Revising the system would allow for more economic freedom from all parties

The argument

The current system that the world has in place for students to pay off their schooling involves going into debt and that's something that should be changed. While the reasoning behind the system we currently have isn't bad its functionality is flawed and more often than not is used for loaners to receive a bigger return thanks to interest. This has the effect of making debt last longer and even harder to pay off. An overhaul of the system would take time to implement but it would allow for new freedoms on all sides. While the problem of funds is something to keep in mind the world is changing. It's becoming an increasing belief that you don't need to go to college or graduate school to be successful. Many courses, especially in this newfound covid-19 world, have shifted to online learning. The problem with debt is that it's hard to get rid of and get rid of quickly. Its entire design is to make money off of the interest. If something can replace these debt causing loans while still allowing for monetary means to be met then the new system will be able to lighten the financial burden while still allowing for both the institutions and the government to make back their money. The return, or benefit of such a system would allow for graduated students to go out into the world faster, prioritize compatible jobs, and instead of focusing on repaying debt they could then focus on a better future.

Premises

Counter-arguments

If its broke don't fix it is an apt description of problem with the student loan system. While it's not perfect it does function as it's supposed to. It's a pattern in every day life. A door squeaks on its hinges but still swings open, a shirt full of holes that's perfectly fine to sleep in. Whether from laziness or a lack of knowledge, if things are at least functioning rarely do they go out of the way to fix a minor inconvenience. It's bearable to live with. The same can be said for global workings. While some global problems definitely need immediate attention and fixing like oil spills in the sea and disaster relief, other things people can wait on. It's the same idea that goes into tarring holes in the road instead of ripping up the road and replacing it. It's a time consuming process and over time, even if there's something new, it'll be worn down, show problems, and have to be revised and fixed, sometimes being better or worse. The main problem is that people don't want to wait that long. When a 4 lane road goes down to a two lane a persons time is wasted, there's a back up of traffic and people get mad, usually at the wrong people. It's chaotic, troublesome, and leads to expensive problems no one wants to deal with. Replacing the student loan debt system is a major uptake that is costly, takes time, and would have people getting angry despite how the revisions are for their benefit. Unless a concrete system that's proven to work and can seamlessly replace the original system is devised then it'll be very hard to get people to agree to wait patiently as changes are made.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Interest is how lending is priced, not evidence of a design intended to prolong debt, and the premise offers no rates, terms or figures against which the system could be judged excessive. [Rejecting P2] The replacement is described only by what it would achieve — lighter burdens for students while lenders still recover their money — and never by what it is. A system defined by its desired outcome cannot be assessed, which is the counter-argument's point about needing a concrete alternative first. [Rejecting P3] The benefits claimed for graduates would follow from any reduction in debt, including outright cancellation, so they do not distinguish revision from the rival position that the debt should simply be eliminated.