By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Trump administration is taking steps to end the Biden administration’s SAVE student loan forgiveness program, which provided lower monthly payments for over 7 million borrowers. This follows a settlement with Missouri, a state that sued to halt the plan, effectively eliminating it. The settlement also requires the Department of Education to notify Missouri 30 days before any future broad student debt relief, potentially hindering future forgiveness efforts. Critics argue this move will likely force more borrowers into default, exacerbating financial struggles amid rising living costs.
Read the original article here
Trump’s Billionaire Education Secretary Makes ‘Backroom Deal’ to Shaft Low-Income Borrowers: Amid a cost-of-living crisis, millions of low-income borrowers may now be forced to spend several hundred more dollars a month paying for student loans. It appears that a decision has been made that will drastically impact the financial well-being of a large swathe of the population, specifically those struggling with student loan debt. The law, as some say, is clear: you take out a loan, you pay it back. But it’s hard not to notice the irony when the very people making these pronouncements have benefitted from significant debt forgiveness themselves, potentially signaling a double standard.
This situation is made even more concerning when considering the current economic climate. With the cost of groceries, utilities, and healthcare rising, many families are already struggling to make ends meet. The move to increase student loan payments will only worsen the affordability crisis, potentially pushing millions into further debt and financial hardship. The reality is that for many borrowers, especially those without stable employment or significant assets, finding an extra few hundred dollars a month is simply not feasible.
The scale of this issue cannot be understated. We are not talking about a handful of individuals; this impacts potentially tens of millions of borrowers, many of whom are already behind on their payments. This administration appears ill-equipped to handle the consequences of mass enforcement against such a large population. Such an undertaking would likely depress consumer spending, limit job mobility, and constrict access to credit across the economy.
The assertion that “if you took out a loan, you must pay it back” seems like a simplistic slogan rather than a workable policy. Credit systems rely on repayment terms that reflect economic realities. When those terms are divorced from reality, noncompliance becomes widespread and understandable. This is not a matter of moral failing on the part of the borrowers, but rather, a failure of policy.
Killing affordable income-driven repayment plans won’t restore fiscal responsibility; it will accelerate the collapse of the repayment system itself. Once default becomes a normalized phenomenon, it will be incredibly difficult to correct the situation. Biden, when he attempted to provide relief to borrowers, was blocked by the Supreme Court. Now, executive power is seemingly unleashed when it comes to actions that negatively affect borrowers. This creates the perception that laws are optional and that power is purely political, which in turn leads borrowers to feel that repayment is optional too.
The individual at the heart of this issue, the Education Secretary, has a history that might make her motives suspect. Some say she comes across as someone lacking empathy and perhaps driven by ulterior motives. Her past, including her involvement with the WWE, raises questions about her judgment and priorities. It’s hard to ignore the potential conflict of interest when policies are made that seem to favor the wealthy at the expense of those with less.
This situation appears to be part of a broader strategy to keep low and middle-income individuals out of higher education. The historical context, such as the elimination of free college tuition in California, shows the long-term goals of those who believe that higher education should be reserved for the wealthy elite. The government-subsidized loan system, which was supposed to be a compromise, is now being dismantled further.
Specifically, the removal of the SAVE repayment plan, along with the phasing out of REPAYE, IBR, and PAYE plans, and the push towards standard repayment plans will create a major financial crisis for millions. The irony is that the person in charge of education is making decisions that are financially harmful to borrowers.
The Education Secretary also has a history of questionable statements, including when discussing AI, where she referred to “A1” instead of “artificial intelligence”. The sentiment is, it seems, that her lack of understanding is part of a larger pattern of incompetence.
The impact of these decisions is likely to be significant. The idea that people will find hundreds of dollars a month to pay back their loans, when they can barely pay for food or utilities, is ludicrous. It is possible to see this as destabilizing the nation on purpose. The intention, maybe, is to expand executive power and clamp down on dissent.
The situation is such that this person, in charge of education, is essentially the embodiment of greed, who could care less for those in need. It’s a sad state of affairs.
This isn’t just about money; it’s about a deliberate effort to restrict opportunities for those with fewer resources. It’s a way of keeping the poor, poor. Many feel this isn’t about education; it’s about control.
It’s natural to be angry about this. What happens when people just refuse to pay? And when they have no assets to take, and wages aren’t enough? This all favors the rich at the expense of the poor. This all keeps them in a cycle of debt.
The current situation is designed to cause mass default. The decision seems to be to manufacture mass default. There is no easy fix and no easy answer.
The potential impact will be felt across generations. Young people may never have the chance to buy a house, their goals limited by their inability to escape debt.
As for potential solutions, maybe exploring ways to allow people to eliminate their student loans through community service. But right now the affordable housing is a hoax.
Those who have student loans are not sure about where they are going and if they will ever have the ability to pay them off. People in the administration aren’t helping. It’s a lose-lose situation.
The fact is that the current administration is in this for themselves.