Cutting costs in education – Tuition fees to rise significantly | Short: Federal Council wants to double fees
by BezugssystemCH1903
Cutting costs in education – Tuition fees to rise significantly | Short: Federal Council wants to double fees
by BezugssystemCH1903
24 comments
Why not less subsidies for farmers?
This is just so incredibly short sighted! Investing in education has a positive effect on the economy of the future, and thus increases the federal budget in years to come. Cutting spending in education is like cutting the whole future budget…
Why do we have money for:
– Military budget increases
– 13th AHV
– No cuts in farming subsidies
But apparently we have to cut 500 million a year in the most stupid place to cut spending??
> Heute zahlen Schweizer Studierende an den Universitäten im Schnitt 1445 Franken pro Jahr. Der Bund schlägt nun vor, diese Gebühren ab 2027 zu Verdoppeln.
No problem for people who get financial support from their parents. Big problem for everyone else. This is a blow to social mobility.
I had trouble paying rent and Krankenkasse even back in 2005 while studying 100% + part-time jobs on weekends.
This is so typical of right-wing governments. Why is education always one of the first things on the chopping block? We need robust, low-cost/free higher education to have a productive society. Without smart, well-educated people, we will stop being competitive in innovations and research. Switzerland can’t afford *not* to provide the best for our young people.
What do you expect from people that probably look up to trump 🤷
You can see in the American south that the right slashes education budgets to create both voters who are more susceptible to their propaganda and to make those who aren’t unable to figure out solutions to stop their looting.
Don’t let those tactics work, *it can happen here.*
This is so stupid and infuriating while at the same time so on brand for the right wing parties like SVP and FDP.
Switzerland should double down on education not reduce its expenditure in it. It is uniquely positioned to become a sort of education and R&D hub of Europe. With all the awful stuff that happens in the US with NSF and NIH this is actually an opportunity to bring research here if someone is smart about it.
But highly educated people tend to vote for other parties. The farmers will also have a dopamine kick from hearing that those “smug students” have to pay more so win-win, right?
It is utter short-sightedness. I love how people constantly whine about “muh the left is tearing the country appart” you hear from the lower class people because they eat up the right-wing BS which allows SVP and FDP to rob them of social mobility while making them feel good about it.
No shocker we are heading straight into a wall by copying the USA when we have an ex Swiss Oil president, pro-Trump weirdo in the federal council.
Call Musk. He just finished destroying education in the us.
Just FYI: It’s already almost impossible for low income families to send their children to university due to cost. I had to go to Germany to get higher education because our glorious country didn’t give a rat‘s ass about the education of its own citizens. And don’t even come with „BUt FoR PoOr pEOPlE THeRe arE „gEnEROuS“ SChoLarshiPs“ – wanna know how much my canton wanted to give me? 1‘000 CHF per year or less than 100 CHF per month.
I honestly hate this country, our society that hates the poor and our government who does everything in their power to prevent poor people from succeeding and climbing the ladder by hard work.
S Volch schön dumm bhalte. De rebelierts weniger.
I doubt this will cause any widespread opposition. If you look at demographics, most voters are too old to care about tuition fees and others didn’t study at all and have a deep seated hatred for anyone who has studied, so making life worse for people you hate is completely acceptable for these people.
Too bad that in Switzerland, the majority of people only think about themselves or in very short terms and only a minority thinks about improving the country for all of society.
It’s also interesting to read the comments on right wing online news media. The people there just do the same thing as usual: Blame foreigners for all and every problem. I bet they blame foreigners when their car breaks down and stops working as well somehow.
We all know what they want: taxpayers pay more but get less each passing year. Healthcare, education, real estate etc.
I will share my experience from the UK, maybe you’ll find it relevant.
When the left-wing Labour government fell in 2010 (largely due to the involvement in the Iraq War and then the Global Financial crisis of 2008) the first thing the right-wing Tories did was increase university tuition fees. The fees tripled over night from £3k to £9k per year. Universities welcomed this change as it would lead to less native and more foreign students. Because fees for foreign students are uncapped and unsubsidised, so that’s where all the profits for universities come from.
The effects of this change were perfidious. Not only did the number of native students decrease but gradually over time this change also created further skills shortages. There were always shortages for blue collar jobs, but also white collar jobs now saw shortages. So what the right wing government did, is that while preaching anti-immigration it actually increased it to record levels.
