You take a student loan, you repay your student loan. That should be the obvious, baseline understanding of how student lending works. There may be times when that should not apply, but contra presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, those times should be rare, and dependent on specific circumstances.
Federal loans constituted about 88% of total student loan volume in the 2018-19 school year. Let's be clear what they do: They give taxpayer money to students so the recipients can get a degree and vastly increase their lifetime earnings.
What would wide-scale forgiveness be? Straight up robbing Peter to enrich Paul.
Such forgiveness would not just be morally wrong, it would exacerbate many huge higher education problems, ranging from rampant price inflation — the more money people are able to pay, the more colleges can charge — to the amenities arms race.
If students don't think they would have to repay their debt, why not accept higher student fees for, say, a fancy on-campus water park?
That said, there are two situations in which it may be reasonable to forgive loans, especially if they are private: when it is either physically or financially impossible for borrowers to repay.
Physical inability to repay is easy to envision. If someone has an accident and ends up with a disability that makes it impossible to work, or work at the level of remuneration they had reasonably expected, it makes sense to forgive their loans.
What about financial failure that does not stem from an act of God? This is tougher. If someone spends on luxuries or too big a house, and renders themselves unable to repay their debts, they can declare bankruptcy, empowering a court to create a repayment plan that can discharge some debt. But they should really remain responsible for what they owe — the situation was of their own making.