ChristineRomansCNN

So the question is, who lobbies Congress for the change? Maybe we need to see student advocacy on this?

I agree that income after college is not the sole driver in college or career choice. But it is critical for deciding how much money you can borrow for college. The math just doesn't work to borrow $100k to get a degree in music or social work. It's not fair, but it's just a fact that a huge student loan debt and a low-paying job will keep someone out of the middle class.

It's not a great prognosis. It can ruin your credit score, and run up thousands in interest and penalties. On federally-backed government student loans, the government can (and does) garnish Social Security checks. It is the one debt that is rarely vanquished in bankruptcy.

I really do believe that the college experience is valuable in many ways. Hearing different opinions and theories, collaborating in groups, developing leadership and so-called "soft-skills" that will serve you well later -- all this is important. The problem is it is becoming so expensive. Do we need to be on a campus for four years? Or should we consider a hybrid model where you are taking the building blocks at a community college first? The fourth year could be an on-site paid internship or on-the-job training. I am a big fan of 3-year degree programs for motivated students.

One reason federally backed student loans can't be vanquished in bankruptcy is because if you default, you are defaulting on the American public, not a private entitity. A credit card company in bankruptcy can be forced to eat your bad debts. But the American government can't. I suppose Congress could change this. Then taxpayers could eat the bad student loans, and pay for it some other way. (Tax increases or program cuts elsewhere, maybe?)