It is often argued that students should pay the full cost of their university education instead of receiving free higher education funded by the state. Although there are some convincing arguments in favour of this view, I tend to disagree because it can create inequality and limit opportunities.
On the one hand, supporters claim that university is a personal investment. Graduates usually earn higher salaries; therefore, they should cover the expenses by themselves. For example, in countries such as the United States, many students pay high tuition fees but later receive well-paid jobs. In addition, when young people pay for their studies, they may value education more and take it seriously. As a result, they often work harder and manage their time more effectively.
On the other hand, free higher education helps talented students from low-income families to achieve their goals. Should tuition fees be prohibitive, many young people simply cannot afford to study, even if they are capable. For instance, in Germany, public universities charge little or no tuition fees, which allows a large number of students to enter higher education. This system supports social equality and provides the country with qualified specialists. Moreover, society benefits from educated professionals such as doctors, engineers and teachers, who contribute to economic growth.
To conclude, while paying full tuition may encourage responsibility, free or subsidized university education is more beneficial for both individuals and society, even if it requires significant public spending. In my opinion, the state should at least partly fund higher education. Even though students can contribute some money, making them pay the full cost might increase social inequality and reduce access to education, which is not fair for everyone.