Fixing Education Funding
Education funding in Canada -- especially Alberta -- is currently broken. More education is better for society. Post-secondary education should be accessible to everyone, no matter their income. It is not good that Canadian students can get a cheap education here and then leave to work abroad.
The social and economic benefits of a University education are well-documented; University graduates are, on average, healthier, more likely to volunteer, more politically active, and are more likely to earnmore. University research, according to a 1995 study, directly accounts for $5 billion worth of our GDP, indirectly sustains up to $15.5 billion of economic activity and provides up to 200 000 jobs; basic research (such as that done at Universities) has also been shown to have a tremendous effect on commercial research and development success. The benefits of a University education should, potentially, be available to all members of society, not only those whose families can afford it. Raising the average amount of education in Canadashould be an objective of our education funding structure.
Jobs in the United States generally result in more money for highlyeducated people; the tax rate in the US in much lower than Canada'sdue mostly to the fact that Americans have less interest in socialprograms. If this is what you want in your society, fine, but it isnot fair to Canadian taxpayers to fund an education for someone whoplans to move somewhere else as soon as they are done; if you want toenjoy the "benefits" of a society such as the US, then pay for yourown education.
In order to enable more people to attend (or at least try) University,and also to try and stem the flow of talent out of Canada, what Ipropose is a drastic increase of funding to education to allow formore first year classes, which allows more people to try their hand atUniversity. Students would pay tuition (at current levels or less) fortheir first year of education; if they feel a University education isdesirable and have the marks to go on, the government would loan themenough money to complete the final three years of their undergraduatedegree. As long as they are in graduate school (here or abroad) or are living or working in Canada, their debt will not have to be paid back. If the graduate later decides they would prefer to live and work elsewhere, then they must start repaying the debt.
In order to pay for such increases in education funding, graduates earning over a certain amount would pay additional tax directly into an education fund; this ensures that graduates who don't enjoy the benefits of a higher wage aren't saddled with enormous debts and allows graduates the option of not working at all (which is not automatically a bad thing). Of course, this additional tax wouldn't necessarily account for all of the education funding; other means could be explored (including the government "uncutting" education funding).
This solution accomplishes a number of goals: it makes education more accessible; it gives the taxpayer something for their dollar; and it gives incentives to use a Canadian education in Canada. By having most of an education paid for by the government, students who otherwise couldn't afford the approximately $11000/year in tuition costs (let alone living expenses) can now receive a University education. Taxpayers receive the benefit of more Canadian University graduates staying in Canada, along with increased economic activity and a healthier, more informed electorate.