Tuition fees are a good thing/

Original post by paul514

That's an argument for limiting places available on different courses rather than an argument that is pro fees

Posted from TSR Mobile

It's linked. We're a generation of people who don't really know what we want to do. Cheap or free university will encourage more people to go. The only way you'd keep admittance under control is set entry requirements to a minimum of something like A*A*A or something...

..but then you'd also have a generation of the most 'stressed out' kids ever :rolleyes:

I'm not in favour of the proposed changes to fees, but i'm not in favour of reducing them on the basis of 'we are entitled'.

Reply 63

Original post by Purpleunicorn197

But then how different is this from about a century ago when only the richest people could go to university- raising tuition fees or even keeping them where they are is more back tracking than progress as we will end up in a society in which only the richest and elitest people can go to university while others aren't even given the opportunity. How are we meant to grow and prosper as a country if we are not giving everybody the same chance to succeed?

EVERYONE right now has the opportunity to go to university now - even the poorest.

We're not exactly 'growing and prospering' as a country now are we?

Reply 64

username1148663

21

Original post by hezzlington

It's linked. We're a generation of people who don't really know what we want to do. Cheap or free university will encourage more people to go. The only way you'd keep admittance under control is set entry requirements to a minimum of something like A*A*A or something...

..but then you'd also have a generation of the most 'stressed out' kids ever :rolleyes:

I'm not in favour of the proposed changes to fees, but i'm not in favour of reducing them on the basis of 'we are entitled'.

Nah you simply link number of places available to number of expected jobs available for that degree.

That would clearly mean closing shite universities so it kills two birds with one stone

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 65

username1148663

21

Original post by hezzlington

EVERYONE right now has the opportunity to go to university now - even the poorest.

We're not exactly 'growing and prospering' as a country now are we?

5th largest economy in the world and the fastest growing in the G7

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 66

Fleuryette

6

I think what everyone is saying that, those who intend to study non-academic degrees, such as liberal arts etc. Should really look at their future options before applying for uni. I have known people who studied Psychology and Speech & Communication Therapy, they all ended up working at the same pay rate as me where I work, and I'm a sixth former. A massive waste of three years in my opinion, if they weren't going to use their degree for study etc.. It's just overwhelming for us academic students at first, to have this massive debt on our shoulders. However, we pay it back in manageable sums, and those of us who are careful, should not be a problem. For those of you who intend to study English and then end up with a crappy office job, don't blame the government, we can blame them for all sorts of stuff, but not this time. If the tuition fees were lowered, we'd probably have to pay much more for other things, such as accomodation or taxes etc.

Reply 67

Original post by paul514

Nah you simply link number of places available to number of expected jobs available for that degree.

That would clearly mean closing shite universities so it kills two birds with one stone

Posted from TSR Mobile

There is no such thing as 'expected jobs available' for a degree. (Except perhaps a clinical degree)

Even if it were, it would vary so drastically per degree and per company, it would be luck of the draw.

What do you consider a 'shite' university?

Reply 68

Tiger Rag

22

Original post by paul514

The money came from taxation and they do pay for their education in taxation once working.

If someone pays for their tuition now should they pay less tax

It's the same stupid argument

Posted from TSR Mobile

But no-one pays for tuition now?

Reply 69

Original post by paul514

5th largest economy in the world and the fastest growing in the G7

Posted from TSR Mobile

And how does that translate to the people? we are all so bitterly unhappy with the austerity but thats a different debate.

Reply 70

Original post by K2G

9000 is a ridiculous amount to be paying yearly + all the expenses like rent, food and laundry etc. This amount adds up to about 15k a year. Unless you're bagging 15k without a problem. Then go ahead and argue this point of yours but trust me not everyone can afford it.

Sign the petition, there's a petition thread with a link to make it 3k

Reply 71

K2G

13

Original post by 0to100

Sign the petition, there's a petition thread with a link to make it 3k

It won't work. They will debate it, make us believe that decreasing tuition fees to £3k would be a wrong choice and even if they do decide to make it £3k, by that time it'll be too late for us.

Reply 72

Original post by 0to100

Sign the petition, there's a petition thread with a link to make it 3k

Why should it be 3k? Why can't it be exactly how much it costs per degree.

Reply 73

Original post by K2G

It won't work. They will debate it, make us believe that decreasing tuition fees to £3k would be a wrong choice and even if they do decide to make it £3k, by that time it'll be too late for us.

How can they make you believe that though

Reply 74

Original post by hezzlington

Why should it be 3k? Why can't it be exactly how much it costs per degree.

Well I didn't say it should be, that's what they're going for but it's certainly less than what it is now.

Reply 75

K2G

13

Original post by 0to100

How can they make you believe that though

They will debate it so much, you will literally end up agreeing with probably 11k a year lol.

Reply 76

Original post by K2G

They will debate it so much, you will literally end up agreeing with probably 11k a year lol.

Lol never but somehow education gets more expensive. Lower cost if not free means more for the taxpayer. It might also lessen living expenses which means the conditions will be worse. Apparently high cost means higher quality, as well, but like I dunno. ****'s mad. I should just drop out init lol

Reply 77

K2G

13

Original post by 0to100

Lol never but somehow education gets more expensive. Lower cost if not free means more for the taxpayer. It might also lessen living expenses which means the conditions will be worse. Apparently high cost means higher quality, as well, but like I dunno. ****'s mad. I should just drop out init lol

The country had no problem when tuition fees were 3000 pounds, should've stayed like that. Quality of life was quite high tbh. even myself as a student could afford much more things back then.

Reply 78

Original post by The gains kinggg

Tuition fees are the fairest way.

Why should i have to subsidise someone else's ****ty liberal arts degree from some unknown polytechnic?

And why do students feel as thought they are soo entitled?

Blah blah blah give me some free **** that other people have to pay for.

Well I see the benefits of it not being free but I see the benefits as well of it being free. Your issue however just seems to be snobbery.

Original post by hezzlington

Relative poverty..?

Not being able to afford a degree is not poverty or even relative poverty.

No. She's saying, if you an't afford uni you will probably get an underpaying job or be chronically unemployed...and living on JSA...which leads to poverty...

Reply 79