Upon reading through the thread, I believe the following are the problem areas that ultimately devalue higher education (when combining them all) that cause such distaste in the topic discussed.
1. Not enough jobs
2. Those w/o a degree are prioritised over those w/ a degree
3. Respect for people w/ a degree depends on what degree
4. Increasing debt on students, increasing burden on the taxpayer
This is a case that I have submitted to my MP when addressing the future of maintenance grants, which help those from poorer backgrounds, to access higher education. Once upon a time, women were downgraded and marginalised for what they could do, with the war effort demonstrating that there was more that women can do. Why were they downgraded and marginalised? because they did not fit the working image, the working man as the breadwinner, their gender did not fit and there was nothing women could do about that.
Why do I mention women? It is because I believe it is students that are now being downgraded and marginalised? To suggest that every student should pay every part of the loan they are given, is to suggest every student has the ability BUT if they don't, then they don't fit the working image, because they are not wealthy or not, they did not get that job because someone 'better' got it first. There is nothing poorer students can do about being poor, just as there was nothing women could do about being women. However, when women were able to climb higher, they were able to break that glass ceiling and achieve. To go to Uni and get a degree, provides the means to be able to break that glass ceiling, that they (who did not fit) were able to achieve!
However, the root problem, is if there is not that job at the end, that makes the degree worth while. If the student gets the degree and gets the job that works with it, then those students are more likely to pay back and perhaps pay back it all (depending on income) - and these are the students that the taxpayer doesn't have to worry about BUT the students who were not so fortunate, that have to find work elsewhere as they didn't reach the mark after working hard, only for their efforts to count for nothing! Don't you think it is hard enough for the student to find his/her result not meeting the grade and then trying to find work elsewhere, only to receive a bad reception.
Women did not ask for the treatment they received, but it happened due to society, but a breakthrough soon emerged. Now, students did not ask for the treatment they are receiving. They did not ask for the loans, but they exercised their right/autonomy to seek an education, to brake that glass ceiling and I don't believe we should be judgemental as to the choice that students have made - and why? is this topic even existing - because of the concern that students don't pay their loans - a legitimate concern BUT once upon a time, education was free! and education was funded by the State by taxpayers money.
Taxpayers > Tax > State > Education > Students > Higher Paid work > Higher Paid Taxes > Public Services > Taxpayers
State > Education
^ If we examine this aspect...
In the past, the State funded all education, students achieved or did not achieve, students then contributed as a taxpayer regardless of achievement and regardless of wealth - no problemo
NOW, the State finances all education, students pay back what they can (depending on achievement and wealth) and contribute as a taxpayer regardless, the State indirectly funds education (as they were doing before) for those students that are unable to pay back or not able to pay it all back (so the only State money in HE) - all of a sudden, a problem, as students facing these difficulties are scapegoated, that they are the problem and NOT the State that is raising the fees, and making the portion of State/taxpayer funding larger to make it more of a problem
IF the State wants to help Students to repay, then (to refer back to the original list): (1) provide more jobs that are degree-worthy to make the degree worthwhile, (2) while understandable that businesses prefer candidates with hands-on experience, open up more opportunities/apprenticeships for postgraduates that didn't meet the mark, (3) if there is an opportunity/apprenticeship for postgrads specifically, then the students' work will be respected, (4) understand the problems students face in the job market and revisit tuition fees to make repayments possible and not im-possible
I am not totally against tuition fees personally, as I understand the reasoning why, but it needs to make sense, or students from poorer backgrounds will be even more marginalised and not have that desire to break the glass ceiling, that HE is more trouble than it is worth - and yet! we have shortages here and there in different sectors - is the answer to cut off those at the bottom end? If a teacher is too 'upper-class', then students aren't going to respect back - would it not be nice to have a student from a poor background, to become a teacher and encourage others to follow? - How can this be done if there is undue pressure to pay back it all? Will a teacher's salary even pay off the full amount? If not, shall we not promote teachers b/c their pay is not going to settle the debt? (same goes with other professions)
Perhaps what would work more, is a standard tuition fee for the University you are attending and the facilities/resources that come with it - the 'push comes to the shove' then, for the State & the University to help Students get into work - which, upon getting work with the help of the degree, would then require a percentage of earnings to be used to give back to the system that got that work in the first place, for however long. I am not a politician though XD but the idea is partly-supported by NUS
The National Union of Students proposed an extra tax of between 0.3 per cent and 2.5 per cent of their income above £15,000, for a period of 20 years, with the highest earners paying higher rates.
The reason I say partly-support, is that the tax would cover all expenses, but the Lib-Dems previously argued this and lost because it was felt that the cost of University education would not cover it - so having a standard tuition fee could help. If repayments are the problem, this would solve them.