- This topic has 95 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
As a parent of someone likely to go to University (I hope) next year, and, under the Browne proposals put forward by the coalition, likely to incur considerable expense, I find the protests against the rise in tuition fees laughable, nay childish. The more strident NUS and the Socialist Worker protesters don’t seem able to articulate a reasonable argument AGAINST there introduction.
What’s unfair about paying for something that you choose to make use of?
Do these protesters (who I suspect are a minority who receive press attention above their worth) think they should get everything free?
Okay – so previous generations of University students had the benefit of no fees, but that was in days gone by, when the percentage of people attending university was much less (approx. 5% as compared to 38% nowadays).
The laughable thing is that we see lefty, Socialist Worker banners at these demos together with anti Tory / Cameron / Lib-Dem /Clegg posters trying give the impression that these are youngsters who claim to want the best for the poor, downtrodden masses and their offspring. Yet, ask them why should a (for example) binman or a barista have their income taxed to pay for the priviliged education of those that go to Uni and they can’t give a coherent answer.
Why also, if they are supposed to be so anti Uni fees, weren’t there violent protests against the Labour government that first introduced the fees? Could it be that these protesters are politically (ie anti-Tory) motivated rather than motivated by any sense of fairness or a desire to fight injustice.
As for the Lib-Dems and Nick Clegg in particular. They may have campaigned aginst Uni fees in the election, but just in case our lefty leaning student protesters aren’t aware, THEY NEVER WON THE F****** ELECTION, and so can’t be expected to impose their pledges on a coalition.
Oy Vey!
The only comforting thought is the knowledge that naive left-wing politics is usually the domain of teenagers. Most will grow out of it, as I did.
- Total Posts 17716
The government are robbing off people who haven’t even got money just because they consider them to be high earners when they leave which is why like 27% of graduates are working below their expected salary whilst 10% are unemployed, Government are trying to cover their backsides whilst they’ll still fund the scumbags on benefits.
Don’t make sense.
A graduate won’t start repaying the loan until he/she earns £21k or more So unemployed or "poor" graduates aren’t being punished or penalised; far from it. How many people can get a loan that they might never have to repay if they fall on hard times? Go ask your building society if you can stop your mortgage repayment until you reach x amount per year!
It seems some students expect something for nothing. They should get real. I say once again, why should a binman contribute via his taxes to university students fees?- Total Posts 17716
A graduate won’t start repaying the loan until he/she earns £21k or more So unemployed or "poor" graduates aren’t being punished or penalised; far from it. How many people can get a loan that they might never have to repay if they fall on hard times? Go ask your building society if you can stop your mortgage repayment until you reach x amount per year!
It seems some students expect something for nothing. They should get real. I say once again, why should a binman contribute via his taxes to university students fees?Your mentality is why we have broken societies and wouldn’t want you anywhere near paid work that has the ability to pay off a mortgage, I’d never consider employing your type.
We’re the future of this country, binmen are delinquants who’ve failed in life whilst University is there for them if they want it although they probably come from such a hard back ground it’s not a cool thing to do because the lads will laugh at them attitude.
I don’t expect nothing for free but at the same time don’t expect to be burdend with a heap load of debt because we’re expected to earn more when we leave and if we do then those on higher income get taxed even further.
Cut benefits by 50% and you wouldn’t have to increase tuition fees, at least immigrants are prepared to work compared to these fat council estate women who pile up the kids and get the benefits whilst their boyfriend is out supporting the EDL and BNP down the local getting boozed up.
Per Mr Wilson:-
binmen are delinquants who’ve failed in life whilst …
Someone’s got to do it – and you expect them to pay your University fees too whilst they’re at it!
Why should they?
