Just be happy that they have a ton of money even though you don’t?
Imagine two students, Andy and Brady. Andy decided that it would be best to get good grades, so he took out more loans and worked less. Andy had more time to study so he got mostly A grades. Brady decided it would be best to get graduate debt free, so he worked long hours instead of taking more loans. Brady had less time to study so he got more B grades. At the typical US university, you might be able to call their outcomes balanced- Andy can maybe get a better job because he got better grades, but has to pay off more debt. Brady won't get quite as good of a job because of his B grades, but gets to start saving for retirement faster because he is debt free.
But then some billionaire (call him Robert Smith, if we're trying to come up with the most generic name ever) comes and pays off Andy's debt. Now instead of a balanced outcome Andy is debt free and has a better job. Which is great for Andy, so I'm not saying the billionaire should't pay off his debt. But you have to think that Brady is probably kicking himself right now for not making a different set of choices. He's now behind in the race, and being behind sticks with you for a long time when it comes to careers.
If we could find a solution that kept Brady from feeling bad, but still gave Andy his goodies, then I'm sure that most people would agree that is a good outcome. An easy one that comes to mind is instead of saying, "I'm paying off all your student loan debt," Smith could say, "I'm giving you each $100k." That way Andy and Brady both get goodies, and Andy doesn't have crippling debt any more. Brady also doesn't kick himself for working hard during college because he now has a nice sum of money to do something responsible with (invest, save for retirement, down payment on a house, etc.).
Far more common is for middle class (and immigrants) to be in this situation, not even to mention the 2-shift-a-day poor parents who paid outright to stay out of debt, worked overtime, scrimped, and planned ahead. They get nothing. I'm sure they can afford not getting any gift...
As I said, I don't begrudge a generous benefactor's actions that help people. It's his choice.
It would be a wholly different matter if government took this approach. In that case, you'd better be dammed sure that someone else getting something and you nothing, isn't going to remain at "be grateful for what you have".
Cf. that company experiment a few years ago (or think through if it applied at your job) that everyone got paid the same. You're probably not so eager in that case.
Almost every financial planner says that you should put your own retirement before your kids college for the same reason.
If you can afford to save for your own future and pay for your kids to go to college then of course that’s different.
I have a step child that I haven’t saved a penny for them to go to college. But, between cash flowing what we can and loans he will have the opportunity to go. Yes, I plan to help her pay the loans after she graduates or probably pay most of them myself - but not at the expense of our retirement.
A convergence of demographic shifts, generational priorities, economic policies (interest rate + cheap money), and personal circumstances.
I'm not saying that parents that let their kids take the loans are bad parents, but it shouldn't be hard to see why some parents don't want their kid to be saddled with debt upon graduation.
If you as a parent want to help your kids after they graduate to pay off their loans once your own situation is secure, help them pay for their loans out of a combination of current cash flows and savings you might have for it.
If $life_happens as a parent and the child can’t pay their student loans, they can get deferments, income based repayments etc.
If the parents don’t have savings because they were trying to avoid student loans and then they lose their jobs or are unable to work, then what?
This is the benefit of being in the right place at the right time. I'm sure people would be salty to not this windfall, but who knows maybe they will be lucky somewhere else.
In this situation, YOU got a free education regardless.
I paid every freaking dime for my education out of pocket by sacrificing my nights and weekends during college. For plenty of people, college was a time where they made a ton of life-long friends. For me? College was a time where I spent half my time on campus passed out in the student union or library trying to get a bit of a nap between classes so that I could work an 8-6 schedule at night.
That's basically the basis of this whole "economic boom". You can rely on the Fed being unable to raise interest rates, or this house of cards will collapse and everyone will need another bailout.
The Fed keeps talking about low inflation while asset prices have exploded on their watch, it's hilarious.
Having said that, this is what companies (and certain wealthy individuals) have been doing for a while now: Get cheap loans, buy back your own stock, buy more real estate, drive up the value, get more loans based on those inflated valuations.
You may be able to do this as an average individual, that's what happened in 2008 when every schmuck would get a mortgage based on another already mortgaged house. The difference is, when you're an individual the government is not going to bail you out personally (unless maybe Liz Warren or Bernie Sanders are in power). You can at least declare personal bankruptcy if you didn't incorporate.
Now the reason why this is a fairly safe bet today is that the governments of the world absolutely don't want to repeat 2008. They will create any amount of money necessary to keep the party going. This means asset prices will rise due to pure inflation. Anyone with cash or long-term bonds will be left holding the bag, which also coincides with the interest of the heavily indebted governments.