A few months ago, Steve Rhode posted a thought-provoking blog titled "The Student Loan Bubble That Many Don't Want to See." He argued that student-loan indebtedness is in a bubble that will soon burst, creating two huge problems:
First, when the student-loan market collapses, postsecondary education will be out of reach for most people, which will "put a drag on the overall economy as fewer and fewer people will be able to pay for tuition that outpaces inflation."
Second, a sharp contraction in federal student-loan revenue along with a shrinking student base will force many colleges to cut tuition, putting them under enormous financial stress. Rhode predicts that "[m]any schools, public and private, will fail."
Mr. Rhode sees a parallel between the the student loan program and the overheated housing market that led to a global financial crisis in 2008. Just as financiers packaged home mortgages into mortgage-backed securities called ABS, the banks have bundled student loans into so-called SLABS, or student-loan asset backed securities.
The home-mortgage market went into free fall when investors woke up to the fact that the ratings services (Moody's, Fitch, etc.) had rated ABS as investment grade when in fact a lot of them were junk because they were packed with mortgages that were headed for default.
Now we see Moody's and Fitch downgrading SLABS based on the fact that student borrowers are not paying off their loans as investors expected. More than 5 million borrowers have signed up for income-driven repayment plans that lower monthly loan payments and stretch out the repayment period from 10 years to 20 or even 25 years. SLABS investors now don't know when or how much they are going to be paid on their investments.
Some policy commentators reject the notion that the student-loan market is in a bubble. In a book published last year, Beth Akers and Matthew M. Chingos wrote: "Student loans have a zero chance of becoming the next housing crisis because the market is too small and essentially functions as a government program rather than a market." Akers and Chingos point out that student debt represents only 10 percent of overall consumer debt while home mortgages accounts for 70 percent of household indebtedness.
Personally, I think Steve Rhode is right: Higher education is sustained by a student loan bubble that the nation's colleges and universities refuse to see. In fact, there are eerie similarities between the housing market before it crashed in 2008 and the current level of student-loan indebtedness.
First, higher education at many colleges and universities is wildly overpriced, just as the housing market was overpriced in the early 2000s. This is particularly true in the for-profit sector and at private liberal arts colleges.
As as been widely reported, liberal arts colleges are now discounting tuition for freshman students by almost 50 percent--a clear sign that their posted tuition prices are too high. And for-profit colleges are seeing enrollment declines. University of Phoenix, for example, has seen its enrollments drop by about half over the past 5 years.
Second, the monitoring agencies for both markets failed to do their jobs. As illustrated in the movie The Big Short, the financial ratings agencies rated mortgage backed securities as investment grade when in fact those bundled mortgages included a lot of subprime mortgages.
Likewise, the Department of Education reports three-year default rates for student loans that vastly understates how many student borrowers are failing to pay back their loans. DOE recently reported that about 10 percent of the most recent cohort of student borrowers defaulted within three years. But the five-year default rate is 28 percent; and the five-year default rate for a recent cohort of students who attended for-profit schools is a shocking 47 percent.
And of course the government's vigorous effort to get distressed student borrowers into income-driven repayment plans also helps hide the true default rate. A high percentage of people who enter IDRs are making loan payments so low that they will never pay off their loans.
In short, Steve Rhode's analysis is correct. A rising level of student-loan debt has created a bubble; and the bubble is going to burst. Colleges raised tuition prices far above the nation's inflation rate, knowing that students would simply take out larger student loans to pay their tuition bills. Millions of Americans paid too much for their postsecondary education and can't pay back their loans.
So far, the Department of Education has hidden the magnitude of this crisis, but the game will soon be up. Colleges are closing at an accelerating rate, stock prices for publicly traded for-profit colleges are down, and long-term default rates are shockingly high.
It is true, as Akers and Chingos pointed out, that the student-loan market is not nearly as large as the home-mortgage market when it crashed in 2008. But Akers and Chingos fail to acknowledge the enormous human cost that has been imposed on millions of Americans who took out student loans in the hope of getting an education that would lead to a better life.
