Carl Mortished: How the Fed weighed in on student loans

‘University costs may soon be a dead weight on the British economy even without a solvency crisis’
Carl Mortished31 January 2018

Once upon a time, universities existed for the good of the Church, religious scholarship and the glory of God. Back then, town and gown didn’t mix well; scholars behaved badly and so did townies, charging too much for food and rent.

Not that much has changed, you might think, but the medieval religious scholars had one big advantage over today’s undergraduates — the absolute support of mother Church and later, the Crown.

Today, the Almighty has been banished to the chapel — Mammon is installed at top table where he dines with the dons. Universities have become part of the modern economy; their purpose to educate and train young people to become efficient workers with a profitable sideline in conducting scientific research for businesses. The Crown (government) still supports the universities but the students must pay for their education. For most undergraduates, that means borrowing large sums over a very long term; a bit like taking out a mortgage on a home.

The sums borrowed (rising to more than £50,000 for an average graduate, according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies), the high rate of interest (6%), and the expectation that two-thirds will never fully repay their loan is fuelling a row. The Labour Party has promised to scrap tuition fees (a pledge that would cost the nation £60 billion, says the IFS) and the Government has promised to rethink.

The Prime Minister should talk to the New York Federal Reserve which last April published disturbing research that showed the impact which high levels of student debt is having on home ownership. America’s graduates owe $1.3 trillion (£920 billion) for their education and many are getting into trouble with loan repayments.

Serious delinquency rates are more than 11% — higher than credit card debt — and William Dudley, the New York Fed president is worried, not about a sub-prime type debt disaster, but about the long-term social and economic cost in the linkage between higher education and high levels of personal debt.

The disturbing news is that the Fed’s research shows that graduates with high levels of student debt are less likely at any age to be homeowners than those who left university with no debt. Though the research shows that graduates leave university with higher earning potential, that advantage is being severely eroded by the burden of debt.

The Fed’s president fears that exclusion from home ownership could have serious social and political consequences. “For a large share of households, housing equity is the principal form of wealth… the way we finance post-secondary education could also have important implications for the distribution of wealth.”

The late Lady Thatcher’s vision of Britain could be summed up as a nation of homeowners, the equity in granny’s suburban semi providing the seed capital for the prosperity of future generations. But how does a young graduate without a home-owning granny pay a deposit on a home, when his very meagre savings are being sucked into student loan repayments at a rate of 9% (on income above £21,000)?

The cost of higher education may soon become a dead weight on the British economy even without a solvency crisis. We can reasonably assume that a home ownership gap exists between debt-free university graduates and those who are repaying loans.

More worrying still is the flawed message about the purpose of higher education. Even without the promise of God’s glory and the kingdom of heaven, university is now supposed to be about personal salvation, a covenant invented by Tony Blair in the election campaign for his second term.

In his 2001, “education, education, education” speech Mr Blair promised huge investment for a wider social and economic goal: to make “responsible citizens who give something back to their community”, to give them “basic tools for life and work”, part of “a national purpose for rapid and radical improvement in our schools, colleges and universities”.

Universities are now engines of social engineering. Any monks still poring over manuscripts in ivory towers had better find wealthy sponsors because their cells are needed to accommodate undergraduates prepared to pay £9300 per year.

Much fuss has been made of the greed of university vice-chancellors but rent-seeking behaviour is now part and parcel of a university’s raison d’être. If students are on the hook for the cost of their education, the universities are reeling them in and the bait is that dream of upward mobility, that promise of a better life.

A comfortable life with financial security in a home of your own — is that still on offer for this generation of bright-eyed graduates? Or is it a financial trap, a huge leveraged investment that generates a meagre return? Maybe it’s just three pleasant years that postpone the grim reality of work and paying the bills.

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in

MORE ABOUT