So, there's a new crowdfunding idea that seems brilliant on the surface, utterly brilliant.
Basically, those with more money would pay off part or all of the the soaring student debts of college grads in return for a cut of their paychecks for a contractual length of time. And right now, it's a fair system. The amount taken is based on what you make--meaning if your paycheck drops so does the payment you make--and nothing I see says that a contractee is required to work for the person they're contracted to, though there does seem to be a potential mentor/mentee relationship depending on the plan. This could be a real, workable solution until something better comes along, one of those touchy-feely, pay it forward sort of things.
Ideally this would be wonderful.
Ideally.
But before students start celebrating in the streets, lets have a long hard think about this. Imagine it, not now, with well meaning people who simply want to give others a hand, but five years down the road, or ten. Imagine it after it's become a successful and profitable venture, successful and profitable enough to be sold to a larger company, or for a larger company to notice and start cashing into the same business model. Because if it turns out to pay well and turn a nice profit, the big boys
will get in on it, and do you honestly think they'll
play fair with young grads who are just desperate to eat and keep a roof over their heads? We already have
full blown slavery in this country (and
have had, for
a while), do we need to totally relive the sins of the past by opening the door again for the possibility of
indentured servants?
Plus, if it
does work it will detract from the real discussion we should be having, which is how to get affordable education to everyone. And if it becomes a viable business model, then no one will
WANT to make education affordable because doing so would mean shutting down an industry and getting rid of jobs.
Plus, what we're really saying is we're getting rid of even the flimsiest of excuses that the rich are robbing from the poor. This will be an insanely easy game plan to wealth, no work required:
1) Set education too high to afford
2) Swoop in like a white knight to back struggling students
3) For no more reason than the fact you are ALREADY rich, dip your hand into their pocket, stealing part of the earnings that they worked and worked hard for and that you only have access to because you could give them charity when they were down
4) Continue to rig the deck to set even more people on an educational course into debt, back them with the money you made stealing from the last set of students, and continue to grow the debt pot indefinitely, as well as increase the amount of workers who are contractually unable to leave your influence until you choose to let them go
Appendix: Lobby Congress for laws in your favor and against students, and use the money you have to block any reforms to education or any individual or group challenges to the increasingly cutthroat and unmanageable contracts you place on the heads of young people. While you're at it, be sure to put in arbitration clauses that take away their right to sue and other flim-flamery that takes away their rights as workers and sometimes their constitutional rights--all things you can do as a private business. Then sit back and enjoy your slaves-in-all-but-name.
Yes, this is a fantastic idea at first glance. But
ONLY at first glance. You have to think a year ahead, two years, five, ten. Think what a single mom would agree to in order to feed her kids. What a foolish, undertaught student may agree to, or a person on the edge of ruin and desperate to keep from becoming homeless.
We'd need laws in place to protect them, but our laws aren't doing so well these days.
Florida just passed a law that basically says not only can the state's workers not have sick days, it's against the law to even broach the topic for future discussion. They outlawed even
talking about the possibility of reversing the law. And even if that is unconstitutional (which it might not be), what took less than a month to do could take a decade or even two to undo, and a lot of money. Arbitration clauses
take away a worker's right to sue, or really even have their grievances
looked at and fairly judged. We have defunded OSHA to the point
factories are exploding all over the US, and yet there is no discussion of correcting the deficiency. Instead, there's a push to defund the
FDA,
EPA, and any other
protective agency, as well.
Filming what happens on factory farms has been outlawed, and violators may even be
labeled as terrorists. And who can forget that we
still haven't lifted a finger to put
a single meaningful restriction on Wall Street, even
after they have
repeatedly been caught doing the
same crooked shit that nearly crashed the world economy.
Laws are being judged in favor of businesses left and right, so if this business model takes off, realistically speaking, in whose favor do you think any conflicts will be decided? College students without two pennies to rub together? Or the guys with the big bucks?
Someone pointed out there is precedent for this, as it's very similar to the way high stakes poker players get their funding. However, poker is a one shot deal. Those who back poker players are gambling just as much as the player himself is. If they pick the wrong "horse," they lose everything, and they know it. College kids are a steady stream of unlimited income, as long as you keep them impoverished and desperate enough to keep them signing those contracts. So if you're going to make a for-profit business model to "help the poor," would it
really be in your best interest to actually help them?
Really?
I think, until things become more equalized, this is opening a very ugly door, one that, if it swings wide, we may never be able to shut again. This should
not be looked at in the short term or in one-off situations, but long tern and in context to our society as a whole. The whole changes the picture, and not for the better.
