Question

There have been discussions of free public education for the masses. Find and summarize an article (or a politician's platform) that advocates for a free college education. Explain the pros and cons of such a plan based on sound economic analysis. Focus on potential unintended consequences and cite your work.

Read the article named "How Tap water Became Toxic in Flint, Michigan" from the web and answer below questions. How do externalities apply to this situation? Who faces the third-party problem? Why is the Flint river polluted in the first place? Who has the incentive to clean up the river? What prevented the government from making a better decision?

Answer 1

1)should college education be providede for free or not is a biggest question faced by the nations now a days. college education is not just that is demanded for degree but for more knowledge and clarity about certain topics and things. and college education is not cheap as school education but is as important as school education now a days. so whether it should be provided free or not is definitly a debatable question because it has its own pros and cons.

an article which speaks in support of free public education advocates that the education will give benifit to the entire nation and not just the individual who is getting it because the human capital of the nation will be more efficient in the longrun and will assist the nation in various fields and will bring prosoerity to the nation. one more thing is when a person is well educated the perception towards things changes possitively and also a well educated society is much better than a uneducated society all the time.

pros- there will be equality in terms of higher education and no one will be deprived from it. the manpower will be more efficient and will be able to learn the new invention and technology better. the countrys gdp will increase as more and more people can now get better job after better qualification. there will be high thinking and prosperity in the society.

cons- the government will be in a huge burden as every body will get equal facility in every manner. to private a huge population with equal facilities will create burden on not just government but also on tax payers because government will ultimately collect money by imposing tax.

2) in case of Michigans water getting toxic there is a huge negative externality problem with it. the people those who are consuming in daily life will fall sick seviorly and will definitly spend a lot on health expenditure which is definitly an extra burdon on them due to negative externality.

the third party here is definitly the general public which will consume the toxic water and will fall ill.

the river got polluted because of urbanisation at first and then the service line which were provided to the house were made of lead which started mixing with the iron and made it more toxic.

the state DEQ is to blame for the disaster and should clean up the river.

lack of fund was the main reason which was preventing the government and also the local parties were making things difficult to reach to the government so the decision taken much later were not efficient.