I would agree with you that the article you quote from is some way wide of the mark in its analysis of student loans. I can only really speak from personal experience, and that of my peers, but I found that the loans offered extremely favourable terms. The interest rate was very low and coupled to inflation so the real cost of the loan over the term was so low as to be almost negligible.
In addition you don't have to begin repayments until your earnings reach a reasonable level (I believe this was around £18,000 per annum when I started work but it's likely to be higher now) and the monthly payments are affordable. Of course, these two factors could combine to extend the period of the loan and consequently the total interest paid but, if one is worred about that then it's possible to start sooner and increase payments. Crucially, the choice is available.
You make a good point about the possibility for 'investment' in student loans. I had a number of friends (alas, all of them more well-heeled than I) who utilised the low interest rate on the loan in just the way you suggest; stick the cash in a high interest savings account and make a nice bit of wedge whilst you study. To my mind this is slightly unfair, presenting, as it does, the rich with a means for investment that is unavailable to those who actually need the money for their studies. However, to try to implement a system where loans are only available to those who really need them would probably incur costs and complications that may outweigh any benefit.
All in all, provided you're comfortable with the concept of those who choose to go into higher education being asked to meet some of the cost themselves, student loans are an effective means of providing the necessary funding. Articles like the one you quote seem to me to serve little purpose other than causing worry and anxiety with misleading or false information.
Bookmarks