Robert Reich's dumb idea

In his May 9 weekly whinatorial on public radio's Marketplace, former Clinton cabinet secretary Robert Reich first complains about large loans many students have to take out to complete their educations. He then bemoans that it makes graduates take up well-paying jobs instead of being able to pursue "what they really want to do," such as taking up painting or archaeology. Reich then seriously proposes a truly silly idea:

Make repayment of government-subsidized loans depend on how much money they earn. Say everyone has to pay 10 percent of their income for the first 10 years of their fulltime work. And then the loans are considered paid off.

My student who's landed that private-equity job would pay 10 percent of his income for 10 years, which would be a hefty sum. My students who go into social work or become artists would pay 10 percent of theirs, which would be far less. The private-equity guy would, in effect, subsidize the social worker and the artist. And why not? This way all of them could follow their callings.

So let's see: We'll create an incentive for people to run up huge college loans pursuing whatever they like for as long as they like, knowing that they won't really have to pay it all back. And they'll be subsidized by those who, instead of pursuing their whimsy, opt to take up well-paying jobs.

Let's also note that Professor Reich teaches at UC Berkeley, where professor's salaries average nearly $130,000 per year, plus a very generous benefit package that likely drives his total cost of compensation over $200,000 per year. That puts him in the very rarified upper percentages of American society. He makes far more than most professionals make, probably more than most university students will ever make. And that's not counting Mr. Reich's other sources of income, such as his aforementioned weekly whinatorials on "non-profit" public radio (though it obviously profits Mr. Reich).

So how about this instead: If those students were not being forced to pay such huge university costs each semester, they wouldn't have to take out such huge loans in the first place. And since much of those huge (and rapidly rising) university costs go to pay the high salaries and lavish benefits of university professors, perhaps the solution to the problem lies with Mr. Reich himself.

So how about it, Professor? Why not address the problem of those big college loans directly at the source, by reducing the cost of a university education? You're very willing to ask taxpayers and less-whimsical students to subsidize graduates who follow their fancies; are you willing to begin by advocating, say, a 20% cut in university salaries? Charity begins at home, yes?