This is a response to Thomas Dahlmann’s Sept. 7, 2022 comment “Contractual obligations” to my letter “Right thing to do” (Aug. 31). I must apologize if I said anything in my letter to make Mr. Dahlmann think I was attacking him or his wife
As I look over my letter, however, I can’t find any reference to any person as being “feeble-minded.” I only claim that the question, “How do you feel about paying for someone else’s college debt even though you have paid for yours or not even gone to college?” is feeble-minded.
I then set out to answer that question in ways that, I had hoped, would make it clear why I think the question is feeble-minded. The point of my letter was a reminder that we are all in this together.
So, student debt is not the fault of students; it represents a failure of our government. While I support fulfilling ordinary contractual responsibilities, college students sign their loan contracts under the duress of that failure. Contracts signed under duress are usually not binding.
Remember, education is the heart and soul of democracy. History teaches us that people in democratic societies who do not understand the nature of democracy run the risk of losing it.
My letter compared debt forgiveness with insurance and school taxes which, in my opinion, made the question above moot. Insurance assumes that those who own a policy are all in it together, and form a community, a fact we often lose sight of.
(Sunbury Daily Item, September 14, 2022)