Voting for TSRs Ultimate Study Playlist is NOW OPEN >>

Debate: Why do students who's parents earn less receive more money?

I'm having a debate with my friend about why children who's parents earn less receive more money from the government when they go onto higher-education. His argument is that everyone should get the exact same amount. I argue that would leave the government giving wealthy students money that they don't need and less to students that may actually need the money.

I agree that its not a totally fair system but I have tried to reiterate how a system cannot suit every single possible situation and there will be some inefficiencies.

Anyone care to enlighten me and perhaps help to strengthen my argument?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Origami Bullets

This thread has been done before - the search function is your friend, and will find you lots of arguments on both sides of the debate instantly.

Reply 2

Dbrown18

Surely its self explanatory? When a kid who has financially stable parents runs into trouble and needs a bit of money, that money is a phone call away, and chances are wont effect the parents financially at all.

On the flipside, a kid with poor parents probably wont be able to get that money, hence why they are given more money, to avoid that situation.

Reply 3

Dan1909

Original post by Dbrown18

That's assuming that all parents who earn over the threshold will always have spare cash to give to the student. That's simply not the case!

Yes, statistically there are more parents above the threshold who are able to, but there are a lot that can't, and it lands the student in a LOT of trouble financially as they've got no assistance from anywhere, while the student whose parents earn as little as possible is living like a king (in a few cases, anyway).

Reply 4

sr90

Volunteer Team

Original post by Dan1909

The amount of money given to the poorest students is fine, because they wouldn't be able to even consider university without that level of assistance. Remember for most people who get the full grant and a bursary, they won't be able to get any assistance from home what so ever, whereas others can easily get their rent, housing deposits etc fully paid for by their parents.

The problem is those in the middle who only get the minimum loan, but their parents can't really afford to help them. You can't throw the maximum grant at everyone because its unaffordable, and its not unreasonable to expect some financial support from a household earning £50k+. But equally the amount they are expected to provide can vary too much. If someone is in this situation because they insist on having the premium deluxe ensuite room, spending a fortune on luxuries and going out 4 times per week, its their own bloody fault and i have no sympathy. If someone is in this situation despite budgeting then yes, that isn't fair. Not too sure how that can be solved though. It would take too much time to consider each case individually.

Reply 5

~ Purple Rose ~

PS Reviewer

As above, they assume that parents with more money will give some of it to their children.

Reply 6

Existentialistic

How about a system whereby you request a certain amount of money? We'll be paying it all back anyway.

Reply 7

Dan1909

Original post by sr90

Yeah I don't disagree at all. I know plenty of people who fall into that middle area, and despite strict budgeting end up in real trouble. The thing is, I also know people whose parents fall into the absolute minimum, who end up sitting on small fortunes, and can afford to drop £5,000 into a new bike half way through the year.

There are a few cases where there's simply too much money given out, that it ends up getting spent on things completely unrelated to the course, which the money simply shouldn't be able to be used for. But as you said, considering each case on an individual basis simply isn't possible, so you go for the solution which statistically works best.

Reply 8

james22

They can't afford to give everyone the money they need, so the current system is good. However it owuld be helpful if they could increase the minimum maintanence loan so it at least covers accomadation and food.

Reply 9

Ra Ra Ra

I think a system where students from comfortable backgrounds receive the same amount of money as students from less well-off families would be far more unfair than what's currently in place. The current system has its flaws, but overall I think it's fair (and I am biased, yes :tongue:

) and also, I believe, encourages those who are put off from going to university because they believe it's too expensive and whose parents' income doesn't provide a safety net should they run into financial issues.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 10

pinkangelgirl

I think the grants and bursaries is kind of fair enough- without them i wouldnt be here. But at the same time the system is majorly flawed. The loan on its own is not enough to cover peoples accomodation- i am lucky that my loan and grant can cover it as well as my bills and food, but for those who are from families who are out of the threshold i think there should be more loans available (it would be paid back anyway so i dont see the problem).

Its helpful to those who are extremely poor or extremely rich, but like most things it doesnt help families who are in the middle :frown:

Reply 11

Mister Dead

what happens if you have good reason to not want to accept money from your parents. Is there a full loan and bursary available if you are estranged from them?

Reply 12

Horatio-

Original post by Mister Dead

what happens if you have good reason to not want to accept money from your parents. Is there a full loan and bursary available if you are estranged from them?

Yep. But you have to prove it.

Reply 13

roh

Original post by Existentialistic

How about a system whereby you request a certain amount of money? We'll be paying it all back anyway.

Not necessarily, after 25 years, I think, the debt gets wiped out and the grants never get paid back no matter what.

If you're willing to take it under commercial conditions with much higher interest; repayments that don't fluctuate depending on your salary, and stop altogether under 15/21k (depending on your year), and the understanding that if you fall behind the bailiffs will come and repossess anything they feel like to pay off the debt then I'm sure the g'ment will happily do that.

Reply 14

Joe911

Original post by Jamanfi2304

I agree that its not a totally fair system but I have tried to reiterate how a system cannot suit every single possible situation and there will be some inefficiencies.

Anyone care to enlighten me and perhaps help to strengthen my argument?

The problem is, there's a lot of people in the middle income bracket whose parents can't afford to make up the difference to their kid's loans. Giving everyone the same amount would make every student equal and give everyone the same chance at university.

Reply 15

roh

Original post by Joe911

So say my housemate is from a single parent family and his mum works in a minimum wage job and also has to support 2 younger siblings. Household income 17k for example. My other housemate is from a middle class family with both parents in the liberal professions and have a household income of 120k (far from a ridiculous notion if both parents work as say doctors). A's mum can't afford to give him anything, B's parents can afford to give him 400 quid a month and pay his rent without too much concern.

The government does some number crunching and finds that if the current SLC budget is just to be distributed equally everyone gets 5K.

Our rent is 3.5k a year. This leaves A with 1.5 k to live on and B with 5k plus 400 quid a month off his parents.

And this is the fairest system?

Reply 16

Hopple

Original post by Jamanfi2304

The stance the government wants to take is "If your parents can't help you, we will". If your parents can but won't, then you can threaten them with never letting them see their grandchildren or sticking them in a crappy retirement home so that'll work out too :smile:

Reply 17

Joe911

Original post by roh

A household income of 120k doesn't make them 'middle income' earners. Would you say it's fair that a student whose parents earn just above the threshold be given the minimum loan when their parents can't afford to makeup the difference to their loan?
Rich parents will always give their kids way more than they need to live on but is it fair that a large dermographic of students are punished because their parents work?

Reply 18

roh

Original post by Joe911

No it's, but you suggested totally flat for everyone ie. anyone at university gets the same amount whether they're in care or their Dad's Damon Buffini.

Do you actually mean a flat amount for everyone up to a cut off of say 85k?

I know that it seems daft sometimes when a family with 4 kids and a mortgage who earn 57k combined get nothing but a family where rich grandparents bought the house with an only child and only one parent working on 45k get extra help but I don't know how you'd avoid those without doing a very expensive case by case analysis.

Reply 19

Rybee

I've never understood why you'd give a grant to a poor kid. If they've decided to benefit themselves by going to Uni, borrow it on a loan like the rest of us. Why the hell should they be dishing out free money?

Scrap all grants and bursary bull****, if you want the money, you loan it, and pay it back, or get a ****ing job.

Can't stand it how much the media bang on about you can't go to uni if you're poor... Financially, I'd be much better off if I was, easy ride with free money because your mum and dad are on the doll, you've accidentally had a kid in your teens and you're too lazy to get a job. STACKING up the money right there.