Oh and by the way you won’t be saddled with a heap of debt; you’ll only start paying that debt off when your earnings rise above a certain level – can you grasp that? Primary school economics that isn’t mentioned by our more vociferous student protesters. If you don’t earn it, you don’t pay it. And the rate at which you pay it off is governed by how much you earn. (So if you earn £21k you pay the least interest, but if you earn millions, then the interest rate is higher – but not punitive.) Oh – and in case you’re unaware – there’s an age limit beyond which your student "debt" is expunged. Seems fair to me – a lot fairer than expecting all and sundry from the lowest taxpayers up to pay your bills for you. What’s there to moan about. Get a grip.- Total Posts 17716
Per Mr Wilson:-
binmen are delinquants who’ve failed in life whilst …
Someone’s got to do it – and you expect them to pay your University fees too whilst they’re at it!
Why should they?
Oh and by the way you won’t be saddled with a heap of debt; you’ll only start paying that debt off when your earnings rise above a certain level – can you grasp that? Primary school economics that isn’t mentioned by our more vociferous student protesters. If you don’t earn it, you don’t pay it. And the rate at which you pay it off is governed by how much you earn. (So if you earn £21k you pay the least interest, but if you earn millions, then the interest rate is higher – but not punitive.) Oh – and in case you’re unaware – there’s an age limit beyond which your student "debt" is expunged. Seems fair to me – a lot fairer than expecting all and sundry from the lowest taxpayers up to pay your bills for you. What’s there to moan about. Get a grip.You still pay the same tax even if the fees go up so you need to direct your frustration at the government rather than us.
What I find disconcerting about all this is a bunch of folk who universally benefited from free university education are voting to pull the rope ladder up behind them.
As for the Lib-Dems and Nick Clegg in particular. They may have campaigned aginst Uni fees in the election, but just in case our lefty leaning student protesters aren’t aware, THEY NEVER WON THE F****** ELECTION, and so can’t be expected to impose their pledges on a coalition.
Oy Vey!Insomniac, perhaps you didn’t notice but with a huge minority of the electorate marking their box, the Tories didn’t win the f******* election either! That’s why they’re in a coalition. I’d be worried about that!
We’re the future of this country
Thank the fooking Lord for that!
I can sleep easily tonight knowing that…
Oh man-paying for college is HELL. Take it from me. Fees upon fees upon fees upon fees. The universities try to suck every penny off of their students and the students’ parents. Don’t take free education for granted.
Yep Miss Woodford, I’m sure you’re right, and I wish my offspring weren’t going to have to do it. And I agree too that it seems unfair that those politicians who have introduced Graduate Fees (THE NEW LABOUR GOV’T by the way), are pulling up the ladder of support from future generations, but hey, that’s the reality.
It’s hell having to pay off a mortgage, paying the rates, paying heating bills etc, but at least the student loans repayments scheme proposed in the Browne report and by the coalition seems pretty fair. (No bank, building society or energy company tells me they’ll wait for payment until my earnings reach £21k p.a. or will write them off at 51.)
Re earlier comments. The fact that the Conservatives didn’t win a majority at the election in no way alters my point that the LibDems didn’t and therefore can’t impose their manifesto pledges.
Mr Wilson states that they wouldn’t have to raise taxes to reinstate state funding of student fees. Maybe not, but to do this would mean cutting funding to other areas to pay for it. Why cut funding for services that might be used by all to featherbed the "elite" minority, who will ultimately benefit from higher earnings (in theory)?
Once again, we come back to my argument, why should the binman or barista have his taes used to support wannabe university students? By the way, when university fees were introduced under Tony Blair and New Labour was there the same level of protest as now? Maybe there was and my memory is worse than I think.
Those anti tories (and Libdems) need to ask themselves:-
1) Who introduced University fees in the first place?
2) Who commissioned the Browne report on university funding?
and
3) If New Labour had formed the government, bearing in mind the state of the UK’s economy, what would they have done re. University funding?
If anyone thinks that if Labour had been returned to power they wouldn’t have increased student fees, then they’re in another world.Well well Mr Wilson. I had you down as a narky, embittered 60-something with a rudimentary education that ended when school chuck-out was 14
A student then
Your dubious command of spelling, grammar and syntax adds damning credibility to the belief held by many that any old thicko can now get the leg-up into further education without needing to pass that most crucial of basic exams: O Level/GCSE English Language; or in your case the 11+the dignity of labour
the demeaning despicable indignity of prejudice
yuk!
