There were as always interesting comments, butI will reply just to the one that was made most frequently. It is that there are external benefits from the study of certain subjects in college, such as English literature and other of the humanities (philosophy, classics, etc.), that would be lost without subsidized student loans. I disagree with this argument for subsidized loans, on several grounds. First, while there may be some external benefits to the study of the humanities, although I'd like to see the evidence or even the argument, I imagine that they are exhausted at a lower level than is generated by subsidization. Second, universities have flexibility with their endowments and they can allocate more endowment funds to the humanities if student tuition income drops because of withdrawal of loan subsidies. Third and most important, most of the ablest students go on to some form of graduate education, and for them the choice of an undergraduate major has few economic implications and so is unlikely to be affected by the existence of loan subsidies. One of the commenters pointed out that I myself majored in English in college. I think it was a valuable background to my subsequent legal studies and I would continue to recommend it as a college major.