> I didn't see this discussed in the article, but IMO the main driver is the availability of student loans
People always say that, but I have my doubts. I did some Googling to try to find costs for some well known schools over time and was only able to find historical tuition data for Stanford.
Stanford's tuition has been increasing faster than inflation as far back as the data goes (1920), almost linearly on a log scale [1]. There doesn't seem to be any big change in growth starting when loans became readily available.
Research would disagree. Student loans definitely have had an effect. That the Atlantic ignores that completely calls into question their potential bias. Student loans are a sacred cow for those on the left and center-left, so it isn’t surprising that the Atlantic ignores even a potential causal relationship in the story.
People always say that, but I have my doubts. I did some Googling to try to find costs for some well known schools over time and was only able to find historical tuition data for Stanford.
Stanford's tuition has been increasing faster than inflation as far back as the data goes (1920), almost linearly on a log scale [1]. There doesn't seem to be any big change in growth starting when loans became readily available.
[1] https://imgur.com/fXnjDNn