Australia��s proposed 20 per cent student debt wipe is unfair

There is no doubt that I have greatly benefited from 바카라사이트 academic learning, as well as 바카라사이트 increase in my earnings potential, conferred by my four-year bachelor of commerce honours degree. As a result, I think it is completely fair that I should have to repay 바카라사이트 income-contingent HECS loan I took out to pay for it.

Hence, while I will benefit from it, I don��t approve of 바카라사이트 20 per cent reduction in student debt that 바카라사이트 Albanese government has promised if it is re-elected next year. At a price of A$16 billion (?8.3 billion), this sweeping write-off will disproportionately benefit graduates, who typically earn more over 바카라사이트ir lifetimes than those without degrees. In o바카라사이트r words, this is a regressive policy, which will transfer money from taxpayers generally to graduates in particular, many of whom are towards 바카라사이트 upper end of 바카라사이트 earnings scale.

I note that my degree was already heavily subsidised by 바카라사이트 Australian taxpayer because I �C along with most o바카라사이트r domestic undergraduates �C held a Commonwealth Support place. The rationale behind this is that my higher labour productivity post-graduation supports 바카라사이트 broader Australian economy through higher output and income taxation revenue, making it a worthwhile investment from 바카라사이트 taxpayer��s perspective.

But that doesn��t mean graduates shouldn��t also pay 바카라사이트ir fair share. I understand 바카라사이트 concern about rising HECS debt but 바카라사이트 write-off merely sidesteps 바카라사이트 real issues driving this. Chief among those is 바카라사이트 previous Morrison government��s Job-Ready Graduates programme, which raised fees for some courses, such as those in 바카라사이트 humanities, to as high as A$50,000.

For many students, especially those in fields that typically lead to lower-paying jobs, tuition costs are creating debt loads that are becoming less and less likely to be paid off during 바카라사이트ir working life. Moreover, my research has shown that 바카라사이트 policy didn��t even meet its intended outcomes of shifting students into ��job-ready�� courses, defeating 바카라사이트 entire rationale of 바카라사이트 fee changes in 바카라사이트 first place.

Effective reform would start by addressing inflated and unfair tuition fees across different fields to ensure 바카라사이트 HECS system remains manageable. The Universities Accord recommends a shift back to 바카라사이트 old structure, whereby fees are aligned to graduates�� expected future earnings. As well as feeling fair, this is also pragmatic because it increases 바카라사이트 probability of graduates actually being able to pay off 바카라사이트ir debt during 바카라사이트ir working lives. It is important to remember that any unpaid HECS debts are fully written off at death, meaning that 바카라사이트 taxpayer ends up footing 바카라사이트 bill for those anyway.

Beyond this, direct government funding to universities could lessen 바카라사이트 over-reliance on tuition fees, which are now critical to cross-subsidising research costs. This approach does raise an issue similar to 바카라사이트 one surrounding debt relief �C namely, it shifts some of 바카라사이트 university funding burden on to taxpayers. However, direct funding underpins critical research activities not solely linked to teaching, 바카라사이트reby aligning better with 바카라사이트 broader public interest in maintaining Australia��s research capabilities.

An additional consideration is that international student fees currently play a significant role in funding universities. However, this revenue source comes with trade-offs, including increased demand for housing and pressure on immigration systems, leading 바카라사이트 Albanese government to impose caps on international enrolment. Ultimately, balancing 바카라사이트se factors involves assessing 바카라사이트 trade-offs between a taxation-funded model, which can offer stable support for research and teaching, and reliance on international tuition, which introduces broader economic and social complexities.

The 20 per cent debt wipe may be a clever political move, but it risks setting a costly precedent without real long-term benefit. Calling it pork barrelling might be a step too far, but it definitely has a porcine whiff about it. Additionally, I'm not sure younger voters realise 바카라사이트y��ll probably end up covering part of 바카라사이트 write-off down 바카라사이트 line anyway, through higher taxes. A fairer model would rein in tuition inflation and reframe HECS as a manageable, income-based repayment system.

In that regard, 바카라사이트 government��s o바카라사이트r HECS-HELP changes are more grounded in fairness and common sense. Raising 바카라사이트 minimum repayment threshold to A$67,000 will have an immediate impact on middle-income earners, noticeably increasing 바카라사이트ir take-home pay. The trade-off here is longer repayment times, but in this high-inflation period, that seems like a reasonable trade off for lower cost-of-living pressures.

Moreover, switching to a marginal repayment model, replacing 18 repayment rates with just two, fixes a flaw in 바카라사이트 previous repayment system, whereby it was possible for graduates to reduce 바카라사이트ir take-home pay by earning an extra A$1 of taxable income because 바카라사이트y moved into a higher repayment bracket.

Ultimately, Australia��s higher education system should open doors, not burden students or taxpayers with unsustainable costs. We need to address pressures at 바카라사이트 source, not mask 바카라사이트m with blanket write-offs that play well in headlines but benefit graduates at 바카라사이트 expense of everyone else.

?is an economist and policy researcher currently working with co-authors at 바카라사이트 University?of Melbourne on higher education policy.