Something’s got to give.

Student funding has been dropping in real and nominal terms

like a stone since the 70s. 45% of young people now go on to HE and the total cost
now stands at 25 Billion,1 for perspective, the bank bailout will now turn the
government a profit2. Nothing in life is free, and the key question here is ‘Who should
pay?.’

This article will attempt to argue that the cost should be borne by those most likely to
benefit from it and not by wider society. I believe it is morally right for students to
bear the cost of their degree courses.  The mere fact that someone would have chosen
to take up the course if they were even more heavily subsidised by the taxpayer is not
reason enough to portray the decision to enter the workforce rather than higher
education as unfree or unfair.

The university classes are some of the most privileged in the world. We
overwhelmingly come from the middle or upper classes, overwhelmingly enter some
of the most high paying jobs in the country and even when even those of the lowest
income brackets enter university they tend to underperform their richer peers. Free
universities are unfair, they represent a massive wealth transfer from the state to the
middle and upper classes. Charging for education will resolve this paradox, and do a
great deal to make sure our Universities excel.

Firstly I will begin with a negative argument for a Browne review system of funding,
and then I will follow with a positive proposal demonstrating my vision for how a fee
structure for universities will benefit all students.

Education is right

Is it?

Everyone Benefits

So, there are often two arguments here, divided into two sets. The first set argues that
the receipt of education is good for society, the second set argues that having the
option to receive free education is a social good.

The receipt of education is a social good

A better educated society is better for everybody3 - it reduces crime, encourages voter
participation, etc. These facts are commonly used as arguments for providing free

http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/Publications/Documents/HigherEducationInFactsAndFiguresSummer2010.pdf
2
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/26/profit-taxpayers-bailed-out-bank-shares
3
“The Crime-Reducing effect of Education.” Center for Economic Performance
working paper (forthcoming)
university education for everybody. Regardless of these facts, there is no evidence to
suggest that post-18 education does anything to reduce societal negatives.

Another approach suggests that studying philosophy (or biology, or engineering) for 3
years is a good in its own right. I agree that it is a good, but the good primarily falls on
me. I gain great joy in studying and discussing philosophy. I primarily benefit from it,
and generally those I discuss these topics with have had, or are pursuing a university
level education. Those that have not had a university level education should not pay
for the good that I obtain, seeing as that directly reduces the goods they can obtain.

The third stand of this set of arguments is that social mobility is a social good. This is
not the case. Social mobility is an individual good (or bad), it is good for those who
move up, and bad for those who move down. It is also necessarily a zero-sum game.
Additionally, in a longitudinal study published by the Centre for economic
performance from 1985-20054, exactly at the time when the first cohort of
undergraduates were being charged fees social mobility was rather high. Those who
were in the bottom second income quartile were distributed randomly amongst other
income quartiles. Those at the top and bottom of the income scales were only slightly
more ‘sticky’ – though 60% of those in the bottom quartile moved upwards, 13% to
the top. Income is not the be-all and end-all of well-being, but statistics like these
demonstrate

I sincerely doubt that the majority of 17 million people in the UK earning under
£20,0005 benefit from my University education, and even if they do, I do not believe
that they should be forced to pay for it.

They should be able to fund it out of th

It is not just the richest that pay tax, it is everyone, the marginal tax rates for the
poorest fifth run at 70%6. While the total tax rates run at 30%

It’s a right
4
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6ce0dad0-8e13-11dc-8591-0000779fd2ac.html
5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_in_the_United_Kingdom
6
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/2009/05/tax-rates-are-highest-for-the-poor-not-the-
rich.html
Everyone benefits

1,440,000

£6000 to £7000 1,160,000

£7000 to £8000 1,590,000

£8000 to 10,000 2,950,000

£10,000 to
2,760,000
£12,000

£12,000 to
3,650,000
£15,000

£15,000 to
4,950,000
£20,000

£20,000 to
6,000,000
£30,000

£30,000 to
4,090,000
£50,000

Notes
http://www.bis.gov.uk/news/topstories/2010/Nov/student-finance
Students from families with incomes of up to £25,000 will be entitled to a more generous
student maintenance grant of up to £3,250 and those from families with incomes up to
£42,000 will be entitled to a partial grant.

Regulation

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/benchmark/statements/economics.asp#p
9

fifth of earners paid 38.7% of their gross income in total tax, compared to the
richest fifth who paid 34.9%. This situation will only get worse when the highly
regressive VAT increases to 20% next year.