My Perspective

By Elizabeth A. Kalbfleisch, Honours Economics, McMaster University

We young people seem to have problems understanding and reacting to economic issues appropriately. Too many of my peers seem to be wasting time vehemently fighting for causes that economically don’t make sense, such as opposing tuition fee increases or calling for “free” tuition.

The proposals by student organizations across the country opposing fee increases usually do so on the grounds that rising tuition constitutes a form of elitist discrimination against students with a lower ability to pay. Yet by insisting that taxpayers shoulder more of the load of the cost for the student’s education, these proposals are even more elitist. Students tend to forget that by undertaking a university education, they are generally ensured higher earnings in the labour market after they graduate. It is not right that this increased earning power be subsidized by the average taxpayer, who is without the benefit of the education.

Indeed, perhaps the Friedmans explain the elitism of post secondary spending best in Tyranny of the Status Quo, where they argue that using tax dollars to subsidize higher education means that low- and middle-income workers are being burdened by taxes to ensure a higher post-degree income for the student. This is hardly what one might call fair allocation of tax dollars. Also, the higher tax burden that would be necessary to lower tuition rates would lead to fewer job opportunities for recent graduates entering the workforce.

More than merely opposing tuition fee increases, many of my peers, perhaps guided by self-interest, strive for “free” tuition, a dream that the Chrétien government seems willing to feed with Millennium scholarships and the like. Yet basic economics tells us that nothing is ever “free.” Every single thing, including the air we breathe, has a cost; it only depends on who pays for the item that determines its relative cost to the group in question. Furthermore, shifting the full cost of higher education to the general taxpayer would only mean that scarce resources would be re-directed from producing other things. Far from being free, free tuition would actually come with a very high price tag.

... basic economics tells us that nothing is
ever “free.” Every single thing, including the
air we breathe, has a cost; it only depends
on who pays for the item that determines
its relative cost to the group in question.

The ridiculous arguments put forth by student organizations for “free” tuition as well as the inaction of taxpayers in protesting the current situation, underscore the need for some basic economics training in the school system. After all, as a high school student one is required to take several science courses for general knowledge. So, too, should a civics course with training in the basic understanding of interest rates, exchange rates, the business cycle, and the debt burden be required. For without a working knowledge of these topics, it is difficult to become an informed scholar, taxpayer, or voter.

[Editor’s note: Elizabeth A. Kalbfleisch has also written for Alberta Report, the Hamilton Spectator and From the Right.]

info@fraserinstitute.ca You can contact us at the above email address for any comments or information requests. Please report any dead links or technical problems.

If you know someone who would be interested in this web page, please enter their email address below, and we will forward this URL to them: Email Address:

Last Modified: Wednesday, October 20, 1999.