Running head: STUDENT LOANS 1

[Your Email]

[Your Postal Address]

[Your city]

March 19, 2021

The Seattle Times

P.O Box 70

Seattle, WA 9811

Dear Seattle times,

The student loan should not get canceled. The main reason to support this argument is that

canceling student loans is poorly targeted. It is a great concern that the wide-scale student loan

forgiveness shall invariably benefit the wealthy student loan borrowers. Hence, the student loan

cancellation is poorly targeted. The standing threshold is that the student loan borrowers earning

less than $125,000 can qualify to get the student loan. However, this threshold is too high.

Therefore, if any student loan cancellation is certain, it should be based on the low-income

borrowers.

Another reason is that canceling the student loan is beside the main point; it leaves out a largely

unaddressed issue on a college education's rising cost. Currently, a college education is

becoming more expensive for an average American to afford. Therefore, canceling the student

loan is a short-term solution and does not help the borrower with the student loan. Therefore, this
STUDENT LOANS 2

does not deal with the problem since the high cost of a college education means that more

student loans will suffer a similar fate as those of the previous student loan borrowers. The best

alternative, therefore, is for Congress to lower the cost of higher education.

Additionally, canceling student loans is unfair to borrowers who recently paid off their student

loans. They will not benefit from such a proposal; this is unfair since many of these student loan

borrowers also experienced great financial struggles, but they managed to pay it off.

Most of these individuals also delayed getting married or having families, made many financial

sacrifices, and worked through multiple jobs. Some of them did not even get to buy a home and

demonstrated the financial responsibility to pay off their student loans. Hence, canceling student

loans for some borrowers should also compensate those who paid the student loans recently. As a

result, it will become burdensome to follow.

The main counterargument supporting the cancellation of student loans is that it stimulates the

economy; this reasoning comes from the fact that many Americans are already suffering from the

Covid-19 pandemic. Hence, the $1.7 trillion of student loan debt is even more burdensome.

Therefore, canceling the loan would free the student loan borrowers the money, hence spending

on the economy instead of paying off the loan. However, evidence shows that canceling nearly

fifty thousand dollars of the loan per student borrower incurs over six hundred billion dollars on

the taxpayers.

In conclusion, instead of cancellation of student loans, the potential solutions would be student

loan refinancing, supporting a lower monthly payment and interest rate. Also, stakeholders

should develop the student loan payoff into an income-driven repayment plan that would result

in the low monthly payment of federal loans.

STUDENT LOANS 3

Canceling the student loans would only benefit the population that borrowed; however, the

impact will be felt on the large population segment who did not borrow. Therefore, this would be

unfair and unbalanced since only student loan borrowers would receive the financial boost.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]