Editorial

                     


April 26, 2012

Obama Puts Spotlight Back on Student Loan Debt
Filed under: Economy,Equities Editor's Desk,Personal Finance — Joel Anderson @ 6:30 am

Obama Puts Spotlight Back on Student Loan DebtThe issue of growing student loan debt was one of the many pet causes adopted by the Occupy Movement last year, and it’s been thrust into the forefront once again this last week as President Obama has been visiting college campuses across America campaigning to stop a proposed increase in the interest rate on student loans.

However, the debate continues to be an important one. As the cost of college continues to rise, student loan debts are also increasing and, with the economy still in recovery, the unemployment rate among recent graduates is very high. More and more voices are raising important questions about a college educations and its necessity in the modern economy.

Rising Costs Staggering

Wednesday saw the staging of protests around the country for 1T Day, meant to mark the day that student loan debt in the United States passed the $1 trillion mark. This means, among other things, that student load debt now exceeds that of that of credit card debt. Interest rates have been at 3.4 percent since 2007′s College Cost Reduction and Access Act slashed it to that rate, but it’s due to double back to 6.8 percent without action from congress. The average levels of student debt for American college graduates approach $13,000, but the top 1 percent of borrowers owe more than $150,000. President Obama has tried to make this issue personal on the stump.

“I didn’t just read about this. I didn’t just get some talking points about this. I didn’t just get a policy briefing on this,” Obama said. “We didn’t come from wealthy families. When we graduated from college and law school, we had a mountain of debt. When we married, we got poor together.”

What’s more, paying back this staggering pile of debt is harder now than it’s never been. A recent Rutgers University study found that, in a simply random sample of recent graduates from four-year universities, only 53 percent held full-time jobs. What’s more, with jobs scarce, many graduates are forced into service jobs that don’t fit the expensive qualifications they’ve just spent four or more years acquiring.

Worthwhile Investment?

This last July, the Obama administration unveiled new regulations on benchmarks for job placement that for-profit colleges would have to reach before students could receive federal aid. Essentially, unless college could prove that their students were getting jobs, they wouldn’t enjoy the benefits of the Federal Government helping students pay for tuition.

“These new regulations will help ensure that students at these schools are getting what they pay for: solid preparation for a good job,” Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said.

However, the question as to why these standards are applied to for-profit educators and not all universities are becoming more and more pressing.  If college graduates still can’t find work and have tens of thousands of dollars in debt, it’s hard to make the case that a college education is so important to America’s youth that the Federal Government should keep footing the bill.

However, the need to get a college education in the current economy is as pressing as it’s ever been. As manufacturing jobs dry up or move overseas, the highest-paying jobs left are more and more in the service sector and require higher education. While recent college graduates are seriously struggling in today’s job market, those without degrees are in even more trouble. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median income for a high school graduate in the United States was $32,552. A four-year degree, however, improves that to $53,300. With a Masters that improves to $65,364 a year, and a professional degree reaches $79,508. What’s more, the unemployment rate may be high for new college graduates, but it’s even worse among comparable age groups without degrees.

President Obama voiced this concern in reiterating the importance of a college education during a stump speech in Iowa. Responding to critics who argued that the student loan question would distract from the economy, he said: “These guys don’t get it. This is the economy. This is about your job security, this is about your future. If you do well, the economy does well. This is abut the economy. You are the economy. If you’ve got schools, if you’ve got talents, if you’re starting a business and companies are locating here in Iowa because they have a well trained workforce – that’s the economy. That’s how we’re going to compete: making sure our next generation earns the best education possible is exactly America’s business.”

 

Comments

comments


About Joel Anderson

Joel Anderson is a business writer who has been living and working in Los Angeles for six years. He’s a staff writer at Equities.com, specializing in daily coverage of the markets and profiling spotlight companies for the site. Joel has an array of experience in writing and research, ranging from analyzing materials for Hollywood production companies, including HBO Films (read more about Joel Anderson)...
| |

Comments

No Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

 

Sector News



Market Overview

Symbol Last Change % Change
DJIA15,303.108.600.06
NASDAQ3,459.14-0.2735-0.01
S&P 500 EOD1,649.64-0.87-0.05
10yr Trsy20.110.110.55
Data is delayed 20 mins/EOD

Uncommon Wisdom with Fisher Investments

Fisher Investments
Japanese policymakers largely understand what their Chinese counterparts don’t—encouraging private firms to invest more and as they see fit is the best way to goad sustainable economic growth.

Behind the Frontlines with Mauldin Economics

John Mauldin
There is bipartisan legislation making its way through Congress that is a huge step in dealing with too big to fail. Taxpayers and investors should be paying attention.

Richard Suttmeier of ValuEngine

Richard Suttmeier
The daily chart for Kinross Gold shows rising momentum with the stock above its 21-day simple moving average but below its 50-day and 200-day simple moving averages.