Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!ubc-vision!ubc-cs!manis
From: manis@ubc-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: who should pay for education. sort of.
Message-ID: <888@ubc-cs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 5-Mar-87 11:52:37 EST
Article-I.D.: ubc-cs.888
Posted: Thu Mar  5 11:52:37 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 6-Mar-87 21:39:18 EST
References: <215@fornax.uucp> <2770@hcrvx2.UUCP> <884@ubc-cs.UUCP> <2775@hcrvx2.UUCP>
Reply-To: manis@ubc-cs.UUCP (Vincent Manis)
Distribution: can
Organization: UBC Department of Computer Science
Lines: 47

Jim Robinson asks some (very) non-twaddle questions:

1) Why is it reasonable to make the loan repayable on emigration? The present
   CSL program makes the loan repayable on emigration from the ivory tower.
   I don't see that much difference here, it's just that fewer people would
   have to repay their loans (and those who wish to emigrate without repay-
   ment merely have to sneak out of the country in dead of night). The 
   primary reason for this justification is a moral one. Education is a
   social investment in an individual. The person who gets an elaborate 
   education at Canada's expense, and then *immediately* leaves the country
   is really ripping Canada off, and as a Canadian I resent that. 

   Of course, someone who stays in the country for 20 years after graduation,
   and then emigrates, would obviously have repaid a considerable part of
   his/her loan, merely by working here. The formula should thus take into
   account the amount of time spent here after graduation.

   Finally, I'm strongly opposed to emigration taxes or exit visas. The loan
   should become payable on emigration, which in turn means that one must 
   make arrangements for its repayment, not necessarily that one has repaid 
   it, prior to leaving the country.

2) Is education a right? Yes and no. Clearly primary and secondary education
   are rights, and therefore we must not raise any barriers to participation
   in the school system. Post-secondary education is not a right: one has no
   right to become a doctor if (like me) s/he faints at the sight of blood.
   The right here is to get the sort of education at which one will achieve
   something. I don't see any right to participate in a program in which 
   one's grades vary between 50% and 52%. If you can afford to pay your own
   costs, fine. Otherwise, go somewhere else.

   Is this consistent with socialism? Yes. Remember the prime marxist slogan,
   "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs".
   (Sorry about the sexism.) "Needs" aren't the same as "wants".

   There is a wide spectrum of socialist thought (no, Jim, I'm not waffling).
   However, I don't know any serious socialist who would argue that people
   have the right to play the state for a sucker.

-----
Vincent Manis                {ihnp4!alberta,uw-beaver}!ubc-vision!ubc-cs!manis
Dept. of Computer Science    manis@cs.ubc.cdn
Univ. of British Columbia    manis%ubc.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa  
Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1W5      manis@ubc.csnet
(604) 228-6770 or 228-3061

"BASIC is the Computer Science equivalent of 'Scientific Creationism'."