In other words, only the students under the age of 24 will get the financial aid from the federal government and that also if and only if their parents have a low income. In my opinion, the financial aid should not be based on parents income when students are under the age of 24.
Government has a moral responsibility in the education of all the students irrespective of the financial capacities of the parents since the contributions to the students are vital in nation building process. All the students are contribution in one way or other for the development of the nation when enters their professional life. Under such circumstances, it is the duty of the government to give their share in the form of financial aid while the students are studying. Since all the students; rich or poor are working for the nation after the completion of their studies, giving ample assistance to the students is the responsibility of the government. In schools and colleges, the education system is trying to avoid all forms of discrimination and that is why in schools uniforms were made compulsory. Under such circumstances, limiting the financial aids to a particular segment alone may create dissatisfaction among the students who failed to get the financial aid.
“Some Republicans say eliminating the subsidy could save the government more than $9 billion in five years, but the democrats say that would burden students with too much debt”(Sanchez). It is a fact that the American government is currently facing severe financial crisis because of the recession problems. At the same time nobody will say that the current crisis was caused because of the financial aids given to the students. Many people believe that the current financial crisis was the bi-product of the huge expenditure made on war on terror, Iraq war etc. If the government has so much money for these kinds of wars, there is no point in limiting the financial aids to the students, when