Schools should not charge students any tuition fees. Education must be totally subsidized by the government.
To what extent to do agree or disagree? (Balanced)
Whether education expenses should be covered by the government or be paid by pupils has seemingly been a source of contention in the present age. Although I assume free education can trigger some problems, this essay will also shed light on the advantages of adopting such a policy.
To begin with, an unsubsidized education system would simply be too costly for governments to be maintained for long-term. Hence families may have to start paying much higher taxes, which could hurt the economy since people might have less to spend or invest. Moreover, should the process of learning and teaching at school be free, there may be a concern that some might not study hard to make the most of their education. They are likely to drop out before getting a high school diploma; therefore, they are not well-prepared for jobs after graduation. It is a universally-acknowledged truth that people appreciate something they must pay for more than what is offered for free.
However, free education empowers low income brackets, most of whom can hardly make ends meet, to send their children to school without being worried about financial problems. Take China as a case in point. Were it not due to government subsidies in the most populous country in the world, half of the population would be illiterate with irreversible consequences, one of which might be high rate of juvenile delinquency. What is particularly noteworthy about not charging students is ensuring fairness in the community as the vast majority of children will have an equal chance to unleash their true potential.
In conclusion, taking all benefits and drawbacks into account, I would concede that a large number of people in the globe are already suffering from economic and social inequalities and not subsidizing education is very likely to exacerbate the situation.
Time: 45 minutes
Word count: 300