Editor:
I read the front page article about student loan forgiveness being proposed by legislators and I can only hope it go down in flames.
This is yet another welfare plan; a person makes a conscious decision and agrees to pay a disclosed tuition to the school of their choosing.
Why is it afterward, having buyer’s remorse and instead of paying what they voluntarily agreed to, they want others to cover their debt under the premise they believe their moral choice of occupation deems their job more important so society should pay for it.
What about a doctor? They spend how much to go through school? Do they have debt forgiven? How about the assembly line worker who put the brakes on your car? How about the airline mechanic or pilot? How about the phone company employee? They serve the public. When does it end?
College is voluntary
Costs are disclosed before attending; take responsibility for what you agreed to and pay it yourself. Taxpayers already contribute to almost all colleges, which is supposed to keep tuition lower. Why should taxpayers also be on the hook for an individual’s debt? This is no different than me asking taxpayers to pay off my mortgage to my farm.
It is great that people want to farm but a college degree is not required. Different colleges charge different amounts; shop around and move if required to keep debt down.
If this passes, it will hurt far more than it helps. Why? Because if colleges know and promote to prospective students that after 10 years of payments debt is forgiven, what do you think the college will charge for tuition, less or more? Why would a student care what the cost is after 10 years, as it is irrelevant?
If a law must be passed, pass one that states colleges discuss what the estimated debt load and payments would be for prospective students when enrolling, along with expected wages once finished.
Scott Tucker
Perrysville, Ohio
