The predation is from voters today to taxpayers tomorrow.

Politician A says they want to help students by paying for their education, or at least some of it. This requires cash flow, which results in more taxes, or at the least, entries into the government’s debt figures. Either way it shows up on the balance sheet and can affect tax liabilities today.

Politician B says they want to help students, but they will instead have the government lend money to them, with zero under writing other than the “school” needing to be credentialed by some entity. The cash is spent, but an even bigger asset in the form of the debt is recorded, actually improving the balance sheet. Then you can whittle down whatever taxpayer subsidy is being given to the schools as is, and they can make up for it with tuition increases. Either way, government finances look good, and taxes can even be reduced.

>The predatory part is the pushing kids who don't understand finances into taking massive loans with high interest rates.

There's literally lectures and a quiz you have to pass before you can take the loans that explains how repayment and interest rates work.

For public loans the actual amount doesn't really matter because payment is income based. And the cap on lending is around $60k for 4 years, so I'd hardly use the word massive.

>"why don't you go to uni?"'

Of course all this only applies assuming you're American, which I'd guess your not since your friends call it uni.