In the Soho Forum debate on "All government support of higher education should be abolished" , I heavily based my argument on the signaling model of education. But if I were a human capital purist, I still would have defended the abolitionist position - albeit less triumphally. Here's how:1. Prospective college students, unlike K-12 students, are adults - both legally and practically. 2. Hence, if they want to invest in themselves, they or their families can and should pay for it. This would be a lot easier than it is today, because government subsidies have greatly inflated tuition.3. If prospective college students or their families don't have the money, they can borrow the money on the free market.
Bryan Caplan considers the following as important: cost-benefit analysis
This could be interesting, too:
David Henderson writes Does Losing Less Mean that You Are Winning?
Bryan Caplan writes Market Failure Theory as Reproach to Government Practice
David Henderson writes The Wall Probably Fails a Market Test
David Henderson writes Sunstein’s Book Has Strengths and Weaknesses