It is sad that the political parties do not seem to get it. The question is: Should government be responsible for education? My answer is a resounding NO!!. Education is an investment in ones skill sets aimed at improving earning potential and hence a higher standard of living. Individuals when they pay for their education are apt to value it. A lot of the students who benefit from the free education programs could careless about education,They see it as four plus years of socializing rather than skill acquisition. As much as I dislike the TEA organization for their double standard, I believe that government should get out of the education business. I will go one step further, government should GET OUT of subsidizing any form of consumption of any good or service. When governments pursue programs to support small businesses, they are directly subsidizing the consumers of the products or services made by this entrepreneurs.
If you have a viable idea, the market forces should evaluate and support it, NOT tax payers.
To my Republican "friends", STOP THE DOUBLE STANDARD. And to my democrat "friend", STOP SPOON FEEDING ME.
IF BOTH PARTIES LISTEN, THE BUDGET DEFICIT AND EXCESS TAXATION WILL BE A THING OF THE PAST.
While I agree with you that many people do not take free education for the serious matter it is I disagree with your conclusion that government should not subsidize education. Education, while personally beneficial, also has national ramifications that make it in the government's interest to subsidize. Government subsidization of education is simply an investment in the nation's human resources. Take for instance, India. What is fueling India's current boom in the technological sector? The answer -- a generation of foreign educated young Indians who took their knowledge back home.
ReplyDelete