Because no one is talking about doing both -- the only policy being discussed by populists is the simplistic option (cancel loans or don't cancel loans). Also, all of those loans (and I have a fair amount as well) were taken voluntarily by adults capable of handling responsibility and consequences. If there was any fair way to do it, it would be to reimburse the last X years worth of student loan payments, such that people who forewent savings to pay down their debts aren't penalized compared to people who did not.

> It literally hurts no one to forgive the loans

Also want to address this, because I feel like it's a common misconception, especially with Gen Z. It's basically an inflationary policy to forgive debts. So it does hurt anyone who is affected negatively by inflation, while certainly not being "fair" for the reason mentioned above (some responsible adults actually paid their debts and are penalized for that). We all make mistakes (such as taking out massive loans to go to acting school and having it not materialize), but consequences are the side effect of living in a consistent reality. If you make financial reality inconsistent by forgiving loans, you incentivize more of that bad behavior. Also note that most degree holders with student debt are not the lower class, but the middle and upper middle class. Student loan forgiveness is a handout for an educated class of people who are generally doing much better than the poorest in society.

Should taxpayers who never went to college and didn't take out any student loans have to bear the financial burden? Should borrowers who did the responsible thing and paid back their loans already receive a retroactive refund?