Also hold the lenders accountable for accurate statements and interest and fees that are attached to these loans (without the knowledge of the student) making the loans impossible to repay. Most lenders or student loan service providers cannot provide an accurate accounting of all of the interest and fees that accumulate over time increasing the original loan balance 100x - impossible to repay on a typical salary. And because of these hidden fees, students cannot verify the accuracy of the total amount owed.
They need to regulate the student lenders like they do conventional banks and credit cards, some people owe twice as much now than the original principal, after paying on the loan for twenty plus years, because they defaulted and were forced to refinance and pay huge fees and finance charges. Some borrowers could benefit if the ftc audited accounts and removed all penalties and fees for people with loans over 10 years old.
While the concept of empowering the free market to regulate education through private lenders sounds pragmatic at first glance, it overlooks several critical aspects that could ultimately undermine both the quality of education and the equity of access to it. The proposal to shift decision-making power to lenders, particularly when it comes to determining the “viability” of degrees, risks creating a system where education is driven solely by financial returns rather than the broader, more nuanced purpose of fostering intellectual, social, and emotional development. Education is not merely a transaction for future earning potential, but a fundamental tool for personal growth, societal advancement, and the cultivation of critical thinking skills.
By tying the viability of degrees solely to financial outcomes, we risk narrowing educational options to fields that are perceived as the most financially lucrative—often sidelining important disciplines like the arts, humanities, and social sciences. These fields may not promise immediate financial gain but are essential for nurturing well-rounded individuals, fostering creativity, and tackling complex global issues. What we must understand is that a healthy, functioning society requires more than just workers in high-paying fields; it requires thoughtful, empathetic citizens who are capable of deep critical thinking and ethical decision-making.
Furthermore, the suggestion of taking away tax-exempt status from educational institutions, particularly colleges and universities, simplifies a much more intricate issue. Many of these institutions provide crucial public goods beyond just education. They engage in significant research that advances science, medicine, technology, and social progress. Their contributions to society are often beyond monetary measurements. Stripping them of their tax-exempt status could reduce their ability to fund these critical research initiatives and further inflate tuition costs, making education even less accessible for many.
The proposal to eliminate certain departments, like Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs, fails to recognize the importance of fostering inclusivity and representation in education. These programs are vital to ensuring that all students, regardless of their background, have a chance to thrive in an environment where their experiences and identities are acknowledged. DEI initiatives help address systemic inequalities that persist in society, ensuring that higher education becomes a space where all individuals can contribute to the collective intellectual advancement of humanity.
Ultimately, the goal should not be to dismantle or privatize education to the point where it becomes an exclusive, profit-driven enterprise, but to create a system that fosters lifelong learning, inclusive opportunities, and a broad range of intellectual pursuits. A free market approach, without checks and balances, could result in educational outcomes that prioritize wealth over wisdom, and access to learning that is limited to those who can afford it. Instead, we should be focused on reforming education to make it more accessible, affordable, and aligned with the needs of both individuals and society at large.