[ad_1]
Proponents of Warren's plan said it would help those in jobs that require high levels of education but do not earn the best salaries, such as teachers. Warren also presented the plan as a middle-class stimulus package that would re-inject money into the economy.
Paul Hankins, an English teacher in Sellersburg, Indian state, said that in the next two years, his two children would go to university and that all his family members would eventually have student debt.
Mr. Hankins, 49, returned to school at age 30 to become a teacher. He and his wife, a nurse practitioner, had taken out loans to do what they liked, he says, and still owe nearly $ 40,000 together.
But "it's an invoice we pay every month," he said. "And as you pay them, they take so long. You're like, "Wait, what's the last time I sat in a classroom while I was doing it?" I could put more money in my class if I did not invest in my studies. "
Some critics have questioned the value of such a huge investment in tuition and loan cancellation, and whether bailing out graduates from higher education was the best way to spend nearly half of the wealth tax proceeds proposed by Mrs. Warren, which she claims would yield $ 2.5 trillion more than 10 years. (Warren also offers other uses for increasing tax revenues, such as universal child care.)
"I think it's hard to sell," said Beth Akers, an economist and senior researcher at the Manhattan Institute, although she acknowledged that Warren's campaign had helped advance the plan by tying it together. to income.
Others felt that one-off deleveraging would not solve the root causes of the country's student debt crisis. Matthew Chingos, director of the Center for Data and Education Policy at the Urban Institute, suggested that the plan was not sufficiently forward-looking.
[ad_2]
Source link