Free Education Essay

in that respect is no such thing as set free information fully payd by the authorities. A zero-tuition college education manifestly means that instead of the students bearing the cost of attaining their degrees the taxpayers bear it. Students and pargonnts misperceive the cost of education, considering it to be free, even though it comes out of their pockets in taxes.And why should low-income taxpayers finance the education of wealthier students? Proponents of state-financed education argue that absence of government help would portion higher(prenominal)(prenominal) education out of reach of brusk students. But I t peculiarity to disagree in that at that place are no poor college students. College-caliber students possess great wealth in the song of human capital. Anyone headed for college has marvelous wealth in the form of intellectual capital and entrust arrest earnings from his/her college education.So, the benefits of a college education are essentially reaped by t he soulfulness acquiring higher education. The future earnings of the individual typically bring about an adequate return on the gross investment in abtaining higher education. muchover, providing free college education to all is a rather inefficient counsel to serve the interests of poor students since a large proportion of students who acquire higher education come from relatively well off families.There are many negative aspects of government-financed higher education.Free education leads to overproduction and waste. But, isnt it good to have more young people with degrees? Dont we have a more educated workforce for the more demanding jobs that will dominate our economy in the future? The answer to these questions is no. By putting more people in colleges we end up with causeless students who lower the standards demanded by higher education. In his book Generation X Goes to College, Peter Sacks explains how he was driven to make his courses intellectually vapid, easy and s ocialize in order to improve student performance and keep his job. This is a result of classrooms being filled by indifferent students who want a degree with the lowest possible effort.The producers of higher education in a zero-tuition system are the only oneshaving control over the quality of education. financial support of universities by the government leads to higher government control over them. political science officials regularly audit universities to check whether the money granted to them in the form of loans and research grants is being spent wisely. The downside of this is that the auditors may lack sufficient perceptiveness of the technical specialities being evaluated. Also the government may enforce the hiring of cogency from minority groups, thus bringing down the quality of the teaching staff.More undesirable is the effect on the thinking of the academics. The state-subsidized scholar is reluctant to hollow ideas that bring into question his livelihood and that of his colleages. He is encouraged by his superiors not to bite the hand that feeds him. Thus, there can be no independence of thought and freedom to explore new ideas under such a system.Most importantly, due to state financing of higher education, it is far outside from a free market. The cost of education is masked by the government subsidies. Government funding is a crucial intrusion into the market monetary value of education. It is an intrusion which steadily raises the price to taxpayers, but reduces the perceived price of education to the educational establishment. As a result there is little incentive to control costs since they are already perceived as low. There is little incentive to promote innovations since people innovate when they feel the need to give consumers their moneys worth. Finally there is little incentive to respect the student who is the customer.In conclusion, I feel that the conventional wisdom about college education is wrong.We dont need free educa tion to get more students into college we need to end the government subsidies so that college costs will be borne only by willing parties. We dont need to try to make college attention universal we need to allow people to choose for themselves the type and result of education that best suits them. Making college education fully government-financed goes against the basic documental of higher education to allow the intellectual cream of society to differentiate in their chosen field of interest.