Should governments pay for the university education of their people?

There is an important issue that is related to the governments’ responsibility to fund their people while studying. Which would be better for the society, to support them, or to keep them to fund themselves, and find a way to do that.

Some people think that it is better for the government not to pay for its university students, because this way will reduce the numbers of students who graduate from the universities, which may lead to two positive results, first is to help the universities to focus on lower numbers of students and the final outcome would be very high quality education, with very skilled graduated students, which would affect the whole market and improve many related issues in many different ways.

Second positive result of that is to enforce those who could not bear the tuitions fees to look for a job, which would be one of low class types, and this would reduce the numbers of unemployed people, and it would help the governments to get rid of the expatriate labours, and it would solve many issues that are caused by them, such as the economic and social problems. On the other hand, this would give the universities graduated students the chance to find the proper jobs easily.  Those who encourage the governments to stop their funding for the high education are trying to tempt them by the huge amounts of money that would be saved and could be spent on other more important affairs.

On the other hand, there are concerned people who may agree with what has been stated, but they think there are more important issue which should not be neglected; one of them is when you stop funding the high education, that would lead to losing a lot of brilliant  minds whose only problem is that they belong to poor families, and instead of giving them the chance to study and enrich the high education environment, they may work in one of those type of jobs where they never use their minds again.

There is another social issue here they are trying to warn not the governments only but the whole societies; which relates to the division of society in-to two classes: those who are rich and could fund their children to get a high qualified education, and inherit their positions in the future, and those who are poor or even do not have the enough amount of money to fund their children, who may withdraw from the education in early times; because of their poverty and frustration. And this imagined picture may bring back the 17th and 18th centuries way of life when some of countries were controlled by some rich families.

To give a good judgment, look at the case from other different side, for example, children get all the support they need, while they are focusing on their education, which means they have one responsibility with full support and funding. The same happens after graduation and getting job they have income for the work they are doing, which means responsibility with support. In the high education some people want the students to carry both the studying and the funding, which means two responsibilities with no support.

So it seems that governments should take their responsibility forward and fund students until they finish their university education, which would give them the chance to concentrate on their responsibilities and get the best result.