Contact us
CALL US NOW 1-888-GOLD-160

Student Loans: Another Government-Created Crisis

  by    0   0

There is more talk of student loan forgiveness. Supporters of these schemes argue that the whole system is inherently unfair, although they rarely talk about who would pay for student loan forgiveness. They also seem oblivious to the fact that the federal government created this problem to begin with.

The following article was originally published by the Mises Institute. The opinions expressed are the authors and don’t necessarily reflect those of SchiffGold or Peter Schiff.

The origins of the federal student loan program are well documented and follow a similar trajectory to most government subsidy programs in American history. Each previous government subsidy program has had a history of mismanagement, inefficiency, backward incentives, and inflationary pressure via the creation and distribution of new dollars in exchange for goods and services at rates below their market value.

The federal takeover of student loans is a subsidy because it sells below market value the interest rate, the lending standards, and the repayment terms of this specific type of loan. These categories were exacerbated during the emergency response to the pandemic beginning in early 2020: interest rates on federal student loans were reduced to 0 percent, required payments were temporarily suspended, and now there is confusion about when, if ever, interest payments will resume or whether the government will write off these debts altogether.

The change in the payment terms has also created direct incentives for borrowers to halt payments on their student loan debts even if they have the means to pay. With debts at negative real interest rates (and the hope that it may be forgiven in the future) and the option to hold wealth in savings accounts or employ it in other more profitable uses, borrowers have little reason to pay off their debts.

The Biden administration’s actions to date have contributed to inflation and backward incentives for borrowers. If this administration is to right the ship, they will need to speak clearly on the future of federal student loan debts. They should warn the borrowers that payments will resume on August 31, 2022, and that the zero-interest period will not continue, but instead, the original interest rate will prevail.

They should explicitly state that there will be no additional suspensions of payments. If the Biden administration proceeds down the path of confusion for the borrower and allows the taxpayer to bear the costs of this subsidy, there will only be one option for Congress. Congress will have to declare that they will pass legislation to remove the authority of the federal government to lend money to students for college education. This action would not punish the citizen who may be expecting to get reduced borrowing costs, rather it would be the only logical step to clear up confusion about whether loans will be required to be paid in the future. Once the precedent is set that the government is willing to bail out borrowers, they will begin to expect similar actions in the future.

The federal government has a long history of unintended consequences and the student loan program is no exception. One of these consequences is the concept of moral hazard. Moral hazard occurs when an entity creates a safety net (such as insurance) but inadvertently and simultaneously reduces the cost of risky behavior. When the government created the FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) in the wake of the Great Depression, it opened the door for banks to engage in riskier behavior, knowing that most of their deposits are insured by the federal government. Thomas Hoenig, vice chairman of the FDIC said in a speech in 2017:

The threat of failure serves to ensure that banks remain more sensitive to risk, and it inhibits the industry from trending toward excessive risks. Without the discipline provided by depositors and other creditors inclined to withdraw their funds when they suspect a bank of being unsafe, banks have an incentive to take on such exposures.

In the wake of the financial crisis of 2007–08 the government felt compelled to react by bailing out many financial institutions and companies. In response, the special inspector general for the US Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), Neil Barofsky, wrote in a quarterly report in 2009: “Absent meaningful regulatory reform, TARP runs the risk of merely reanimating markets that had collapsed under the weight of reckless behavior.”

Government intervention encourages moral hazard by excessively risky behavior from disconnecting financial penalties. Right now the Biden administration is considering whether to remove yet more of the economic cost of decisions made by the forty-three million individuals with student loans totaling $1.606 trillion dollars, averaging $37,000 per borrower. If all or a portion of these loans are forgiven, then the precedent will be set for this safety net to appear again for future student loan borrowers.

The borrower’s risk calculus changes when the taxpayer may pick up the tab. There will be an increase in borrowers and an increase in the balance of the loans when paying cash today costs more than paying interest for a few years before your debts are likely forgiven. As of the first quarter of 2022, 78 percent of these borrowers owe less than $40,000, and 56 percent owe less than $20,000. If debt forgiveness becomes expected, future borrowers will be incentivized to take on more student loan debt and hold it for longer terms.

Forgiving some value of student loans today will immediately change the spending habits of those who have the money earmarked in savings accounts for repayment of their debt or who have made plans to pay debt with future earnings. This will stimulate these borrowers to make alternate plans for that money, plans that will no doubt artificially increase demand for goods and services in the coming years.

Current student loan borrowers do not need additional confusion on the payment terms of their loans, future student loan borrowers do not need to undervalue the cost of their payment obligations, monetary policy does not need an additional inflow of dollars into the economy, and taxpayers do not need additional burdens while transferring wealth to student loan borrowers. President Biden should be clear that debt payments will resume on August 31, and borrowers should start preparing to repay their loans according to their original terms. If the president fails to make this clear, or forgives any amount of student loan debt, then Congress must remove the authority of the federal government to issue new student loans.

Student Loan Bubble Free Report

Get Peter Schiff’s key gold headlines in your inbox every week – click here – for a free subscription to his exclusive weekly email updates.
Interested in learning how to buy gold and buy silver?
Call 1-888-GOLD-160 and speak with a Precious Metals Specialist today!

Related Posts

Three Debt Ceiling Lies Politicians Keep Telling You

We are in the midst of yet another debt ceiling fight. This is mostly political theater. That being the case, both Democrats and Republicans are using the drama in an effort to score political points and push policy in their preferred direction. And since politicians are involved, they’re telling a lot of lies.


Ron Paul: Will the End of the Petrodollar Mean the End of American Global Dominance?

Earlier this year, Saudi Arabia said it was willing to discuss trade in currencies other than the US dollar. This could mark the beginning of the end of petrodollar exclusivity. That would be a huge blow to dollar dominance. Ron Paul said historians may one day call this the most significant event of 2023.


The Deregulation Boogeyman

The ink wasn’t even dry on the newly printed money to bail out the banking system before people came out of the woodwork to blame the failure of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank on “deregulation.” But is the deregulation boogeyman really to blame? In a word, no!


Ron Paul: Bank Failures a Sign of More Trouble Ahead

After the Federal Reserve raised interest rates another 25 basis points, Fed Chairman Jerome Powell assured everybody that the collapse of SVB and Signature Bank “are not weaknesses that are at all broadly through the banking system.” That raises a question: if that’s true, why did the Fed bail out the entire banking system? The […]


Odds the Fed Is About to Trigger the Next Bust Are Rising

During testimony on Capitol Hill, Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said the central bank may have to raise interest rates higher than previously expected to bring down price inflation. Despite the speed of Fed hiking and the enormous amount of debt in the US economy, most people in the mainstream seem convinced the central bank […]


Comments are closed.

Call Now