Robert Reich's latest book is "THE SYSTEM: Who Rigged It, How To Fix It." He is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley and Senior Fellow at the Blum Center. He served as Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration, for which Time Magazine named him one of the 10 most effective cabinet secretaries of the twentieth century. He has written 17 other books, including the best sellers "Aftershock,""The Work of Nations," "Beyond Outrage," and "The Common Good." He is a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine, founder of Inequality Media, a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and co-creator of the award-winning documentaries "Inequality For All," streamng on YouTube, and "Saving Capitalism," now streaming on Netflix.

+  MY LINKTREE    +  SUPPORT INEQUALITY MEDIA
+  FOLLOW ON TUMBLR    +  TWITTER    +  FACEBOOK

PBS, JANUARY 13, 2020

UCTV, DECEMBER 22, 2017

CNN, DECEMBER 13, 2017

TRAVIS SMILEY, NOVEMBER 30, 2017

MORNING JOE, NOVEMBER 9, 2017

ABC, APRIL 30, 2017

ABC, FEBRUARY 26, 2017

CNN, FEBRUARY 21, 2017

CNN, FEBRUARY 2, 2017

CNN, DECEMBER 10, 2016

CNN, DECEMBER 7, 2016

CNN, DECEMBER 7, 2016

DEMOCRACY NOW!, AUGUST, 2016

C-SPAN BOOK TV, OCTOBER, 2015

COLBERT REPORT, NOVEMBER, 2013

WITH BILL MOYERS, SEPT. 2013

DAILY SHOW, SEPTEMBER 2013, PART 1

DAILY SHOW, SEPTEMBER 2013, PART 2

DEMOCRACY NOW, SEPTEMBER 2013

INTELLIGENCE SQUARED DEBATES, SEPTEMBER 2012

DAILY SHOW, APRIL 2012, PART 1

DAILY SHOW, APRIL 2012, PART 2

COLBERT REPORT, OCTOBER, 2010

WITH CONAN OBRIEN, JANUARY, 2010

DAILY SHOW, OCTOBER 2008

DAILY SHOW, APRIL 2005

DAILY SHOW, JUNE 2004

TRUTH AS A COMMON GOOD, APRIL, 2017

MUNK DEBATE ON THE US ELECTION, OCTOBER, 2016

WHY WORRY ABOUT INEQUALITY, APRIL, 2014

LAST LECTURE, APRIL, 2014

INEQUALITY FOR ALL, NOVEMBER, 2013

THE RICH ARE TAXED ENOUGH, OCTOBER, 2012

AFTERSHOCK, SEPTEMBER, 2011

THE NEXT ECONOMY AND AMERICA'S FUTURE, MARCH, 2011

HOW UNEQUAL CAN AMERICA GET?, JANUARY, 2008

  • A Better Idea for College Loans


    Tuesday, May 15, 2007

    One of my former students who graduates from business school next week has already landed a job with a private-equity firm paying him $240,000 next year, which I can tell you is a lot more than the salary of his former professor who’s more than three decades older. My student tells me with a smile he’ll be able to pay off his student debt way ahead of schedule. But that’s not his real reason for taking the private-equity job. He wants to make gobs of money.

    On the other hand, several of my students who will graduate next week tell me they would have liked to go into social work or into the non-profit sector or provide legal services to the poor. One had his heart set on becoming a painter. Another became passionate about archeology and had wanted to go on a dig in the Sahara. But they can’t do any of these things because they have tens of thousands of dollars of debt. They need jobs that pay the rent while they repay their loans.

    When they begin their university studies and take out college loans, most students don’t know exactly where their interests lie. That’s what college is all about – discovering what you want to do with your life. But America’s increasing reliance on student loans to pay for higher education is directing millions of young people away from what they really want to do – from careers that could contribute a great deal to their communities and to the nation as a whole, but don’t get them out from under their college loans.

    So here’s an idea that might allow more students to pursue their real interests when they graduate: Make repayment of government-subsidized loans depend on how much money they earn. Say everyone has to pay ten percent of their income for the first ten years of their full-time work. And then the loans are considered paid off.

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

    Share


  • Click for Videos