Pricey varsity adds to poverty cycle

I READ with sadness Peter Onesta’s letter (“Nothing is free, students”, November 9) that seems to suggest that since nothing is free, those who can’t afford the basic needs, such as education, should be left out.

For starters, education is a vital basic need, a fact Onesta consciously or unconsciously fails to mention. If education is free, everyone will have access to it. Poverty will be alleviated, the inequality gap will be bridged and unemployment will be reduced. Education plays a very big role in developing the country.

The concept of free education doesn’t mean it should not be paid for but that the state and other entities must help pay for those who can’t afford it.

Your correspondent mentions graduates being indebted. That is a direct result of a non-free education. Poor students take out loans to pay for their studies then spend the rest of their lives repaying the debt and supporting their poor families. And that may require taking out more loans, which creates a cycle of poverty.

Instead of answering his sarcastic question (“What do students at Wits and other universities think – that money grows on trees? Just shake the tree!”), I’d like to rephrase it and direct it to universities who wanted to increase the already high fees. Where do they think money grows from? Trees?

Berea, Joburg