Interesting read, thanks for posting! I have one question: why do you see it as an “instead” scenario, and not a “both” one? From what I’ve read, Germany has its apprenticeship program deeply developed AND also a (mostly) free-of-tuition higher education system.
It feels to me that your argument of “more admissions = more graduates = lower wages because of an overabundance of graduates” implies that it is then better to leave a tuition system in place, so that there will be fewer graduates and their future wages will remain high. But that doesn’t seem to solve the problem of people who would do better with an education but cannot afford it. And even if you find yourself struggling to find a decent-paying job after graduating -one that would ideally be in accordance to your skill level-, I think it might still be better to face that with a much lower debt than the one the actual system produces.
Any thoughts on this? Thanks!