There seems to be this misperception out there that everyone opposed to this whole student debt transfer thing is just motivated by some variation of "I didn't get to enjoy this 'beneficial' policy, so they shouldn't either".
That's hogwash.
There are a plethora of valid reasons to oppose it. Let me list the first, I don't know... ten or so that come to mind that have nothing to do with that:
It's unconstitutional.
Biden knows it's unconstitutional and is gonna get thrown out once someone shows standing and it works it's way through the courts.
Despite knowing this, he's made no efforts I can see to get Congress, the branch with the authority to tax, spend, and, you know... legislate, to pursue this to make it constitutional. He didn't even try to do this the right way first.
It's set to spend literally hundreds of billions of dollars (more than any unilateral executive decree in history that wasn't a war) at a time of 40 year highs in inflation and lacks any way to pay for itself. Even if it was a beneficial policy (it's not), this would be horrific timing to introduce it.
This amounts to a regressive wealth transfer from those who are disproportionately less well off (those without college degrees) and suffering financially already to those who are comparatively more well off (those with college degrees).
The decree tries to address this by attaching an (admittedly high) income cap for recipients. Meaning, focusing just on those who are richer on both ends, it's also a transfer of wealth from those who pursued worthwhile college degrees (as priced by the market) and those who went to trade school to those who pursued less useful degrees or life paths.
Because of this, it doubles down on the current policy of the federal government making it easier for young people to make bad decisions that they'll be paying for the rest of their lives.
The decree, despite being sold as necessary in part as a response to predatory lending practices, rewards lenders who made these loans to get more money. Directly. By giving them more money.
The decree would have the effect of making college more expensive rather than less for future students by offsetting a portion of the cost through the subsidy.
The decree completely ignores entirely one of the biggest drivers of skyrocketing tuition and student debt (federal student loans), and doubles down on much of what created this crisis in the first place in the name of addressing it.
Pretending the only opposition is from some subset of boomers who claim to have worked their way through college (in a way that would be impossible to achieve today), who thinks this shows a reward to irresponsibility or who are just mad that they didn't get the benefit themselves so their grandkids should suffer too doesn't add anything to the conversation.