In an ideal world, the State would finance public education and research,
which means that everyone would finance, by paying taxes, public education and research.
In an ideal world, even the ones who will never attend a class,
even the ones whose children will work as farmers and will never go to university,
would be happy to finance public education and research,
because they would know that one day they might need a doctor —and that they would be glad they paid her perfect training—
because they know that their children will need a qualified teacher everyday,
because they know that more often than not educated people are also likely to be better politicians, administrators, citizens.
To sum up, in an ideal world everyone would be happy to pay taxes for financing public education and research, since even other people's education and research would enhance one's own well-being.
But,
since the State (every State, it seems, more or less) wants to save money, especially as for public education and research
and since people rather seem to wish to pay less taxes,
should not WE be responsible for public education and research? If WE do not engage in the front line, do not we risk to end up with private (and expensive —check the comments here) universities on the one hand and nothing at all on the other?
If you think I am right, please consider donating here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Logically expressed. I think there is a problem with the hyperlink with http being mentioned twice. Please correct it.
Thank you very much, VS. But add also an opinion, if you wish so.
In fact, I was debating why in an 'ideal world' would education and research be sponsored by the state? What is so ideal about it? As I could not get a very satisfactory point of view (for or against), I restrained myself from adding an opinion.
I admire and respect your comment asking about an opinion.
Dear VS,
I am glad you raised the issue. To be honest, I am also not completely sure that this should be ideal. I am sure that states usually use money for much less significant purposes and that education and research are among the best goals to be achieved through public fundings. I listed the points in favour of it in the post.
However, I do not see any substantial objection against private fundings (if appropriately ruled). All objections are rather linked with specific historical circumstances.
Post a Comment