Instead, all many Americans got by taking out student loans is an enormous debt load that they can't pay off or discharge in bankruptcy. Eight million Americans have defaulted on their student loans; 5.6 million are in income-driven repayment plans that stretch their payment obligations out for as long as 25 years, and millions more are playing for time by putting their loans in forbearance or deferment.
References
Beth Akers and Matthew Chingos. Game of Loans: The Rhetoric and Reality of Student Debt. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016).
Anamaria Andriotis. Debt Relief for Students Snarls Market for Their Loans. Wall Street Journal, September 23, 2015.
Patrick Gillespie. University of Phoenix has lost half its students. CNN Money, March 25, 2015.
Adam Looney & Constantine Yannelis, A crisis in student loans? How changes in the characteristics of borrowers and in the institutions they attended contributed to rising default rates. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution (2015).
Steve Rhode. The Student loan Bubble That Many Don't Want to See. Get Out of Debt Guy, July 15, 2016.
Amy Thielen. Declines at For-Profit Colleges Take a Big Toll on Their Stocks. The Street, May 8, 2015.
Kellie Woodhouse. Discounting Grows Again. Inside Higher Ed, August 25, 2015.
Showing posts with label Beth Akers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Beth Akers. Show all posts
Sunday, January 8, 2017
Friday, November 4, 2016
Psychological Costs of Student-Loan Debt: A Critique of Game of Loans by Beth Akers and Matthew Chingos
As I have pointed out more than once, several policy organizations argue tirelessly that worries about the nation's student-debt crisis are overblown. In particular, scholars at the the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution have repeatedly published articles that minimize the magnitude of what I have long called a crisis.
It is not surprising then that Beth Akers, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, and Matthew Chingos, a fellow at the Urban Institute, published a book recently called Game of Loans, that essentially argued that the federal student-loan program is basically sound and under control.
In my view, Akers and Chingos widely missed the mark regarding the student loan crisis. They did not misrepresent the data about this problem or say anything that is technically inaccurate. Rather, in my view, they seriously misinterpreted data that warn of a coming catastrophe.
I won't attempt to articulate all my criticisms of Game of Loans in this essay. Rather I will focus on one point that Akers and Chingos made in Chapter 5, where they admit that "education debt is having negative psychological impacts on borrowers" (p. 95).
Of course this is true. As Kathryn Hancock explained in a 2009 law review article, "Studies have consistently found that socioeconomic status and debt-to-income ratios are strongly associated with poor mental health." Student loans, in particular, Hancock wrote, "can be a chronic strain on an individual's financial and emotional well-being." Indeed, "[t]he mere thought of having thousands upon thousands of dollars worth of debt can severely impact those with already fragile mental health, especially if they will carry that debt for the rest of their lives" (Hancock, 2009, 160-161, internal quotation marks omitted).
But what solutions do Akers and Chingos offer for this problem? Solution number one, they say, is to dial down the rhetoric about the student loan crisis. We need "to change the tone of the public discourse on this issue," Akers and Chingos counsel. In their mind, the "hysterical treatment" of the student-loan problem has caused some borrowers to worry more about their student loans than they should.
And solution number two? Akers and Chingos suggest that the psychological costs of student indebtedness could be reduced by creative repayment plans, including income-driven repayment plans.
In essence, Akers and Chingos are aligned with the Obama administration when it comes to addressing the student-loan crisis. Let's pretend there is no crisis and shove more students into long-term repayment plans.
Thanks, Ms. Akers and Mr. Chingos. You've been a big help.
References
Beth Akers and Matthew Chingos. Game of Loans: The Rhetoric and Reality of Student Debt. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016).
It is not surprising then that Beth Akers, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, and Matthew Chingos, a fellow at the Urban Institute, published a book recently called Game of Loans, that essentially argued that the federal student-loan program is basically sound and under control.
In my view, Akers and Chingos widely missed the mark regarding the student loan crisis. They did not misrepresent the data about this problem or say anything that is technically inaccurate. Rather, in my view, they seriously misinterpreted data that warn of a coming catastrophe.
