Some people believe that people have the right to university education so government should make it free no matter that thir financial background. Agree or disagree?
People have different views about whether higher education should be subsidized totally by govenments. While I agree that free access to university is benefical to many students, I believe that this argument is flawed with potential problems.
On the one hand, it is understandable why some people are in favour of the opinion that a part of the government budget should be allocated for tertiary education. The core of the argument is that education is of paramount importance for personal success in life. Therefore, higher education should be free for those who chose to pursue a university degree . In a society without affordable higher education, only children from wealthy families would have access to the best learning opportunities, they would therefore be better prepared for the job market. This kind of inequality would be ensure the success of some but harm the prospects of other.
On the other hand, I contend that free tertiary education is unfeasible for the following reasons. Firstly, the public purse is limited. If public money is diverted to university education, other sectors will suffer. Lack of investment in healthcare, for example, can result in an outbreak of epidemic or unnesscary deaths in society. Secondly, students tend not to feel a sense of responsibility towards their studies when their courses are funded by the government. In worst cases, some drop out of their courses while others graduate with a poor degree, which hinders their career prospects in the future. This leads to a waste of national resources spent on teachers and materials.
In conclusion, although providing public subsidies for university education would be advantageous to many young people, I personally believe that this would be difficult to implement because of the main reasons mentioned above. (290)