Economist Daniel Altman acknowledges that the student loan industry in the United States is a disaster. The obvious solution of government intervention by wa…
No. The whole system needs restructuring. Selling your future or putting a
price tag on your future career sounds pretty grim to me. And there are
both moral and practical problems with that position. I suspect that the
way forward is to reevaluate the way we view education. It shouldn’t just
be a product. Sweden, Scotland, Finland, Norway and other countries have
fine educational systems without overflowing students with debt. What they
did can be done almost everywhere. But there’s no political will.
I do not think this is a good idea. “Sell[ing] Your Future” sounds a bit
like slavery to me.
Who the hell is this clown of the earth? What a disgusting idea. The state
should provide education, paid for by TAXES. It is an investment in the
future of any civilized country. We should tax the rich, not sell the youth
into indentured servitude.
Wouldn’t investors attempt to influence the people they’ve invested in?
This could go wrong on so many levels
Swamping every student with debt by selling them overpriced and frankly,
largely worthless avenues of education, is just another way of ensuring a
lifetime of financial servitude for the masses. It’s a way to control you.
Here’s a better idea. Forget student loans altogether and go get a trade
that’s in demand instead. A financially wise plumber or industrial welder
can wind up with more assets in his lifetime than a general practitioner
doctor will have.
oh, so bailing out students would create moral ambiguity?
good thing banks are not students, right?
I can’t believe what I just heard come out of his mouth. This is
disgusting. Education shlould be free!
Explain to me how this WOULDN’T exploit students? Someone who is heavily
invested in a student isn’t going to take kindly to them changing their
major from corporate law to poetry, and would easily be able to hold the
threat of divestment (and of course future crippling student loans now that
said investor has sold his or her shares) over the student’s head. So, in
reality, the principle investor is able to impose his or her will on the
student in order to protect his or her own monetary interests.
Of course, no matter that the student rather be a poor poet and live
frugally but happy, it is in the investors’ best interests that the student
end up with a job that pays very well, regardless of how the student might
feel about having said job.
Would these investors also get a share of any income that student made
outside of their profession? So if a lawyer bought real-estate and had a
second source of income would they get a cut of that? What if that student
files taxes with their spouse would they take a percentage of both of their
income? This idea seems extremely flawed.
What happened to big think? Just loads of American right-wing rhetoric.
This like arguing a new form indentured labour.
I don’t like the idea of people betting on my future for their own profit.
I don’t like the idea of people earning money because I was born to a lower
class and have to borrow my money from their massive stockpile at interest.
I believe in human rights. Water, food, shelter, mentorship– if you don’t
have them, come to me and I will try to provide– if I don’t have them, I
guess I’m not worth being alive according to economists.
Ideally the US should have college paid for through taxes so anyone can go
to college. However, given that we don’t have that this seems like a better
alternative to getting loans. People in the comments relate it to slavery,
but both ways (loaning and investing) you are going to have to pay off the
money you own for a long time. Investing in a person’s future is just the
better of the two options.
I would like to propose that you do it like they do in Sweden.
Education is free (while you can enter a private university, there aren’t
very many of those and they who want to do so normally enters a university
in another country).
The goverment gives some money to everyone who is studying, not enough to
live on unless you’re living with your parents but it’s a decent amount.
And if you’re living on your own you can take a loan from the goverment
which has a very low interest and unless you find a job I think you don’t
have to start paying it off for like 5 years after you graduate (so you
have a chance to get a job even in bad times).
If school was free industry would plummet because nobody would work in a
factory, or at McDonald’s, or any of the conveniences that people use every
day, except for the people that had kids at 16.
How about,making the education free,did you think about it.
These “ideas” of yours are disgusting,always for profit of those who have
it (the money)
so its ok to bail out banks that demolish the world economy, but we
shouldn’t dare to bail out students seeking an education to be contributing
members of the work force. thanks economists. what wretched scum
damn capitalism -.-
I’d rather pay off a set sum then whoring myself out idefinitly.
How about we make make the education not so absurdly expensice? Other
countries in the word seem to do it fine, even ones that have lower GDP and
higher social expenses.
By making loans, doesn’t it mean we are “selling our future” already?
FYI: You’re future has already been sold. Its called Taxes and registering
with Selective Service. Oh, and then there is this thing called…a
We need to stop paying for people who don’t contribute and invest in our
education like china. Think about how much better we would be if every
student could go to any college paid for with our tax dollars.
this is [C] all over again.
Umm.. Fuck that that’s slavery