Education is a public good, so should be free

The argument

This argument states that education should be free because it is not only the students who benefit from further education. Having a better-educated workforce improves the economy, improves public health and leads to higher democratic participation. Furthermore, university facilities themselves are often re-purposed and used by local residents or nearby companies. Consequently, If students aren't the only people benefiting from higher education institutions, then it is unfair that they bear the full cost of funding them.

Context

A public good is something which has positive externalities, or put simply, a good which brings benefits not only to the purchaser. As higher education has broader benefits for a country, it brings into question whether students should be the only ones who pay for it.

Premises

Counter-arguments

In strict economic terms, a public good must be both non-excludable (everyone has access to it), and non-rival (everyone can access the good without depleting the resource itself). As a result, education does not fit these criteria because not everyone has access to higher education, and the resource is finite; a university can teach only so many students. As a result, many economists would argue against university being a public good.

Rejecting the premises

Rejecting P1. University is NOT a public good.