money should not keep funds away from states or localities that know what they are doing. We have a strategic plan just waiting to go to an architect and engineer and out to bid in less than a year.
Why not just make it a targeted program? Why not target allied health fields (among the few actually growing in this economy) and bolster loan repayment programs for nurses and expand them to others?
The fact that the workers you'd be putting money in the pockets of are disproportionately female may also add to the productive returns you get, unless we think that kind of thing only applies to third world countries and microfinance.
Students from wealthy families are able to attend college tax-free, as college savings are not taxed. Students who take out loans have to pay taxes on the money used to repay those loans. The end result is a regressive tax forced on individuals based on their parents' actions.
This reflects the DOL and federal government’s focus on helping workers that "need it most" which in the past has been the poor, the illiterate, those who have low paying jobs and want to move into higher paying ones in the same field (incumbent workers). The feds and DOL don’t know what to do with the well educated unemployed because until recently, it wasn’t that much of a problem. The DOL in particular struggles with programs in colleges because they take so long - DOL likes programs that are finished in 6 months or less (and they have a point – my former Uni required more than 50 semester units of gen ed – a year and a half of toss away classes taught by poorly compensated adjuncts so that the university could make a buck).
At the end of the day, the assumption is that college educated people don't need more help and at a certain level, that's true. While living with your parents in your early 20's might not be every person's dream, it's a hell of a lot better than living on the street – and for those that worked in construction at the turn of this century, things now are very stark.
As with many of the suggestions out their to "fix" the economy this falls in line with the idea that there's a whole group of poor people out there wanting to work but who can't because construction is in a rut. The noble poor who deserve our help! It ignores the basic structural problems inherent in wealth concentration and low taxation and the corrupting influence of infinite contributory capacity to political campaigns on the part of corporations. It also ignores the reality that the middle class is not only in trouble but shrinking by the day. 15% of Americans now live in poverty. 22% of kids are growing up poor. The rich who argue to preserve their tax breaks while our safety net programs are shredded and our cops get laid off should be ashamed of themselves.
"First there’s the environmental impact, the ADA compliance issues, the retrofitting, the bid process, yadda yadda yadda."
But for the bureaucratic nonsense, we could build that building in half the time at a third of the cost. Instead, we've made it completely unaffordable, so we'll just do without. And without the jobs.
I generally agree with your point about forgiving student loan interest, but am unclear on why you think that would not be "throwing a few more billion at the banks," an option you seem to otherwise oppose. The banks, after all, will receive the money from the government to take the students off the hook, will they not?
Also, Cody Custis makes a very sound point that very few people appreciate. Why isn't all college tuition tax deductible, I wonder? Education is so important to our society that we have completely exempted from income taxes billions upon billions of dollars in the Harvard and Yale endowments. How about a real education tax break for the rest of us (not all the piddling credits and crap that's in the tax code now)?
What would it take for Apple to open such a plant in the USA? Do they even consider such a step any more? Why not?
For us this has always been a core value. In fact, if you look very closely, you will find embedded in our company logo the words “siyafunda siyakhula” – meaning “we are learning, we are growing”.
First of all i would like to thank you for the great and informative entry. I have to admit that I have never heard about
this information I have noticed many new facts for me. Thanks a lot for sharing this useful and attractive information and
I will be waiting for other interesting posts from you in the nearest future. Keep it up.
Wow! Thank you! I always wanted to write in my site something like that. Can I take part of your post to my blog?
I found it very interesting and enjoyed reading all of it...keeps it up, lovely job.