Many people have been stating the root cause of this bubble for over a decade. Discussion and debate in the US is dead, as the left will not engage in anything that could alter their voter base, and the incentives provided to them.
Financial gamers inherently desire airtight abstractions so they can leverage the heck out of them. But this doesn't mean they should get this wish, since the purpose of the financial system isn't simply to perpetuate itself but to optimize for people.
Everyone needs a place to live, so under financial primacy the only limit on housing prices in a developed area is the economic rent on the principal. A college degree is worth a heck of a lot over one's lifetime, so the fully-optimized market solution is for most of that surplus to go to the credentialer.
In all cases of secured credit, the effect is for prices to rise such that things that used to be able to be owned are instead rented by most people.
... are you arguing against secured loans?
Destroying 'collateral would be quite drastic. I'm pointing out that it is equivalent to making student loans non-secured, regardless that one arises out of contracts and the other from more recent lobbying.
Simpler would be to eliminate banks conjuring money from thin air, or perhaps to just raise interest rates to the point that essentially interest-only loans once again become untenable.
That said, we cannot continue to fund the system we have which according to R. Arum's Academically Adrift, leaves many students with a mountain of debt and few marketable skills. As the authors of "Paying for the Party" note, these students had a great time but learned little. Both books (and Arum's follow up book tracking graduates) are sobering reads...