proffemi:


I have to give it to Slackerpenguin2. The point he's making is one I have made on this forum multiple times, but he seems to be a far more patient man than I. I'm surprised at your post above even after he obliged you by providing the explanation you asked for (high tax-to-GDP ratio allows some nations to provide "free" education, but we have a very low ratio).

The answers you seek have been provided. Accepting them or sticking with preconceptions is a matter of choice.

Cheers.

My little knowledge of economics seems to be failing me here. I mean, is it not income that it's taxed? If the income is as low as it is, how then do we expect tax revenue to be high?

Besides, we're not asking for free education. Just for it to not be unaffordable.

Let me paint a picture. Let's say fees are raised to 500k - 1m(way above the minimum wage) per session. How many people can afford that? Does this not mean that the number of enrolled students will drop? Will there be any significant increase in revenue then?

Please be patient with me o. I'm honestly confused and only trying to learn.

Most countries employ either a socialist-leaning or capitalist leaning model to fund qualitative education. In the former, provision of high-quality education is treated as a responsibility of government. The funds for this have to come from somewhere, hence taxes tends to be higher in such countries (the aforementioned tax-to-GDP ratio is a sort of objective metric to gauge how much revenue is generated by a government versus the country's productivity). In other countries, the burden of funding education falls more directly on students/their sponsors. Tax-to-GDP may be lower because individuals pay more.

The problem in Nigeria is that we do not pay high taxes yet we want the government to provide all amenities including qualitative tertiary education. Ko le werk. We have to be one, or the other.

emorse:
...Besides, we're not asking for free education. Just for it to not be unaffordable.

Let me paint a picture. Let's say fees are raised to 500k - 1m(way above the minimum wage) per session. How many people can afford that? Does this not mean that the number of enrolled students will drop? Will there be any significant increase in revenue then?

How many people can afford 500k? Well, arguably about the same as the number who can afford it in the USA or South Africa. You probably think the tuition in the US/SA is within the reach of the majority of students. Not so. Most students need loans or scholarships to survive. Obama famously got over $40k and finished paying his student loans shortly before he became president. No real reason why that can't work here.

Qualitative education isn't cheap or really free anywhere. People pay for it, either centrally through significantly higher taxes, or individually either out-of pocket or via loans. Saying government should fund it when we're not paying the taxes is akin to -as a wise man noted - paying for a bicycle and demanding for a Ferrari.

You have very beautiful way of approaching this topic.

Slackerpenguin2:


The answer is...quite a lot.
ABU, Zaria has overhead costs, around 50 million naira montthly...and we haven't talked aboutt staff ssalalries, equipment, etc etc.

Plus universites need constant upgrading of things like libraries, equipment , etc

Then there is the fact that universites pay heavily now for utilites....


OK...HEREwe go

Denmark ...free education, tax to gdp 44.9%
Germany too....tax to gdp 38.2%
Norway tax to gdp ratio 38.9%
Sweden tax to gdp ratio 43.9%
Finland tax to gdp ratio 42.7%
Austria tax to gdp 42.9%
Czech 35.3%
France 46.1%

All the above have free education and have high tax to gdp ratios..

Now Nigeria ....has a tax to gdp ratio of 5.8%

We charge much less in tax than these big countries...and you want us to offer free education with what money? When we charge less in tax?

Yet., if the government raises taxes....people like you will complain.

Now you know why Nigeria cannot afford free edducation.