Critique Essay Final

.docx

School

Centennial College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

COM171

Subject

Communications

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by NewChange2023

1 Is Joe Biden’s policy on student loans a candy only for the wealthy? Centennial College COMM171 Section 035 Professor Jean Chang Date: October 22, 2022

2 Is Joe Biden’s new policy on student loans a candy only for the wealthy? Joe Biden's new policy has aroused many debates lately between economists and politicians. In the article “Forgiving Student Loans Is a Costly Mistake,” published by the Editors of Bloomberg on August 25, 2022, the author discusses why the forgiving student loans policy announced by the Biden administration is a bad idea. As the author believes this policy will benefit wealthy people more than poor Americans, it is a big mistake for the Biden Administration. The author uses logos and ethos to drive their viewpoints to the readers. But the author’s views are not effectively delivered to the readers because of the ineffective use of research studies, cause and effect, and emotional word choices. Firstly, the author uses research data and statistics to support their point of view. But it is not effective. In paragraph 3, the author quotes an analysis that roughly 42% of this benefit would go to the wealthiest two-fifth of Americans, and only 12% would go to the bottom fifth. The study quoted is from the Penn Wharton Budget Model analysis (Smetters et al., 2022). But the data cited by the author is outdated as it was revised after Biden’s package was released (Cook, 2022). The original Penn Wharton Model does not consider the $20,000 forgiveness applied to those who qualified for Pell Grants. In the revised Penn Wharton Budget Model, about 75% of the benefit would go to households making $88,000 or less per year (Luhby, 2022). So, the revised analysis invalidates the author's data and undermines the article's credibility. If the author can quota more data from different groups or research to support this argument, it will be more effective and convincing. Also, in paragraph 4, the author quotes that funding this forgiving loan plan would reduce the funding available for investments in K-12 and early childhood learning. But other people argue that this plan is already “paid for” because of the shrinking federal deficit (Tankersley, 2022). So, the financial implication of this plan will not

3 worsen the government's financial situation. As it is difficult to see the direct linkage between the program and the reduction of investment in early childhood education, this argument from the author is not effectively delivered. Secondly, the author uses the cause-and-effect technique to present this plan's impact on inflation and future tuition costs. But the argument is also feeble. In paragraph 5, the author argues that even though the program would not put cash in borrowers’ pockets, it would still fuel inflation by encouraging consumers to spend more. But inflation is a complex economic topic and needs to be analyzed by sophisticated models. Without throughout studies and research, it is tough to prove that the plan will cause inflation to rise. For poor Americans who live paycheck to paycheck, the program will relieve their financial burden of monthly repayment instead of encouraging them to spend more (Smith, 2022). The author also argues that this plan would cause future tuition costs to rise as colleges have fewer incentives to hold down tuition costs. The tuition price is affected by many factors, for example, the cost of teaching personnel, the wages for other workers, the maintenance costs for campus facilities, etc. In contrast, this plan will make higher education more attractive for lower-income families and attract more students from these families to attend the colleges. With more population attending higher education, the country's productivity can be significantly increased and provide a chance for upward mobility to kids from lower-income families. Therefore, this argument from the author is not very persuasive and does not stand on solid ground. Thirdly, the author uses emotional word choices to convey that this policy is wrong. In paragraph 6, the author writes, "… an even bigger bonanza for the rich” and “That this order was advanced under a dubious legal rationale.” The author uses the word “bonanza” to emphasize that this plan is a bonus gift for the rich and uses the word “dubious” to show that

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help