There is a controversial perspective heating up a debate over the fact that the authority should subsidize college education. I don’t really regard myself as a proponent of this idea.
Without a shadow of a doubt, the state had better invest in the academies. The explanation could be that it can bring huge benefits for individuals and society. In terms of individuals, especially those poor, they can absorb some useful knowledge and will have prospective jobs in the future. With respect to society, universities can bring more well-trained personnel and thrive the nation’s economy. For example, the governors of leading-economy countries such as Germany along with Holland subsidize college education. Therefore, it is crucial for the authority to make an investment in tertiary education.
While the necessity of splurging cash on higher education by the government is widely acknowledged as improving the quality of the workforce, it leads to problems about career opportunities. Due to the fact that there are too many bachelor degrees, there will be no disparities between candidates so the unemployment rate in the young will ever-increasing. Established companies such as Vingroup, FPT and Sungroup can be cited as outstanding examples to recruit people with prestigious college qualifications. If everybody had the similar acquisition of a tertiary degree, there will be no advantage over the job applicants. This makes it difficult for interviewees to express themselves so they can’t achieve their desirable position. As a result, the state shouldn’t totally squander money on institutions.
In conclusion, it is important for the governor to allocate money on universities but this cost had not better become the financial burden of the state.