To forgive or not to forgive? The student debt crisis has been a notable talking point leading up to the 2020 election. It is a bipartisan agreement that massive student debt is an issue (a $1 trillion issue), but opposing sides propose different solutions for the complicated issue. Executive Director of Build the Wave, Nate Lerner, and advisory board member of Women for Trump, Danielle D’Souza Gill, visit Bold TV to debate how the government should deal with student loan debt.
To arrive at a solution, one must determine how they see the problem. Many believe $1 trillion in debt is too massive to be settled without aid from the government. Supporters say that paying off student debt would free a generation to finally achieve milestones of adulthood. This would result in an economic boom. On the other side, student debt forgiveness is not worth taxing hardworking, third-party citizens and should be addressed by expanding economic opportunity. Ultimately, paying off debt for one generation will only generate a larger problem for the next generation: a higher price tag on a college education. While some see the college price as a key talking point in the debate, the other view the two issues as separate and not equal.
Many fear of a shrinking middle class, but the question is whether to start afresh or stay the course. One side of the argument pushes the government to take a hands-off approach. They believe the government shouldn’t forgive debt but offer opportunities to make money. However, the other side does not abhor creating new jobs but wants the government to take the driver’s seat. In this scenario, the government offers recent graduates a new beginning without the debt hurdle. Their definitions of creating jobs are inherently different, but who will the public and, more importantly, lawmakers support? Or will a new idea arrive? In the marketplace of ideas is where solutions arise, so check out the conversation.