In 2023, after having left the EU and all while talking about deporting people to Rwanda and shutting the border down and so on, they issued 1.2 ***million*** visas and the ***net*** immigration hit a record figure of 900k people.
The moral of the story for me, was this: The right -wing tends to preach about low immigration and use divisive and hateful (sometimes) rhetoric to get an emotional response from people to vote for them, but deep down they dgaf about migration. Because every measure that might actually lead to self-sustenance and less migration (like better education, more benefits for parents etc.) they are against. They are first and foremost pro-small state and pro-business and the benefits of businesses are typically aligned with low costs and low taxes. And for service industries, low cost means low worker salaries, something that is achieved via more immigration from lower income countries.
A country with a large service industry needs good and accessible education, if it truly desires to reduce independence on immigration.
That’s my 2 Rappen.
I will have finished my degree by then but just to let people know: I study part-time with a decently paying job and I could not do it if tuition was doubled. My parents would have to pay the increase.
This makes it even more difficult for students of „lower class“.
I know this goes against the grain of most comments here, but I think the idea of keeping tuition fees low—or even free—is one of those things that sounds great but can actually be counterproductive.
The reality is that well-funded universities need money, and if that’s not coming from students, it has to come from somewhere else—usually taxpayers. That means people who don’t go to university (often from lower-income backgrounds) end up subsidising those who do (who will, on average, go on to earn more). That’s not progressive – it’s rather regressive in fact.
A fairer way to structure university funding is to have students contribute, but in a way that is based on their future earnings. A flat increase in tuition fees is a blunt tool, but a system where graduates repay a percentage of their income—essentially a graduate tax—would be far more equitable. Those who earn a lot contribute more, those who earn less contribute less, and those who don’t earn above a certain threshold wouldn’t have to pay at all.
This would ensure universities are properly funded while keeping access open to everyone, regardless of their financial background. It’s what England moved towards, and despite all the initial outrage, it didn’t reduce university participation, even among disadvantaged groups. If anything, it helped universities invest in better teaching and support services.
So rather than just rejecting tuition increases outright, the real discussion should be about how students pay, making sure it’s tied to future earnings and not upfront wealth. That’s the real progressive approach.
Recommended reading: https://www.theguardian.com/science/the-lay-scientist/2016/jan/28/the-evidence-suggests-i-was-completely-wrong-about-tuition-fees
No popular votation? No popular opposition? Can someone explain to me how this passes without a referendum?
This will just lead to so many people leaving, not even coming here or just straight up dropping out from their ongoing studies. We NEED people from abroad and they want to make them pay 4x more than they already do? (Which is around twice as much as a Swiss person pays)
My parents want to help me cover my study costs and they aren’t wealthy. I will work but I can’t work more than 50%. Should I become a financial problem for the government, just so I can afford to study? What is this bogus???
Morons.
23% of students in switzerland suffer from medium to severe depression, compared to 11% of the total age group. This increases to half of students for those with large financial problems.
If graduates earn more, they also pay more tax. Is increasing their marginal tax rate even further a good way to incentivise them to work more or even stay in Switzerland? Is it right that Swiss should be taxed more than immigrants who studied elsewhere?
You are right that student numbers didn’t fall in the U.K., but forgot the reason: aggressive marketing and expansion of cheap to teach courses by universities, who are now incentivised to keep student numbers high. It’s not so hard to convince 17 year olds to take on a lifetime of debt when they have no other option.
Your view also presupposes that the benefits of higher education go only to graduates, as if a farmer has received no benefit from the teacher that taught them to read or thé microbiologist that tests if their food is safe to sell or the accountant that helps them apply for their state subsidies.
They are literally ruining the country. But we voted them in, so…
so swiss citizens would pay double, non swiss citizens who now pay in average 2.5k would be tripled or quadrupled in this new set up.
Sorry for the stupid question but where will this money increase go to exactly?
Don’t agree with doubling, but it’s worth noting that tuition fees haven’t increased in over 30 years. Living expenses are also so high that tuition is only a small part of the cost of studying. You easily need 20k a year to live in Switzerland.
I also don’t agree that everyone should study. The job market needs a certain number of academics, and some professions absolutely need a uni degree. But sending everyone to uni like in the UK or France is not the way to go. You’re better off doing a good apprenticeship than a Bachelor’s in Tibetan Basket Weaving and then working at Starbuck’s.
Comments are closed.