This is just another way of saying that the society cares about this issue!

To put an analogy: When a society cares about parenthood and children, non-parents pay some share to parents. This is how financial solidarity works. How else should that work? By telling parents that they do a great job, that you appreciate what they do for society, but not giving a single cent to them? That would be hypocritical, not solidary.

> By telling parents that they do a great job, that you appreciate what they do for society, but not giving a single cent to them? That would be hypocritical, not solidary.

It's not hypocritical if you compliment someone without paying them money.

You could say that about any tax founded expense?

But, yes, I am in favor of a small, limited government.

The reality is lots of people study subjects that don't result in higher salaries but political correctness insists that people be able to study the arts easily, so governments "have" to subsidize education.

I know someone in particular who went on to get a law degree (and was steadily employed in her field from her time of graduation) but was only managing to pay in the double digits toward her loan's principal on a monthly basis -- the rest went toward interest.

My first post-grad school salary was $112,000.

My education was an investment. It paid off.

Source?

But definitely not for education.

I hate that sort of terminology, money only exists for you to trade because you are a member of a society that collectively decided it was a good idea.