It’s always reassuring to find someone in this world who practices what they preach. They are the type of person who is in extremely short supply these days.
Give you an example; several years ago the CEO’s of the Big Three auto makers in the United States came to Washington hat in hand asking for money to save their companies. They were sitting before a congressional committee when they were asked how they all made it to DC from Michigan. One of them replied that he took a private jet that cost somewhere around six figures just to get off the ground.
Needless to say, the people that heard that were not pleased one bit. Now, translating that to colleges if you had a college professor that was making a hundred thousand dollars a year you might listen to them on matters of colleges charging too much for some services than someone that is making nearly half a million dollars a year. There are a lot of liberals doing this, claiming poor while having a loaf of bread under each arm.
If Elizabeth Warren wants to solve student loan debt, I have one small way she can contribute to it. She probably won’t like it, though.
If you haven’t been paying attention to the Massachusetts senator’s campaign, you might have missed the fact that she’s made canceling student debt a major part of her platform. She has proposed eliminating up to $50,000 of debt for households earning less than $100,000, on top of a proposal to make all public colleges tuition-free.
She proposes to pay through this through a wealth tax — colloquially referred to by her campaign as an “ultra-millionaire tax” — which would tax households worth more than $50 million at 2 percent per year for every dollar over that amount; households worth more than $1 billion would be taxed at 3 percent marginally for every dollar over that amount.
“For two cents on the dollar, we could pay for universal child care, universal pre-K, universal college and knock back the student loan debt burden for about 43 million Americans and still have nearly, just short, of $1 trillion leftover,” Warren told CNN.
“It tells you how badly out of whack our economy is right now.”
Forget that her numbers on the plan are dodgy or that she’s targeting the group of people who are most easily able to cloak or move their wealth to avoid taxes. When it comes to education, it doesn’t address the root problem: The fact that the cost structure of education is profoundly inflated by treating government and private loans as “free money” without any impetus to restrain the price tag.
Warren has long insisted that the government is partially responsible because it profits off of student loans. Back in 2013, for instance, she called this profit “obscene.”
“Instead of helping our students, the government is making a profit on student loans,” Warren said during a speech before a conference that skewed young, according to the Huffington Post.
“That is wrong. It is morally wrong. That is obscene.”
The reason we’re even talking about this is that higher education doesn’t really try to contain costs — or, when they do so, they aren’t all that successful. Between 1985 and 2011, while inflation was a cumulative 114.85 percent, college inflation clocked in at 498.49 percent.
Costs are clearly out of control, which is why it’s arrant hypocrisy to see a candidate who was taking home $430,000 a year from an institution of higher education talking about the “obscenity” of government profiting from student loans. She’s grabbing for cash at the same time she’s condemning cash-grabbers in government.