Why does the author say 'average earnings hide wide variation'?
Whether students should pay for university is usually discussed as a question of fairness between graduates and the general taxpayer. Graduates earn more on average, the argument goes, so they should contribute. That is plausible but incomplete. Average earnings hide wide variation, and a flat debt falls hardest on those whose degrees lead to modest incomes. A graduate contribution collected through the tax system, as a percentage of earnings above a threshold, would adjust to what each person can afford. It would also remove the apparent paradox of a loan that many will never fully repay. The proposal is not free of difficulty, for it asks graduates to pay for decades. But it matches what is charged to what is received more closely than a fixed sum can.
Answer and explanation
Correct answer: E. Because a rule based on the average ignores graduates who earn much less than average
- Step 1: The next clause says a flat debt falls hardest on those whose degrees lead to modest incomes.
- Step 2: So averages conceal the people who earn less.
Answer
Because a rule based on the average ignores graduates who earn much less than average.
Why not the others: The point is about graduates who earn less than average, not that all earn the same, that graduates never earn more, that averages cannot be calculated or that degrees are worthless.
Practise more Higher education.
Free questions with an explanation for every one, and full timed LNAT mock tests.