I won't attempt to articulate all my criticisms of Game of Loans in this essay. Rather I will focus on one point that Akers and Chingos made in Chapter 5, where they admit that "education debt is having negative psychological impacts on borrowers" (p. 95).
Of course this is true. As Kathryn Hancock explained in a 2009 law review article, "Studies have consistently found that socioeconomic status and debt-to-income ratios are strongly associated with poor mental health." Student loans, in particular, Hancock wrote, "can be a chronic strain on an individual's financial and emotional well-being." Indeed, "[t]he mere thought of having thousands upon thousands of dollars worth of debt can severely impact those with already fragile mental health, especially if they will carry that debt for the rest of their lives" (Hancock, 2009, 160-161, internal quotation marks omitted).
But what solutions do Akers and Chingos offer for this problem? Solution number one, they say, is to dial down the rhetoric about the student loan crisis. We need "to change the tone of the public discourse on this issue," Akers and Chingos counsel. In their mind, the "hysterical treatment" of the student-loan problem has caused some borrowers to worry more about their student loans than they should.
And solution number two? Akers and Chingos suggest that the psychological costs of student indebtedness could be reduced by creative repayment plans, including income-driven repayment plans.
In essence, Akers and Chingos are aligned with the Obama administration when it comes to addressing the student-loan crisis. Let's pretend there is no crisis and shove more students into long-term repayment plans.
Thanks, Ms. Akers and Mr. Chingos. You've been a big help.
References
Beth Akers and Matthew Chingos. Game of Loans: The Rhetoric and Reality of Student Debt. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2016).
Katheryn E. Hancock, "A Certainty of Hopelessness, Depression, and The Discharge of Student Loans Under the Bankruptcy Code," 33 Law & Psychology Review 151, 160-161 (2009) (internal citations and internal quotation marks omitted). psychology
Thursday, June 26, 2014
The Student Debt Crisis? What Student Debt Crisis? The Brookings Institution Issues A Report Stating That The Problem of Student Debt Has Been Exaggerated
The Brookings Institutopn issued a report a few days ago suggesting that worries about a looming student-loan crisis may not be justified. The report, entitled "Is a Student Loan Crisis on the Horizon?," makes these major points:
The Brookings Report was widely reported in the media, including newspaper pieces in the New York Times and Slate. The Times quoted one of the Brookings authors as saying, "The evidence does not support the notion that student loan debt is dragging down the economy." The Times article also pointed out that more than half of student-loan debtors owe less than $10,000; and more than three quarters of borrowers owe less than $20,000.
Without quarreling with any of the Brookings report's findings, I will just point out a few indicators that show a much less rosy picture:
First, as several newspaper articles have recently pointed, about one in five college graduates under the age of 35 now live with their parents--a percentage that has grown in recent years. Undoubtedly, student-loan debt is partially responsible for the growing number of college-educated young people who still live with Mom and Dad.
Second, the student-loan default rate is going up, more than doubling over the course of just a few years. According to the Department of Education's most recent report (issued in October 2013), about 15 percent of student-loan borrowers default within three years of beginning the repayment phase of their loans. For students who attended for-profit institutions, the rate is about 21 percent.
And, as I have pointed out, for-profit colleges have been successful in hiding their default rates by encouraging their former students to sign up for economic hardship deferments that keep borrowers from being counted as defaulters even though they are not making their student-loan payments.
In fact, according to a recent report by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, we now have about 7 million people who have defaulted on their loans and another 15 million borrowers in the repayment phase who have obtained some sort of deferment that allow them not to make payments.
It is true, that millions of people owe only modest amounts on their student loans, and millions of college-loan borrowers are managing to make their monthly loan payments without difficulty.
But to say that monthly payments have not gone up overall because more people are taking 20 or 25 years to pay off their loans instead of 10 years is somewhat disingenuous. People who are forced into long-term repayment plans because they can't afford to pay off their loans over 10 years will be paying a lot more in interest on their loans and many of them will not be making payments large enough to cover accumulated interest.
Furthermore, even if most people are not burdened by their college loans, those 7 million defaulters have suffered a financial catastrophe. Their credit ratings have been ruined, they are subject to wage garnishments, and they are saddled with debt that most of them cannot discharge in bankruptcy. For these people--the student loan program has been a disaster.
