Melissa Gilleland

English Composition II
Student Loans as Explained by Someone Who Can Pay Them
In September of 2011, an economist named Justin Wolfers wrote an article about student
loan forgiveness. The article, titled, Student Loan Forgiveness? Worst Idea Ever, was a
response to Robert Applebaums petition to forgive student debt. The point of the article was to
persuade those who were interested in the bill that student loan forgiveness is a pointless feat. In
his article, he discusses how not only student loan forgiveness is a bad idea, it wouldnt solve
anything in the first place. Though the article may provoke an agreeable response from its
readers, the construction of the argument itself is lacking effectiveness.
The use of ethos in the essay gives the readers a sense of the authors expertise. Wolfers
background provides a firm confidence in his credibility. An economist and a public policy
scholar, Wolfers has worked at many credible sources including the New York Times and Wall
Street Journal. He graduated from Harvard earning a PhD and Bachelors degree in economics,
and currently works as a professor of economics at the University of Michigan (Wolfers). His
writing in the article, however, negatively impacts the ethos that his background has built up.
Wolfers self-confidence may initially help to assure readers that he knows what hes talking
about, but Wolfers tone becomes overly-confident throughout the essay. He belittles the
opponents argument from the get-go, with Worst Idea Ever being part in the title. The way he
goes point by point through Applebaums argument is convincing, but his unnecessarily snide
remarks take away from that. While Wolfers does have the superior knowledge on the subject,
his own sense of superiority takes away from his credibility.
Pathos is used in the article to evoke a belief in the audience that Applebaums proposal is
faulty and should be dismissed. Wolfers off his article by asking why on earth giving money to

Melissa Gilleland
English Composition II
college graduates is being considered, planting the idea that its a ridiculous notion (p. 228). He
goes on to paint a picture of college graduates as freeloaders who just dont want to pay the
money. He uses phrases such as this is just a bunch of kids to further enforce the idea that
those who support the bill are childlike, spoiled and ignorant, and not to be taken seriously (p.
228). He also subtly separates the readers from the supporters of the bill. Throughout his essay,
Wolfers calls those who support Applebaums petition they, and uses we or us whilst
addressing the readers (p. 228-229). While his tone is educated and adamant, it is also harsh and
superior. More clearly depicted in his article is his use of dramatic language. He repeatedly uses
hyperbole such as best and worst, and clearly lets his passion for the topic shine through.
While this may evoke feelings of agreement and superiority in some of his readers, it may have
caused anger or wariness in others. The way he belittles Applebaums idea past simply proving
his point may make him appear less trustworthy, especially to the readers who are experiencing
student debt himself. His last phrase about not being able to find a single economist to support
this idiotic idea may make his entire article seem less convincing, as all-or-nothing phrases are
rarely every true (p. 229). While some of Wolfers more incendiary language may have put
readers off, it is still highly effective in highlighting clear flaws with his opponents plan.
The use of logos in the article helped to enforce the idea that Wolfers notions are correct.
Wolfers does a good job of dismantling his opponents argument. When he goes through their
reasoning point by point and offers up his opinion of why they are wrong, Wolfers is
acknowledging the other sides complaints while also proving his own points. The way this is
executed reveals the major flaws in Applebaums argument, and leaves very little room to
disagree with Wolfers points. At the same time, though, many of the sentences in Wolfers article
begin with words like probably, maybe, and likely. When looked at closely, it is clear that

Melissa Gilleland
English Composition II
his argument is based on assumptions. One of the main assumption Wolfers makes is that the
money spent on forgiving student loan debt would be better boost the economy if given in
smaller amounts to poorer people. He proposes that giving $1000 to 50 poor people rather than
giving $50,000 to one person in student debt would be more effective. What he fails to mention
is that this is a theory that hasnt been proven, and that its possible to be both poor and suffering
from student debt. Wolfers article includes several examples of logical fallacies. There are many
hasty generalizations made. To start the article off, Wolfers talks about how those who went to
college have higher paying jobs and salaries, but he does not cite any sources or statistics. He
fails to concede that it is possible to have gone to college but not have gotten a job. Along the
same lines, Wolfers hastily generalizes those with student debt as people who could spend more
money if they wanted to (p. 228). While this may be true for some college graduates, it most
certainly is not true for all. Wolfers also notes that the people lobbing for the bill are a bunch of
kids who dont want to pay their loans back (p. 228). He creates a false either-or scenario which
purports that the people who support the bill simply dont want to pay the money back. While his
systematic dissection of his opponents argument is clear and appears to be logical, much of the
argument is based on faulty assumption.
Wolfers uses ethos, logos, and pathos throughout his article to sway the readers towards
his point of view. With ethos, the credibility of his background is overshadowed by his lack of
sources. With pathos, his authoritative tone is at times overshadowed by his attempts to prove his
superiority. Finally, in regards to logos, his clear deconstruction of his opponents points is filled
with logical fallacies. The weight of his argument is diminished by his biting personal opinions
and lack of sources. Although his essay is compelling at first glance, when it is deconstructed,
Justin Wolfers argument falls flat.

Melissa Gilleland
English Composition II
Citations
"Justin Wolfers." Justin Wolfers. University of Michigan, n.d. Web. 8 Feb. 2015.
Wolfers, Justin. "Forgive Student Loans? Worst Idea Ever." Contemporary & Classic
Arguments: A Portable Anthology. By Sylvan Barnet and Hugo Adam. Bedau. Boston,
MA: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2005. 228-29. Print.