I have mixed feeling on that. In the UK I understand that the repayment of the student loan is conditional to resources. Then I think it’s not too bad as effectively you end up paying for the studies you get the benefit from, rather than making others pay for your studies. And if you don’t get the benefit, then the cost becomes socialised.
But on the other hand the people who have to make these decisions are 17 or 18 year old kids. Some of these kids will be impressively mature, most will not. Then it becomes a function of how well their parents know their way around the system and high tuition fees create a big hurdle. Then you get social selection and it’s counterproductive.
By definition the only people who need loans are the people who can't afford them.
They have to take a gamble on their own learning and earning skills and the future state of the economy - the latter being something they have no control over, and realistically, no understanding of.
The reality is the system will collapse anyway within the next ten years, probably with significant economic wreckage, and the next generations will wonder why anyone ever thought it was a good idea.
Is social selection an unfortunate byproduct, or a deliberate goal?
But on the other hand the people who have to make these decisions are 17 or 18 year old kids. Some of these kids will be impressively mature, most will not. Then it becomes a function of how well their parents know their way around the system and high tuition fees create a big hurdle. Then you get social selection and it’s counterproductive.