“… would be to allow students to sign enforceable contracts by which lenders would pay their college or university expenses in exchange for a given percentage of their future earnings. That way, students would be issuing stocks to raise capital, the way corporations do, instead of being limited to borrowing money to be paid back in fixed amounts — the latter being equivalent to issuing corporate bonds. “

Why shouldn’t students – however rich or poor they or their parents are – not get the same Citizen’s Income as an unemployed person in that age group, realistically about £40 or £50 a week?

If parents are paying the tax to fund the system it seems a tad churlish not to let their children have some back.

No, you’re wrong here – which is why tax credits, which are precisely a system to ensure that only the poor benefit from state spending, are still a bad idea.

Universal benefits cost very little to administer. Targeted and means-tested benefits cost a hell of a lot to administer. This means that there is less waste of resources in total if universal benefits are provided (in one case, the government is taking a fiver off the middle classes and giving them £4.95 back; in the other, the government is taking a fiver off the middle classes, giving £3.50 to the poor, and wasting the rest…)