In The Daily Beast, NYU Professor Andrew Ross takes a stance that should make college admissions officers, the federal government, and student loan debt collectors blanch. Essentially, he says that student loans are immoral, and that asking college students to leverage their future earnings for an opportunity to learn is akin to indentured servitude. He notes that, while there is much discussion of student loan debt, very little of that discussion takes place on college campuses. He also takes issue with the terms of student loans, pointing to loans’ inability to be discharged during bankruptcy proceedings, the high interest rates the government charges for student loans, and the tools that debt collectors have at their disposal (such as garnishment and clawing back tax refunds).

Last fall, Ross and others launched the Occupy Student Debt Campaign, which calls for the federal government to pay college tuition fees, zero-interest student loans, financial transparency at both public and private colleges, and wiping the slate clean for those that currently carry student loan debt. The Occupy Student Debt Campaign website has three petitions: one for those who owe student loans and pledge to stop paying them once the petition garners one million signatures; one for faculty members; and one for allies who don’t owe debt but who support the principles of the campaign.

While the idea of a federally-funded university education is anathema to many, Ross offers a chilling perspective. He writes, “On a rough estimate, it would only take $70 billion of the federal budget to cover the tuition costs at every two- and four-year public college. This happens to be the sum the Pentagon wastes annually in ‘unaccountable spending,’ according to a recent audit, a testimony to how skewed our national priorities have become.”

Andrew Martin at the New York Times reports that, while debt collection agencies are rubbing their hands in glee at the defaulted student loan goldmine, there is zero incentive to help consumers who owe the debts rehabilitate their loans. Quoting a column from debt collection industry publication InsideARM, Martin highlighted the industry’s reaction to the $76 billion mountain of defaulted student loans: “It was lip-smacking.” Martin quotes another InsideARM article in which the writer called student loans a “new oil well.”

There are 23 debt collection agencies that are priming the pump. These agencies each have a piece of the student loan debt collection pie, and the federal government paid out $355 million last year to these debt collectors. At issue isn’t whether or not borrowers should repay their loans; at issue is a broken system where borrowers aren’t made aware of the programs available to make repayment manageable, and debt collectors who have no incentive to create a payment plan that works for consumers. As a result, the interest and penalties pile on, sometimes doubling or tripling the original loan amount.

Given that student loans generally aren’t dischargeable in bankruptcy, and given that the government is allowed to seize tax refunds and garnish wages of defaulted borrowers, it’s worth it to find a way to repay student loans. The government offers income-based repayment programs (payments are 15 percent of disposable income) and deferment programs. Unfortunately, debt collection agencies don’t have a financial incentive for shepherding borrowers into these programs. Under consideration are regulations that would force debt collectors to help those with student loans move into an affordable payment plan, that would lower required payments to 10 percent of disposable income, and that would enable borrowers to apply for the programs online. While this won’t solve everyone’s problems, it will help many more consumers who are in default and prevent the “lip-smacking” mentality of the debt collection industry.