 

 82051300599              
              194703                 
        74     
      40  




For at least several years intellectuals , academics and politicians have discussed whether university education should be free for everybody. I believe that the answer to this question should be negative. 
First of all, the thought expressed by Milton Friedman has to be kept in mind: There is no such thing as a free lunch. It is obvious that if the students do not pay, someone else, namely all the taxpayers, will have to.
Furthermore, a government which provides students with free education must be aware that after having finished the university, they may emigrate, thus working for the wealth of a different state. This may happen especially if taxes in their motherland are high due to the need of raising money for free education. 
Opponents of this approach often claim that the state has an obligation to equalize chances of people. This is true, but providing free education for all would deter, rather than upgrade peoples chances. 
As far as the argument that paying and non-paying students receive identical diploma is concerned, it has to be remembered that any certificates are issued to prove a persons education and skills rather than the way in which these were obtained. 
Having considered the above arguments, I am bound to restate my opinion that the university education should not be free for all. Private grants and scholarships for the best students would be sufficient to secure poorer persons' education. I would, however, be slow to attribute one man's money to another without their mutual consent. 


