The Case against College
Free college is a concept aimed at enabling students to attend university without paying any fees and having the state catering for their upkeep. In the United States and other parts of the world, students receive offers of fees subventions, living grants, and maintenance loans. The state’s offerings enable most students to finish college but do not cover most of the learner’s financial needs. Therefore, students continue to take hefty loans to fund their education, a situation that places them in debt. Proponents of free college want the state to eliminate tuition fee and provide enough grants to cater for the learners’ upkeep. An alternative solution is to ensure students get enough working opportunities to cater for their needs. The aim of free college is enabling students to finish college with little or no debt.
However, many college students come from families that can afford a percentage of fees to cater for their education. Therefore, the paper advocates that free college is a non-issue, and the focus should shift to helping needy students only. When faced with the question of why room and board should be free for college students while every other person pays for the same proponents of free college point out is that students forego a lot of income opportunities by choosing to go to college rather than working. Therefore, they require compensation through the provision of free room and board. The argument remains unconvincing because students go to college in an attempt secure a sound financial future. According to Matt Bruenig when writing “The Case against College,” the biggest problem with free college is that most students come from well-off families, and they already enjoy promising futures. Statistics show that only 20% of students from 2% of America’s poorest families attend college. The same statistics show that 90% of students from 2% of America’s richest families attend college.
The statistics prove that most college students can afford to pay for higher education. Consequently, free college education must remain a reserve for the minority needy students from poor families. Bruenig explains that the relatively few poor students attend two-year community colleges and cheaper, less selective, four-year colleges. Public colleges that are the target of free college currently charge no tuition fees for poor students and provide grants of between $ 3,080 and $ 2,320 to them. Richer students receive much fewer subsidies and living grants. Considering that public colleges mainly constitute of wealthy students, offering free college would fill the pockets of rich students and their families, and neglect poor students. Supporters of free college often ignore the financial class-based distribution of students in colleges.
They tend to put their focus on a supposed student-debt crisis to show that those attending college are a suffering class and need more benefits. It is true that some colleges inflict impose high fees to students resulting in significant debt, but these colleges do not represent the larger picture. It is unfair to invest large sums of taxpayer’s money …