Many today would argue that higher education is a basic right that should extend to all, regardless of socioeconomic background. In my opinion, I largely disagree since there is more value in improving the relationships between social classes.
Supporters of this policy point out that every taxpayer is entitled to equal treatment. Those who are wealthy typically receive little financial support from the government they have earned a prestigious scholarship. However, such families pay taxes at far higher rates than the average citizen. They have contributed greatly to the federal budget and it is only just that they should receive an equal allocation of their share of government disbursement for university. Without financial aid, these individuals may feel they are being unfairly treated simply because they are .
Although I recognize the legitimate the argument above, I would generally side with those who believe a system that takes into account financial differences is more sustainable. If average families are not allocated the majority of funding for higher education, then they may not be able to attend these schools at all. This risk does not exist for the more affluent. Over time, this could have dire society. The general populace might feel that upward social mobility is nearly impossible and become demotivated. They may also begin to resent the government and higher classes, creating the conditions for social unrest.
In conclusion, despite calls for fairness under the law, certain distinctions should be made for the betterment of society on the whole. Government policy should be aimed at equality of opportunity rather than a reductive understanding of equality.