Uni students should pay for the full cost of education fees because uni education benefits themselves rather than the society. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The 21st century has witnessed an unprecedented increase in educational funds by the government. This has created a general concern among those who claim that students ought to completely pay for their study at universities as it is more beneficial for them rather than the society, with which I completely agree. This essay will elaborate on the reasons for my personal perspective and provide an analysis of a common counter-argument. It is my contention that postgraduates tend to receive numerous valuable benefits with a university degree in various aspects. For the most part, in the long term, being accepted by a university could help to enhance their living standards in the future so as to encourage a healthier lifestyle for themselves, their families and descendants. In other words, as society nowadays is seeking for talents due to the tense competition between businesses, this would raise their social status as well as open numerous job opportunities with attractive salaries offered by companies and organisations. In particular, an extensive study into a famous university in Vietnam, nearly 90% of undergraduates have already got full-time jobs. This strongly proves that the more intriguing your profile is, the better your career path becomes. Furthermore, students could also gain sustainable experience by participating in individual and group assignments or extracurricular activities at school, therefore improving soft skills, which is advantageous in intensifying their performance at work, thus conducive to raising their positions. Hence, it is obvious that students are those who make the most of university courses. Opponents might argue that since residents raise their living conditions and a healthier lifestyle, this has brought about considerable developments in the society in different fields, being supportive in the progress of becoming a high-placed among others. This might sound convincing to a certain extent. However, I would argue that while the growth of a nation is directly related to its citizens’ lives, in contrast, a considerable number of its residents do not contribute to their own society considerably. Regardless of those with low incomes, foreign students are given sakes from the universities but instead of staying in their home country to donate their efforts, they made a decision of making their life better by travelling to another. For instance, Vietnam has over one-third of its students seeking further education abroad, with only a minority of them returning to the country. This has clearly shown that not every learner deserves to receive support from the government as they do not pay back by their investments into society. Thus, it is irrefutable that getting students to pay for their own educational fees is more reasonable in most cases. In conclusion, the sustainability of students has surpassed that of the government and the country itself in general. However, it would be more efficient for the government to give out scholarships for impoverished students with much improvements throughout the course and those with considerable achievements rather than without any considerations.