[novariation]

Even if you dislike markets as a mechanism, education is very tricky because it's very very expensive, and prone to important moral hazards when it's free.

Think your passion is economics or psychology and drop out after 1.5 years ? You've just cost the equivalent of 8 years of tax money from the average joe (ex: France median after tax income is 25k, roughly 2k of tax money, each college year is 10-12k).

It turns out there aren't enough average joes to give every kid the opportunity to try multiple studies, so we have to share the burden, at least a little bit. The average joe can pay 70%, and the students 30%. Or the average joe pays 90% of the first curriculum, but if you "reset" once (change majors without transfers), then the average joe no longer pays that share and only pays 50%. But you have to accept that education isn't free and there should be some incentive, even if small, to make sure you're picking something you'll commit to and make it work.

[joe_the_user]

Even if you dislike markets as a mechanism, education is very tricky because it's very very expensive, and prone to important moral hazards when it's free.

Education is not inherently expensive. The student loan mechanisms are what allowed the vast expansion of colleges as capital intensive enterprises. You can find a multitude of discussion about how cheap both public and private education was in, say, the 1960s. And that was with primarily state/institutional regulation. Which is to say the student loans were moral hazard crack to compared to state regulation.

For most subjects, one needs an informed teacher, a class room and some books. Somehow this costs vast sums now. Guess why?

[novariation]

I'm using french costs, these are paid 90% by the government ! The underlying issue does not disappear.