Topic: We should subsidize vocational education

Argument: subsidising vocational education will simply have the effect to creating a glut of certain skill-sets, driving down demand and wages in these sectors.

Argument: subsidising vocational training won't make the quality of training any better so there isn't any point in doing so.

Argument: subsidizing vocational education could mean that we have a steady supply of people into trades. this in turn willl help keep costs down for everyone.

Argument: subsidizing vocational education gives it unfair advantage over alternative career paths.

Argument: subsidizing vocational education is unnecessary as those who have learnt trades can end up making a lot of money.

Argument: Subsidizing vocational education takes money away from other, more worthy causes that help society at large.

Argument: subsidizing vocational education will allow more people to pursue a vocation in a time when too few people are choosing that avenue.

Argument: subsidizing vocational education will improve economy growth and will make people more successful.

Argument: subsidizing vocational education will lead more people learning vital skills that could help them get ahead in life

Argument: Subsidizing vocational education would be beneficial to students who want to further their education or train for new careers.

Argument: Subsidizing vocational education would be most beneficial to the worst of in society, as they often have lower costs, quicker access to employment, and flexible schedules that people can work around.

Argument: subsidizing vocational education would help bring in more money for better lessons.

Argument: subsidizing vocational education would prepare people for careers and jobs.

Argument: subsidizing vocational education would take money away from more important issues.

Argument: supporting vocational education helps society as a whole when we have plenty of people qualified to do the work that supports our daily lives.

Argument: the city, state, and/or federal government not only have higher priorities in other areas, but there is also debt/budget deficit to consider. in other words, we may not be able to afford another program.

Argument: the cost of vocational education far outweighs the benefits in terms of earnings capacity.

Argument: the government can't afford to subsidize everything that people want to learn to do. there has to be a cut off point where students have to pay for it themselves. do not subsidize vo-ed.

Argument: the government cannot be expected to cover extra schooling for only a part of the population

Argument: the importance of the education of our professionals must be taken into consideration in our society

Argument: the learning of skills is benificial to society

Argument: the poor also have the right to education

Argument: The salaries of vocational school graduates are significantly less than those earned by college graduates with bachelors degrees. Better to subsidize 4-year colleges than vocational schools.

Argument: there could be no end to a list of vocational studies requiring subsidising and that cost cannot be met.