no its not wrong you invest in your future, if it was free everyone would take the mickey like all the single mothers etc (there are a high percentage that take the mickey)
2006-10-30 14:21:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
When the government is crying out for people with apprenticeships and people with the right qualifications for the job themn YES study should be free to all. I do not agree to people having to pay to stiudy because at the end of the day what is wrong with a person trying to better themselves. In this country there is far too much centalisation on money which is aimed at students paying for their tuition fees, their books, their transportation to and fro college or uni. Doesnt the government realise if it was cheaper to study then they would not have to employ as many people from other countries. which in the long run costs more than training someone already living in this country.
2006-10-30 21:51:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by daisy 22 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hi Blue,
I completely agree that ALL education should be free, all the way to PhD.
Those that disagree are usually those who do not have the academic prowess to succeed at university or are those who simply make excuses for not going.
Then they moan when they don't get promoted high enough in the firms they work for.Graduates pay taxes when they get a job the same as anyone else but when they get the higher paid jobs they pay more tax.
When students go to uni they have rent etc to pay. They then have to pay this money back so in effect they are paying it twice.
Education is a right, not a privelidge.
What would you prefer? Spend the money on educating our own people or send it abroad to line the pockets of some dictator by calling it foreign aid, which is happening now?
Think about it.
2006-10-30 16:59:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by LYN W 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
I think it's wrong that you have to pay for what is called a "public education" that is required by the government.
I think that tuition at college and university should be ALOT less then it is but that shouldnt be covered by the government. No one forces you go to.
Unless I was going to an ivy leage university, I could never imagine going to a big university when I can get the same education at a local college for 1/4th the price.
2006-10-30 16:42:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by ME 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Who pays the teachers to teach the students? Besides, I don't think that students pay the whole education. State's pick up some of the tab too.
2006-10-30 16:36:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by m_scott123 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes, especially if they are studing to be doctors nursing teaching anything which will be a "labour of love" and putting something back into society. It prices out students who come from lower income familes as a lot of pressure goes on to kids when they leave school to go out and get a job to help with the family finances. If however students are studing for something like art or acting yeah they should pay
2006-10-30 16:39:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, because all of the money you pay helps the school fund your education. Textbooks, and lunch are expensive. Although education is a free right, you have to take your part.
2006-10-30 16:54:18
·
answer #7
·
answered by (: 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yeah its wrong,in one sense in that you want to achieve, but the benefits obviously outweigh the temporary negative financial state you will find yourself in. You can always work part time for a few whiskey vouchers.
Study after 18 shouldn't be a free right, what about those who are not academically adept?
Where is the parity and equality for those people?
2006-10-30 16:48:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by alx n 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
i see your point, and suppose i would have agreed with you several years ago but as owner of a training business i would like to say that those who pay for the courses i offer really want to improve their skills and knowledge and work hard to achieve this. but when i worked for a college where students were funded and so didn't have to pay - they just messed about with their mates (and frankly it was worse than when i was at school)
if you're serious about your education then you are willing to go that extra mile!
and don't get me wrong - i have been on a low income myself, and know that there are people out there who want to learn but can't afford to pay for a course, but that's where subsided funding comes in for those on low incomes wanting to study at a college or university.
2006-10-31 05:04:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by just trying to make a difference 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I come from Scotland where ed is still well funded....i think it is wrong that a student (and family) should have to borrow upfront on the premise that they will be able to afford it in the future as this is not always the case.....
Most students do though get good jobs and i think payments should be assessed if and when that happens
2006-10-30 16:56:37
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't think it's wrong and I pay £3000 a year. Why should it be a right? Food is a far more fundamental human necessity than study and we pay for that.
You only pay it back when you are earning money after you've graduated. Why should a manual labourer for example who didn't go to uni have to pay tax to enable students to graduate and earn loads more than them?
2006-10-30 16:47:57
·
answer #11
·
answered by Katya-Zelen 2
·
1⤊
0⤋