People from cities go to university more often than those who live in the country. Some people think that the government should make it easier to enter universities for people who live outside of cities and towns by setting lower entry requirements and tuition fees. To what extend do you agree or disagree with this statement?

The pursuit for quality education of students from towns to the universities located in the cities is predominantly increasing throughout the years.

Hence

,

this

begs a question should whether the state allows

lowering

Wrong verb form

lower

show examples

its entry requirements and fees for those who live in other locations. In my opinion, I fully agree with

this

suggestion to the government since it has many benefits. There are several upsides to

this

which are mainly for students, local businesses and the government. Lowering the schools' payments may greatly be beneficial for those studying externally since they bear additional costs of moving to a different place. A clear example is for a person who wants to move from Los Angeles to Boston to enter MIT university, he or she will need to pay more for the rent, food and other transfer expenses.

Furthermore

,

this

will attract more outsiders to enrol in these schools,

hence

increasing the number of customers for the local businesses.

For instance

, there will be a huge number of people that may come to cafés, rent apartments, or go to the groceries which will lead to higher profits. Since the local economy is progressing,

this

may translate to higher taxes to be paid for the county.

This

increase in tax will lead to more budgets that the state can utilise for their various programs and developments. In conclusion, there are many benefits of lowering its school standards of entry for those outsiders.  Due to

this

, I fully agree that government should impose

this

to realise the positive outcomes.