-
The only way to start to do this is free education for all, paid for from general taxation.
I think the problem with this is that it totally sidesteps any concept of cost-benefit analysis wrt education. I suppose you might say that “any £ spent on education is a £ well spent so it doesn’t really matter”, but I think you have to be more forensic than that.
Making it an individual financial decision works for those kids that end up in the private sector. For underpaid skilled public sector occupations (nursing etc) it doesn’t work, but that could be solved by improving pay…
NickCJ-
I think the problem with this is that it totally sidesteps any concept of cost-benefit analysis wrt education.
Do you need to be particularly forensic about it? If it's a matter of principle - that each person should be enabled to have the opportunity to explore their potential, especially if you're drawing education broadly - I don't think you do need to reduce it to a straight cost/benefit.
-
I don't think you have to be more forensic, and the driving force of government shouldn't be how much things cost, it should be how useful are they to society.
Otherwise how do you fund the arts?
jsabine
n3il
The problem with a graduate tax is it adds a price to education that doesn't need to be there, it will always add a mental hurdle to people from low incomes going to university. We need to uncouple the relationship between education and cost, as the key value of HE isn't measured in £.
The only way to start to do this is free education for all, paid for from general taxation.