[Catfish]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Core of the Erasmus program was and is the international exchange of students. This purpose has become synonymous with the program.

What a bad idea, eh?

The British obviously think they do not want to subsidize foreign students in their British universities while their own students must pay more for access to the very same British universities.

First this is not "the British" this is Johnson alone, and maybe England. I doubt Wales, Scotland and Ireland had any say in this typical Johnson ad hoc decision.
Second, most university fees in England are of a type no one not born into a rich family can ever hope to visit it. Which means it is not the talented, but the rich who get this kind of education. Which cements and further widens the good old traditional instrument of class division.
There are ecxeptions, but of course they do not have the "reputation". Someone who believes in science and research rather than "reputation" will of course not become a Rees-Mogg, or Johnson.
Maybe the Turing program helps more talents Brits to study overseas when they have no chance in England, but i seriously doubt the underlying intention.
Third, and not the last argument but i'm tired to read this kind of bull, is that the better-known english universities get their fees anyway. If the government decides they can get through with it in the third millenium, their problem and their class society.

In Germany, when i studied it still was free. The result was that many students did not study economically, and wasted their time, too semesters and years longer than would have been needed, broke off more often than students in other countries where it costs them money, started another branch, and took longer time. All this at the expense of the taxpayer.

Studying in Germany in universities meanwhile costs money, and a lot more than in the 1980ies or 90ies, though no comparison to something like Eton of course. Politicians like Merz are of course interested in founding private universities, with their own certain "private" fees. The outcome is usually worse than what leaves the "classic" public universities.

You have usually several kinds of people who want to study, some are really interested, and maybe talented, and may or may not have the money, and then there are those entirely career-horny types with their geled hair and interest in quick money, like Guttenberg. The latter will often finish their "studies" earlier, now you tell me whether those will be the better scientists and researchers, or "valuable" for the society (including sympathy, improving international relations and such).
Young people have interests but few know whether studying, and what, is something for them. If not they will soon find out and there is no problem in letting them find out. Einstein was not a "good student", nor was Heisenberg. No government can order students to think and be brilliant, as China will find out sooner or later.

Germany stil has a federalist system, meaning each county can make its on rules regarding what and how things should be tought, which makes them more individual, which is a good thing.

"Better universities should cost more".

Why exactly? Not necessarily, full/associate professors usually get the same money within a county's university/ies. There are certain posts in the university hierarchy of course like C1 or C2 professorship, but ..
Then there is the question of educational equipment, which has to be paid for alright. But why should they be more expensive for students? Education should not be primarily an economical contraption, and they should attract talented people, not rich ones.

It is funny how just of all those who pay no or few taxes have the biggest mouth about how they should be spent.