The United State of America does not have free education for students, at least at the higher levels. Due to increasing levels of student debt, people are now suggesting that college education should be free. Free education would mean that the government would provide the funds for any student to attend college without concern of debt. This also means more taxes as well as shifting their funds. Although some people think college should be free, it is clear that it would be a mistake because it would decrease personal freedoms for much of the general population and it would reduce quality.
To begin with, free education would decrease the personal freedoms of too much of the population. According to Vince Norton, “Taxes will go up and... whether they have college-age children or not – will pay for the free college.” This explains that people would no longer be able to spend their money as much as they would if taxpayers did not have to pay for the education of others, which declines the personal freedom of the population. The author also states, some students might be nonconformists, and college dropouts, which means taxpayers will have to pay for them additionally. Therefore, the overall population would have to pay more taxes for others despite some of them will not take college seriously, taking away personal freedoms of individualities might have more of a substantial impact than making free colleges, which means that the personal freedom of individuals would out benefit free tuition of others.
Additionally, a free college tuition program is a bad idea for the US when you consider how it decreases the quality and value of higher education. Free college sounds like it can only bring good things to students, but when looking at the facts, it is clear that it hurts the quality of the student's educational experience. Hillary Clinton was once asked what she thought free higher education would do for our country and she explained that “it demands a willful postponement of disbelief to conclude that “free” education will increase higher education. Maybe it is beneficial for politics, but making college free will only make it critical.” She is not the only person who has come to realize the ugly truth that free does not mean better quality. David Brooks states that when students have nothing to lose financially, they tend to have less motivation to do well. According to research, many students are required to work due to they are obligated to pay for their college tuition expenses, and students are even more motivated due to their current salaries which cover a small portion of their tuition expenses, and they work more diligently in order to graduate. If students do not have the motivation to do well, then their attitudes will reflect and change the atmosphere of their classes. When considering the public education system k-12 in America, it is clear that student apathy on a large scale affects the learning of the students around them as well as demoralizes the teachers. If this were to happen at a college level, it would have a devastating impact on such a crucial point in building their future careers.
This free tuition program will only be available to public colleges, which leaves out many top colleges such as Harvard. Students are now able to receive financial aid from the government to both public and private colleges, but once the public becomes free, it will significantly affect private colleges. Kevin James explains this issue by showing that making only public free, will limits students' choices because “many private institutions, now trying to compete with a highly-subsidized, free public option, would likely struggle to survive” and by reducing students' options, the public colleges would feel significantly less pressure to effectively serve students. Both reducing students' options for quality education and creating a system that cripples the level of excellence expected from higher education shows how harmful free education will be for future college students.
It is not only harmful to the quality of education; it also will affect the value of education as well. If college tuition is available at no cost to students, a larger number of people will surge the already bursting colleges. College is used to further people's opportunities in life and make them more marketable for their desired careers and set them apart from their competition. With the job market already flooded with graduates, it makes for a very competitive starting point. Martin Bozeman talks about this current problem and then goes on to say that if college was now free and thousands of more people entered the same job market with the same degree, how are you going to make yourself more employable than the countless others wanting the same job? He goes on to say that, “your education can only go so high, also including so many people occupying the same one, there will not be enough opportunity to find employment.” If there are more people all holding the same free degree, the degree loses its value, and you will have to do more and more to make yourself stand out against the others. If everyone owned a Tesla, it would no longer hold the value that it does now. A high school diploma is the very basic education required for a minimum-wage job because nearly all Americans have one. If the college degree becomes the new status quo, employers will start to require even more. To summarize, having some financial equity in your college degree not only motivates you to work harder, but also ensures that your higher education maintains high standards in quality and that your degree will continue to hold value in the job market.
However, some people assume that colleges should provide free tuition. According to Hunter Thordsen, if students did not have to worry about paying for their college each semester, then they would be able to give all of their attention to their studies. It is understandable why they think free higher education would improve students' motivation and focus, yet the reality would look very different. If tuition was free, and students had nothing to lose, they may not be as driven to succeed. When students invest in their education, they know that if they do not do well, then not only will they have to retake their class, but they also lose their investment. For example, Redbox has a policy where if you fail to return the item on time, they will charge you daily until it is returned. When people have the incentive of saving their money, they are more likely to return the item on time. If students paid for their classes, they would want to get their money's worth and would focus more on passing. In sum, when students pay for their tuition, they will be more determined to complete their classes than they would be if they had no money to lose.
To conclude, government-funded college would be a mistake because it would diminish personal freedoms and cause the quality and value of college degrees to decline. Evidence has shown that the increased taxes to fund this program will move the financial burden from some to all. The taxes will decrease necessary disposable income and in turn, limit personal freedoms. The quality and value of education are also negatively impacted. Free tuition will lower student motivation, eventually decrease the standards of public education in higher education, and will reduce the value of the degree due to an influx of graduates.