Also, it is not free because not enough people wants to go to college. In Denmark, for example, we have educations where 95% of applicants are rejected.
I guess alternative would be accepted almost everyone, but then during first three years or so, ruthlessly remove students from programs based on test scores etc.
I believe that you are right in your intuition, but not in the consequences.
The first consequence is that in Germany, vocational training is often a much better alternative to universities for many pupils. Also being allowed to go to university requires an "Abitur" degree of the school, which means that you have to go 2-3 years longer to the school. For even being allowed to "Oberstufe" (the part of school that leads to "Abitur"), you need decent marks in school beforehand.
Even if you have Abitur, there exist alternatives to universities that can suit one better than university, for example Fachhochschule (school of applied science; though I am cautious to use this English translation, since it is a very German concept that has no analogue in the English-speaking world that I am aware of), a kind of "university" that has no academic focus, but applied focus. I think the best English translation that I can come up with is "engineering school", though it is not restricted to engineering degrees.
Also be aware that at German universities you are very much on your own for studying; i.e. no hands-holding etc.
TLDR: Two points:
1. There exist good alternatives to universities in Germany
2. At a German university, you are typically much on your own - this is not for everybody.
And for those who don't qualify for particular masters program, well I guess they will either try harder next time over, or face the music and look for some other areas where they might be a better fit.
I bet you could find approximately 5% of people in the US who are able to qualify for full scholarships.
So saying "Hey if we can pay for a few hundred thousand people to go to college, why can't you pay for tens of millions of people to go college?" is not really a fair comparison.
It makes no sense at all.
Those who go to college don't have to deal with crippling dept.
We did at one point in history have college that was affordable without having the government pay for it. It should be possible to do that again.
It would also mean less horrific student loan situations.
I'd be interested in seeing data on that. Family income and "academic prowess" are often highly correlated, since higher income families tend to have better educated parents to begin with and are more able to pay for tutors and additional help.
My totally anecdotal experience (mostly Italy, Spain) is the opposite, even in countries where higher education is cheap/subsidized, people tend to go to University "just because", mostly because it is expected by family/parents, and most don't really have a long term plan.
It is really rare for a 17/18 yo to have a clear picture of his/her own future, IMHO.
Canada - 54%
Japan - 48%
U.S. - 44%
Switzerland - 40%
Sweden - 39%
Estonia - 38%
Iceland - 37%
Belgium - 37%
France - 32%
Germany - 27%
The US, on the other hand wouldn't benefit nearly as much. The need for still more (relatively) over-edu'ed isn't there.
On a similar note, US edus charge more because they can. As demand increases so does price. Top that off with the available of "cheap" and easy money (i.e., subsidized student loans) and prices go even higher.
Not everyone is college material, and that's not a bad thing. Unfortunately, most in the US are unwilling to accept this.