Tickerguy,

The students who are the objective in this scheme are unaware of the mechanisms and purposes of the funding. They're 18 to 20 year-olds who largely cannot process the math to understand what a loan obligation truly amounts to in the first place. They are sheep headed for the shears. The government is precisely the evil villain in this scheme, so awarding said villain with extra powers to police and void degrees is signing up for an even more hellish and bizarre outcome.

Besides, the two objectives in all of this are 1) the Progressive college industry is fully funded, and 2) the college system indoctrinates the masses. If these objectives are met, then government achieved victory. If it gets its loans repaid, well, bonus, but the government undertook this without condition on full repayment.

For a private arrangement in which a college holds the note, awards a degree, and then is stiffed by the student borrower, then the college does maintain control of transcripts and can withhold them as well as send dunning notices to both student and his employer. Not too many employers want deadbeats on staff. So, natural remedies would exist if the private lender system were in play. But, so long as the government is the ultimate buyer of loans, it's a Progressive game in play. Granting greater powers of seizure to that government is a horrid thought.

To the point of seizing or nulling ill-gotten property/gains for the purpose of punishing fraud, there is no disagreement there. But, why would the Progressive government undertake to achieve non-Progressive measures? Student loans are at best nothing more than a really naive idea and at worst a contrivance designed to ensnare an entire generation in Progressive traps.

Government-backed loans were a BAD idea precisely because there is no clean, equitable remedy when the wave ultimately breaks. Debating over equitable solutions after that fact won't really result in one, because the whole system was designed to be inequitable in the first place.