Okay then Insomniac, lets throw the whole thing to the market.
Lets forget the benefit to the country of an educated workforce or the moral benefit of equality. Lets forget that my son, a working class lad in a comp will pay the same as the son of a Judge educated at Wellington College – whose father will pay a good percentage of the fees so its likely that whether he earns 21k or 210k, cost isnt really an issue. Let’s forget the ephemeral that equality is good for a civilised society, that it brings down barriers and create harmony.
Lets go for the market. Here’s what my son and I want to purchase.
My thirteen year old son – top set at virtually everything so far (touch wood) – will pay £9,000 per year to study English at Cambridge University.
His mum and I will help him pay for it and I’m sure we’ll get a bursary from a charitable trust to help too. I don’t want to pay £9,000 at anywhere else. Just Cambridge.
Where do I sign?
Well Maxilon, why should the child of a wealthy family have to pay more for tuition from the same tutors at the same university with the same facilities than anyone else? (In reality, he probably will as offspring from poorer households will be subsidised).
Having a wealthy family doesn’t mean you pay more for your Mars Bars, more to get into a racecourse or more for your haircut than those not so well off does it? So why do you think that tertiary education should be any different?
You mention not to mention "… the moral benefit of equality" and "…Let’s forget the ephemeral that equality is good for a civilised society", but in education, (as in much else in life) there is no equality and you’ll never get it. We can and must nobly try to attainequaility of opportunity,
but that’s somewhat different and even if it was acheived, there will always be some kids smarter than others. As long as those smart kids have equal opportunity to obtain a tertiary education then that’s fine. I maintain that the proposals put forward by the coalition after the Browne report are not a handicap to those bright kids, even from a poor background, getting that chance.
I’m not rich, far from it. My daughter has always gone to a state school and goes to the local comprehensive. I’ll struggle to help her financially. But that doesn’t mean I go red in the face and blow a gasket because – heaven forfend – she has to actually PAY for something! (And remember, the not insignificant caveats that – students have to earn £21K+ before repayment starts, there’s an age limit after which the debt is expunged and there is a greater degree of financial assistance for those from low income households -which my household definitely is.)
It is of course galling that youngsters nowadays are having to pay for something that was free to those who introduced University Tuition fees (ie Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, Harriet Harman, Jack Straw, Ed Balls, Yvette Cooper, Diane Abbott, The Millibands, Andy Burnham etc.)
What is particularly galling about University Fees isn’t the principle of them (most countries have them and in some places would be green with envy over the cost of ours) but the unequal application of them for English youngsters as opposed to Scots and Welsh. But that’s partly down to the shambles that was devolution. (Now, let me think, which party was in government when Scottish and Welsh devolution was introduced?)
I never went to Uni, but went to college and evening classes after work. I paid for these courses out of my wages and didn’t expect any handouts from family or taxpayers, neither did millions of others who did likewise. Why should obtaining a university degree (which, whilst admirable isn’t compulsory), be any different?
And all the socialists who don’t like to see the poor worker subsidising the wealthy, answer me this: why should the taxes of the binman and the barista or the toilet janitor help subsidise the tertiary education of those who will reap a finacial benefit from it (in theory) in their later years?
The NUS and Socialist Worker activists are probably doing working class youngsters who want to go to University more of a disservice than anyone else They rant like inarticulate, rabid divvies about the evil, crushing fees, not giving the full story and scaring many who haven’t got the facts into thinking that University is going to be too dear for the likes of them. That’s just not the case – it’s affordable – as you don’t start repaying until you earn £21k+ and the repayments are staggered so that repayments are less if you’re at the lower end of the £21k+ eaners. But hey, it’s not a Labour government is it, so the NUS and the other divvies will kick up a stink come what may.
