Two Sides of the Debate on Student Debt Forgiveness

Regarding Allysia Finley’s “How the Student-Loan Payment Pause Hurt Borrowers” (Life Science, Aug. 21): Student-loan interest rates have hovered around 6%, which is usurious. The pause made up some of the difference. Three years at 6% plus three years at 0% equals about 3% for six years, quite reasonable.

Why forgive loans? Dropping the rate across the board to 3% would create an entirely different dynamic for most borrowers. Don’t forget that these loans enabled equal-opportunity higher education, a great investment that will pay dividends for decades.

Don Cook

Santa Barbara, Calif.

As a retired school counselor who helped many students access higher education, I am disappointed that the system is so broken.

At every financial-aid program held at our high school, we emphasized that there are three ways to pay for college: out of past income (savings), current income or future income (loans). This approach seems to have fallen on deaf ears as families seem to care more about the name of the college than the cost or quality of the education.

I blame colleges. They keep increasing the cost of tuition, knowing that price doesn’t affect the applicant pool. The federal government keeps offering more bailout programs for graduates, even for those with masters degrees, so cost is no deterrent.

Under President Clinton, the amount that students and parents could borrow increased. The price of college rose much faster than inflation. President Obama took the lending program from banks and imbedded it in the government. Colleges again raised prices. Add in the student-loan payment pause and the crisis has worsened.

Linda Sturm

Venice, Fla.