I agree that student loan forgiveness can *feel* unfair, but I have a hard time convincing myself that it *is* unfair. If I owe both of my children equal love, care, etc., then other things being equal it would be unfair of me to love and care for one more than the other. For both of my children have an equal amount of claim to my parental attention to them, which is a limited resource. But student loan forgiveness strikes me as very different. Adults who have paid off their student loans, unlike my hypothetical child who is tragically loved less, have nothing to lose when other debt-payers receive some sort of relief. Indeed, if the economic impact argument is on the right track, they stand to gain, to some degree. Adults who were able to avoid student loans because they went to a cheaper school likewise have nothing to lose, but potentially something to gain. There's a counterfactual sense in which had they known they'd be getting $10,000 worth of debt written off, they might've chosen differently, I suppose. But is this backwards-looking counterfactual an important consideration? I take it unfairness intuitions are grounded in the idea that people that are relevantly similar should be treated relevantly similarly. But in this case it strikes me as implausible to think adults with and without student loan burdens are relevantly similar. "I would've also liked to receive $10,000" is not a strong reason to think something unfair has occurred. If I fought and won the battle of cancer, it's not unfair that there's now this breakthrough procedure that will cure other people's cancer in a low-cost, pain-free manner. Or, if I spent big bucks on this new treatment that cured my cancer, it isn't unfair, it seems to me, now that the patent of the treatment has expired, making it much more affordable. In both cases, once again, I have nothing to lose.
By forgiving the loans of generation X, might you be encouraging generation Y to take out bigger loans than is wise, because they predict that they too will be forgiven? Isn't that a danger?
Also, future borrowers will refrain from paying off their loans, and hence refrain from prudential and responsible behavior, because they don't want to be the next poor sap who diligently paid off their loan when they could have just waited to have it forgiven.
Generally, intervening to negate the advantages acquired by the responsible over the not-quite-so-responsible will, over time, remove societal incentives towards responsible behavior.
I agree that student loan forgiveness can *feel* unfair, but I have a hard time convincing myself that it *is* unfair. If I owe both of my children equal love, care, etc., then other things being equal it would be unfair of me to love and care for one more than the other. For both of my children have an equal amount of claim to my parental attention to them, which is a limited resource. But student loan forgiveness strikes me as very different. Adults who have paid off their student loans, unlike my hypothetical child who is tragically loved less, have nothing to lose when other debt-payers receive some sort of relief. Indeed, if the economic impact argument is on the right track, they stand to gain, to some degree. Adults who were able to avoid student loans because they went to a cheaper school likewise have nothing to lose, but potentially something to gain. There's a counterfactual sense in which had they known they'd be getting $10,000 worth of debt written off, they might've chosen differently, I suppose. But is this backwards-looking counterfactual an important consideration? I take it unfairness intuitions are grounded in the idea that people that are relevantly similar should be treated relevantly similarly. But in this case it strikes me as implausible to think adults with and without student loan burdens are relevantly similar. "I would've also liked to receive $10,000" is not a strong reason to think something unfair has occurred. If I fought and won the battle of cancer, it's not unfair that there's now this breakthrough procedure that will cure other people's cancer in a low-cost, pain-free manner. Or, if I spent big bucks on this new treatment that cured my cancer, it isn't unfair, it seems to me, now that the patent of the treatment has expired, making it much more affordable. In both cases, once again, I have nothing to lose.
Full disclosure: I have no student loan debt.
By forgiving the loans of generation X, might you be encouraging generation Y to take out bigger loans than is wise, because they predict that they too will be forgiven? Isn't that a danger?
Also, future borrowers will refrain from paying off their loans, and hence refrain from prudential and responsible behavior, because they don't want to be the next poor sap who diligently paid off their loan when they could have just waited to have it forgiven.
Generally, intervening to negate the advantages acquired by the responsible over the not-quite-so-responsible will, over time, remove societal incentives towards responsible behavior.