I sincerely hope your son gets a place at Cambridge. If he’s bright enough then the fees aren’t a real barrier. It’s the fear that’s now being instilled into working class kids that theys ARE a problem that is the barrier – and it’s the daft student activists who are responsible for this.
The scaremongering by the more vociferous politically motivated activists is a shame, the proposals of the coalition when studied in a calm and measured way do not handicap working class kids if they really want to go to University.Insoms, the fact that the Libs (or the Nasty Party) didn’t win the election has nothing to do with student anger towards the Liberals.
The ‘Pledges’ the Lib Dibs signed were nothing to do with their manifesto. They were a NUS initiative and every Prospective Parliamentary Candidate from all parties was offered the opportunity to sign one.
The pledge itself states:
I
will never vote for an increase in student fees……
What it doesn’t say is: The Libs if we form an outright government will never vote……..
It’s really that simple.
Fair enough Pompete – I take your point now that you’ve pointed that distinction out to me. I own up to not paying too much attention to the promises (in the manifesto or not) of the LibDems prior to the election.
Ah! The service based argument. That a Mars bar costs the same to you, me and to the Duke of Westminster. Reminds me of the Poll Tax, Insomniac, the policy which eventually finished your heroine. I can picture John Selwyn Gummer’s broadcast now.
Flat fees/taxes are fundamentally unfair – and regressive. From Adam Smith and Jeremy Bentham onward, the principle of affordability and fairness has always been a lynchpin of taxation policy. That’s why we used to have a progressive taxation policy.
Under the new proposals, extremely bright and talented people from poor backgrounds, perhaps with limited driving from parents, living environments of third generation unemployment and experiencing limited teaching resources have to make a choice.
"Do I become indebted for up to £27,000 PLUS living expenses, something you conveniently ignore, Insomniac – in order to get a degree which may – or may not – enhance my career prospects? And how much would I have to earn to ensure that the indebtedness isn’t an overwhelming burden?"
21k is nothing nowadays.
If the figure was 41k? I wouldn’t even be talking to you, Insomniac. I would broadly agree.
21k? Its only just above the average wage in this country and the student is going to be hammered. Many young, talented young people from non-traditional backgrounds – without parental/statutory support – will choose not to go to achieve their potential.
Many students from traditional, prosperous backgrounds can afford to take the risk because their parents will help both in advance and retrospectively. So therefore, universities will remain the province of the middle class. And that’s a shame.
21k is nothing nowadays.
If the figure was 41k? I wouldn’t even be talking to you, Insomniac. I would broadly agree.
21k? Its only just above the average wage in this country and the student is going to be hammered. Many young, talented young people from non-traditional backgrounds – without parental/statutory support – will choose not to go to achieve their potential.
There’s plenty of families out there earning less than the 21k you describe as nothing nowadays, and I’d hazard a guess that there’s a hell of a lot of those with debts at least twice that amount if not more.
People everywhere are feeling the pinch and having to make cutbacks.
I come from a working class background and was taught from an early age if I wanted something then I had to put the effort in and work hard for it and the reward would then come.
I don’t see anything wrong at all in asking Students to pay their costs once they are reaping the benefits in the future. If they live within their means from day one and go out and get part time jobs and save while they are at Uni then it shouldn’t be a major problem when they have to start paying it back.
I don’t like the fact I have to pay so much tax, so much for diesel, so much for weekly shopping, so much for just about everything nowadays.
Guess what though…I just go to work, work my bollocks off for not much more than you call ‘nothing’, provide for my family, enjoy things when I’m able to afford to do so and do it all with a smile on my face.
I feel hard done to at times but I don’t go protesting here, there and everywhere smashing police vans up etc, etc…
Your dubious command of spelling, grammar and syntax adds damning credibility to the belief held by many that any old thicko can now get the leg-up into further education without needing to pass that most crucial of basic exams: O Level/GCSE English Language; or in your case the 11+
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.