In short, I think the Brookings Institution is wrong to suggest that a student loan crisis is not on the horizon. On the contrary, the crisis is already here.
References
Beth Akers & Matthew M. Chingos. Is a Student Loan Crisis on the Horizon? Brookings Institution, June 2014. http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2014/06/24%20student%20loan%20crisis%20akers%20chingos/is%20a%20student%20loan%20crisis%20on%20the%20horizon.pdf
David Leonhardt. The Reality of Student Debt is Different From the Cliches. New York Times, June 24, 2014. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/24/upshot/the-reality-of-student-debt-is-different-from-the-cliches.html?_r=0
Jordan Weissmann. Are We Overreacting to Student Debt? Slate, June 24, 2014. Available at: http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2014/06/brookings_institution_student_debt_crisis_have_we_all_overreacted.html
- Roughly a quarter of the increase in overall student debt can be attributed to the fact that more people are obtaining graduate degrees.
- Increases in average lifetime earnings have more than kept up with increasing student-debt loads.
- Average monthly student-loan payments have stayed the same or gone down a bit, due in part to longer loan-repayment periods.
The Brookings Report was widely reported in the media, including newspaper pieces in the New York Times and Slate. The Times quoted one of the Brookings authors as saying, "The evidence does not support the notion that student loan debt is dragging down the economy." The Times article also pointed out that more than half of student-loan debtors owe less than $10,000; and more than three quarters of borrowers owe less than $20,000.
Without quarreling with any of the Brookings report's findings, I will just point out a few indicators that show a much less rosy picture:
First, as several newspaper articles have recently pointed, about one in five college graduates under the age of 35 now live with their parents--a percentage that has grown in recent years. Undoubtedly, student-loan debt is partially responsible for the growing number of college-educated young people who still live with Mom and Dad.
Second, the student-loan default rate is going up, more than doubling over the course of just a few years. According to the Department of Education's most recent report (issued in October 2013), about 15 percent of student-loan borrowers default within three years of beginning the repayment phase of their loans. For students who attended for-profit institutions, the rate is about 21 percent.
And, as I have pointed out, for-profit colleges have been successful in hiding their default rates by encouraging their former students to sign up for economic hardship deferments that keep borrowers from being counted as defaulters even though they are not making their student-loan payments.
In fact, according to a recent report by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, we now have about 7 million people who have defaulted on their loans and another 15 million borrowers in the repayment phase who have obtained some sort of deferment that allow them not to make payments.
It is true, that millions of people owe only modest amounts on their student loans, and millions of college-loan borrowers are managing to make their monthly loan payments without difficulty.
But to say that monthly payments have not gone up overall because more people are taking 20 or 25 years to pay off their loans instead of 10 years is somewhat disingenuous. People who are forced into long-term repayment plans because they can't afford to pay off their loans over 10 years will be paying a lot more in interest on their loans and many of them will not be making payments large enough to cover accumulated interest.
Furthermore, even if most people are not burdened by their college loans, those 7 million defaulters have suffered a financial catastrophe. Their credit ratings have been ruined, they are subject to wage garnishments, and they are saddled with debt that most of them cannot discharge in bankruptcy. For these people--the student loan program has been a disaster.
In short, I think the Brookings Institution is wrong to suggest that a student loan crisis is not on the horizon. On the contrary, the crisis is already here.
References
Beth Akers & Matthew M. Chingos. Is a Student Loan Crisis on the Horizon? Brookings Institution, June 2014. http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2014/06/24%20student%20loan%20crisis%20akers%20chingos/is%20a%20student%20loan%20crisis%20on%20the%20horizon.pdf
David Leonhardt. The Reality of Student Debt is Different From the Cliches. New York Times, June 24, 2014. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/24/upshot/the-reality-of-student-debt-is-different-from-the-cliches.html?_r=0
Jordan Weissmann. Are We Overreacting to Student Debt? Slate, June 24, 2014. Available at: http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2014/06/brookings_institution_student_debt_crisis_have_we_all_overreacted.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)