Stein and Johnson offer no solution to student debt

Saying “Free tuition!” to a USC student has the same effect as “Build a wall!” has on my older friends in Oklahoma — both audiences are euphorically stimulated by such an immediate and drastic solution to their problems. Real change seems to never be made by the bureaucratic hellhole that is the government, this being a criticism that keeps the media in business. However, most major problems in our country cannot be remedied with a quick fix, even if the solution is coming from radical third-party candidates like Gary Johnson or Jill Stein, who both offer either a non-solution or an unrealistic solution to the student debt problem.

Johnson has repeatedly stated that college tuition is high because of guaranteed college loans. In other words, because every student knows he or she is guaranteed a loan for college, college administrations have no reason to keep tuition low. To illustrate, Johnson states “If every college student tomorrow says, ‘I’m not going to go to college until the price of college, university education drops,’ guess what? It would. It would happen. It would happen dramatically.” Unfortunately, all Johnson has done is demonstrate that he understands the most basic principle of capitalism, not come up with an inventive angle on the problem. Johnson concludes with, “And I am sorry that college graduates today have been sold a bill of goods. Graduating college with a home mortgage without the home. I think college students have been sold a bill of goods.” As seen on his website, Johnson seems far more concerned with the problems of secondary education (and eliminating the Department of Education itself) than the cost of public universities.

Jill Stein, on the other hand, actually offers a solution for those struggling with student debt. Unfortunately, her plan is as unrealistic as Trump’s wall. According to her website, Stein plans to “abolish student debt to free a generation of Americans from debt servitude” and “guarantee tuition-free, world-class public education from preschool through university.” Her plan is to bail out students with debt “through quantitative easing, the finance tool used to bail out the banks. This would be a huge stimulus for the economy, as young people are enabled to follow their dreams & re-imagine our future — as every new generation must.”

A question you might be asking is “What is quantitative easing?” Essentially, quantitative easing is the government creating more money in the hopes that it boosts the economy. The Economist published a thorough analysis of the effects of quantitative easing and concluded that many economists fear “the flood of cash has encouraged reckless financial behaviour and directed a firehose of money to emerging economies that cannot manage the cash.” Johnson understands the problem while offering no solution, while Stein does not understand the problem and gives an unstable solution.

Ultimately, neither candidate holds a candle to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s plan to make community college and public university free for families with income up to $125,000 through taxes for higher-income taxpayers. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has not presented a plan of his own, though he does agree that the federal government should not be making money off of student loans.

So, the media probably shouldn’t care more than it already does about Johnson or Stein’s plan for student debt. Kevin James, research fellow with the Center on Higher Education Reform at the American Enterprise Institute, wrote “in overhyping the issues facing this segment of the population, the media narrative around student debt often overlooks the struggles of other groups — like those with debt and no degree — who are often far worse off.”  James is not wrong that the media caters to what the college audience wants to hear. Democratic platforms have not been free of white lies and appeals to target demographics. Perhaps college students should stop mocking Republicans falling for Trump’s pandering while entrenched in the unique pandering brought on by talks of debt-free college.