大学免费与学生分担费用Free University or Student Contributions?

Arguments about university fees are not really arguments about whether education is valuable. They are arguments about who gains from it, and therefore who should pay. Both sides have a fair point, and I believe a good system needs to combine them. Those who support free education make two strong arguments. The first is access. If a degree costs a large sum at the start, the students most likely to be put off are those from families with no experience of university and no savings. They are frightened by the idea of the debt, even before they look at the terms. The second argument is that society as a whole benefits. Everyone gains from having good doctors, engineers and teachers, whether or not they went to university themselves. The opposite view is also serious. Graduates earn considerably more over a lifetime than non-graduates. A system paid for entirely out of general taxation therefore asks people who did not go to university, and who usually earn less, to pay for those who did. Free education sounds fair, but its effects are not always fair. My own view takes the strongest part of each argument. Nobody should have to find money in order to start a degree, because that is the point at which access is lost. However, those who later earn a great deal because of that degree should pay back more than those who do not. This means repaying through the tax system, according to income, and writing the debt off if the income never comes. In short, the cost should follow the benefit. What it should never be is a bill handed to an eighteen-year-old.