Why pay more for higher education

In the article "Why Pay More for Higher Education", the author questions about the amount of local university fees being subsidized by the Singapore Government. Her stand is based on a couple of premises. She argues that an undergraduate should "pay for what they get" and by using comparisons with the systems with other countries, tries to convince the reader that her stand is right. However, her argument is flawed and the loopholes shall be exposed in the next few paragraphs.

The writer starts off by citing a survey conducted on undergraduates. It was about if they were prepared to pay almost twice their current fees for their degree. The survey indicated mixed comments and two examples of the comments are quoted. The comment which was against the idea of paying more is much shorter and less precise than the opposing view. The writer's stand is quite clear the way these comments are presented, i.e.

MacDonald Tartans [8]

BRITAIN ST.

English: The dome of the Old Supreme Court Buildin...

the Singapore Government should cut its share of subsidization of local university fees. The comment which coincides with the writer's stand is not in the least bit convincing. Local University fees are being compared to those of that in other countries. After comparing, it is concluded that in addition to the earnings the interviewee MAY get in the future, "50-50" is fair. It's just like the following fallacy: (1) A meal in MacDonald's in Malaysia costs 6 Ringgit Dollars. (2) A meal in MacDonald's in Singapore costs 6 Singapore Dollars. (Conclusion) Therefore, based on the above, it is acceptable for the Malaysian to pay more for his meal since it is so much cheaper compared to Singapore. The difference of Government policies, standard of living and other factors between Singapore and other countries should be taken into account when comparing instead of numerical value...