Why I Defaulted on My Student Loans

I remember being 18 and I was terrified of loans, or of any kind of arrangements that could limit the options of my future! Advices, even ones that come from well-intended people, weren't worth much for me if they weren't supported by detailed plans in which I would end up OK. Receiving such insurance plans proved to be next to impossible, because and as you may presume, those who seriously suggest you mortgaging your life aren't the most forward-looking people!

...so no, I don't sympathize with that naive kid not thinking straight about his own future. I actually feel that this kind of practice represents one of our time's laws of natural selection.

But...

I was talking to my sister the other day, who just graduated from an Ivy League school. All her life she's been in accelerated programs with other well-to-do kids. I realized that she has always interacted with people with above average intelligence, above average connections, above average wealth. I'm betting that many HNers have at least one of those privileges. The overwhelming majority of people do not.

Over time I see a recurring theme: that people who are uneducated and poor are so easily taken advantage of. I've seen single moms lease $30000 SUVs for 600 a month. People who, after work, sit in front of the television and spend -all their money on the weekends.

The world makes it so easy to fuck up. I always have to remind myself, a person with the single privilege of above average intelligence: what is obvious to me is not obvious to others. Yes, books are ubiquitous and cheap. Yes, people should know what they are signing up for. Yes, debts should be paid. But perhaps these things some of us take for granted as simple realities are not so obvious for an overwhelming majority. It is not their fault.

The alternative is to tell them they aren't educated enough to take out a lease.

Imagine how this would be applied to other scenarios. Say... telling someone they aren't educated/financially secure enough to have children.

Because usefulness isn't measured only in money.

(Think of the children! No, really. They cost a ton, no guarantee they'll live to support you in your dotage even, but people still have them.)

So Germany invested by subsidizing some (foreign) students and manages to benefit from the fruits of its own education investment - this is hardly the context I was talking about. I was talking about the case where a country like Germany educates for free its own citizens then they leave for greener pastures. The fact that your government managed to sell you the idea that everything is all right because at least some of the subsidized students (foreign and German) will stay is relevant only to your subjective contentment level. The overall picture can be judged pretty objectively.

"Turns out if you spend like 5 of your formative years at one place, you kind of build roots there."

These kind of people would probably rooted anywhere, in any condition, as its just a thing in their nature, not something to present as a resulting advantage of a given system. Maybe a small part them came to Germany because of something unique that they couldn't possibly find anywhere else, but I think that most likely the majority came to Germany just because of the prohibitive education costs in their own country. That's to say someone else's education system has a problem (by being unattractive in the current conditions) and that secures you incoming talent now. Just expecting others to continue having problems is not a very solid plan to rely on. I believe that it's possible to design the system a little bit better, where the students that have access to subsidized education may come to feel the education debts only when they try to emigrate (and take away the results of that subsidized education) or some other kind of solution to the leakage of public investment.