Wilmington StarNews editors have made some bizarre statements about proposed (or presumed) reforms of the North Carolina public university system. At best, they are questionable; at worst, they have no basis in fact. For example: “Pricing students out of is (sic) public universities would cripple North Carolina’s economy.”
No one has proposed or even suggested “pricing students out of” our state-run university system. However, it is not unreasonable to expect students to pay for whatever benefits they personally gain from higher education. Other state citizens, many less fortunate than these students, should not have their limited resources confiscated to subsidize wealthier people.
Star News progressives often argue for income redistribution—state subsidies for university students reverse this because the greater beneficiaries of the UNC system are middle- and upper-class people. Jay Schalin, in a paper titled “State Investment in Universities: Rethinking the Impact on Economic Growth,” published by the Pope Center for Higher Education, reveals that “higher education subsidies probably have ‘regressive redistributive effects.’”
“For instance,” writes Schalin, “in North Carolina, middle-class and wealthy students flock to the state’s top universities; the state’s elite often educates its next generation at UNC-Chapel Hill.” Editors disconnected from that reality worry that the Wascally Wepublicans will “shift more of the burden of higher education onto already overburdened students and their families.” Really?
Would reducing subsidies to beneficiaries of higher education “cripple North Carolina’s economy”? No. However, unsubsidized higher education would result in consumers choosing only offerings that would meet their needs; they would not pay to support all the excessive administrative costs, unproductive programs and the expense of social-justice propaganda. Universities would become much leaner, but still sought-after, valuable resources.
In fact, one could credibly argue that eliminating subsidies for higher education would result in much greater efficiencies in learning and, thus, improvements in our economy. Most students would invest their money only in learning that would help optimize their individual talents to achieve a higher standard of living—thus, benefiting all of society by the innovations and jobs they would create.
........As you post your comment, please conform to Squall Line's simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. If you wouldn't say it to a co-worker in front of your boss, it probably is not civil and respectful. We will delete any comment that fails this test and issue a warning to the poster. A second offense will result in a ban on commenting on this site. In sum, disagreements, arguments even, are welcome; abusive behavior is not. Thanks.
You must be logged in to post a comment.