[Americaniamh]

(Original post by NR09)
Yes, it is unfair to ask the general public to pay for other people's higher education. It is a privalige to go to university, not a right, therefor you should pay for it yourself.

However I don't know if the cap should be lowered/raised/removed.

I don't think fees should be removed, but I think this is a poor argument. Remove the word higher and replace university with school and you sound like a 19th industrialist who has fondness of child labourers.

[pollypokit_x]

[not neccessarily related to the poll in question but]

I agree with everybody having an equal RIGHT to go to university, but I definitely feel it's not for everybody and students shouldn't be hearded into uni after they finish their A-levels or whatever. I think this culture is not the way we should be going - people just go to uni for the sake of it and because it's what is expected by parents/schools/etc.

Uni is like the 'done thing' now, and alot of people go for the 'uni life'. Ridiculous and over-rated degrees are given out which have no REAL meaning in the job sector so people who gain a degree after the 3/4 years don't even end up doing anything even related to their degree. This is shown by the extremely high drop-out numbers and the amount of 3rds which are given out by unis. I have many friends and also family who are in this position and I can give many, many prime examples.

I think the fees should be lowered - where are they ACTUALLY going (i'm not sure whether the lecturers even get extra pay with the extra fees)? I think they should have highered them to a more practical fee maybe 6 grand rather than 9.

I also think it should be at least part-funded by students and I think there should be some special schemes funded for the people who are GENUINELY low-income (and by that I do not mean 'benefit scroungers' quoted by somebody earlier on in this post), the ones who have high grades, but are experiencing genuine poverty areas throughout the country.

Not sure if i've made sense with this post but I think at the end of the day, the fees are paid back little by little, out of your paycheck so they aren't REALLY all that noticeable.

[llys]

(Original post by Mr Dangermouse)
No one wants to work during the holidays and be hamstrung after graduation.

So? The lazy ones can pay it all themselves. Those who are willing to work for it should get it for free.

If you want to be lazy, I've nothing against that, that's your choice.

[r4ndom]

(Original post by llys)
So? The lazy ones can pay it all themselves. Those who are willing to work for it should get it for free.

If you want to be lazy, I've nothing against that, that's your choice.

I don't think is lazyness not to want to spend all your holidays working after 9 months of studing hard to get pass the course.

[rougelipstick]

I do agree with fees rather than "the taxpayer" funding the whole degree, but what I disagree with is students in England and Wales paying £9000 and those in living in Scotland and studying in Scotland paying nothing, as technically it's all the same country (UK) and Scottish people do not pay more tax do they? Correct me if I'm wrong. If it were all balanced out than surely English and Welsh people would have to pay less as well.

[NR09]

(Original post by Americaniamh)
I don't think fees should be removed, but I think this is a poor argument. Remove the word higher and replace university with school and you sound like a 19th industrialist who has fondness of child labourers.

My point is that every child in this country is legally obliged to go to school. Since everybody born here has been to school, and everyone's children go to school it makes sense that the primary and secondary education is funded by the taxpayer.

However, since the majority of people have not been and will not (if the number of university students each year remains as it is. I am aware that this probably will not be the case) go to university it is unfair to ask the taxpayer to fund the optional education chosen by the minority of the population. They should pay for it themselves.

[DarkWhite]

Fixed tuition fees and the arbitrary cap decided by the government is such an unsustainable model for higher education funding that its existence serves only to show how incompetent the coalition really is.

Under the current system:

• Those who fail to pay off their student debt in full cost the country and thus the tax payer by not paying for the education the state has decided to pay for.
• The removal and reduction of grants means universities are left with funding gaps even when charging the higher rates under the £9k fees regime.
• No consideration is given to the "value" of a degree (albeit I dislike the marketisation of HE).
• There is a lack of sensibility for more flexible courses - part-time, distance learners etc.
• It relies on a number of assumptions about the economy and growth in particular.
• There is no protection for students whatsoever - future governments could change the Ts&Cs of graduates' loans to fix future economic issues.
• Prospective students are put off - the prospect of what could be £60k debt from the Student Loans Company alone does make you question whether a degree is worth it or not.
• It bears nothing on what exactly is offered by the university in return, and takes advantage of the high applicantlace ratio.

Something along the lines of (not necessarily strictly the same as) NUS' Blueprint proposal would prove far better. When you graduate, you pay a percentage of your salary which falls above a minimum threshold based on both the teaching received during your studying and your annual income. The more you benefit from your award, the more you pay back, and thus the greater encouragement for universities to strive for excellence in teaching and programme delivery.

[Mr Dangermouse]

(Original post by llys)
So? The lazy ones can pay it all themselves. Those who are willing to work for it should get it for free.

If you want to be lazy, I've nothing against that, that's your choice.

I'm Scottish so I get it free and don't have to work for an employer. U mad bro?

[cl_steele]

Personally i think fees are fine ... you dont get something for nothing in this world now do you? wouldnt especially want to see them raised though...

[tpxvs]

(Original post by shezshez)
You should pay for your university education, for sure. The system now, is fine whereby you get a loan off the government in order to pay for it. The way in which it is paid back under this new system actually seems quite fair to me... So keep it how it is.

The current system is not fine. One flaw i can think of off the top of my head is, how the amount of loan students get differs. Let me explain, I will get the minimum of ~£3500 which is more than 1.5k short of my accommodation alone! Now im not going for any fancy accom.. it is standard, no ensuite, in the biggest "block" and known to the be cheap/party hall. This does not by any means i fall into this stereotype and am going to uni for the social life. I am, but im also going for the lifestyle choice - il be doing a "proper" degree (medicine). I also know of friends who are getting 7k+ .... who are literally throwing that cash around (not all of them, some..) One friend for instance always buys the drinks as shes "loaded" compared to the rest. Although the financial situation doesnt affect me too much due to having savings from gap year/parental support etc.. for some this can be the decision between university or not.

[SweetsAndSugar]

I think uni fees should be based on how much money the course is costing the uni for the student to study + average earning potential from that uni once graduated.

[shezshez]

(Original post by tpxvs)
The current system is not fine. One flaw i can think of off the top of my head is, how the amount of loan students get differs. Let me explain, I will get the minimum of ~£3500 which is more than 1.5k short of my accommodation alone! Now im not going for any fancy accom.. it is standard, no ensuite, in the biggest "block" and known to the be cheap/party hall. This does not by any means i fall into this stereotype and am going to uni for the social life. I am, but im also going for the lifestyle choice - il be doing a "proper" degree (medicine). I also know of friends who are getting 7k+ .... who are literally throwing that cash around (not all of them, some..) One friend for instance always buys the drinks as shes "loaded" compared to the rest. Although the financial situation doesnt affect me too much due to having savings from gap year/parental support etc.. for some this can be the decision between university or not.

Yes, but we're not talking about tuition fees here are we? We're talking about maintenance grants and loans which is a completely different story, but again, in my eyes are fair. I come from a family with 5 children, and my parents earn around 22k a year, they struggle to feed and house us and get little help from the government, despite working 65 hours a week between them, and taking on another child due to family circumstances... this is why I will get the maximum funding from the government, because my parents are poor. You however, by the sounds of it, will struggle to get by because your parents earn significantly more than mine. The idea of the loan/grant is that the more your parents earn the more they are expected to help you afford the costs that come with university.

Now, you may think that it's unfair that the poorest people in society are helped more to better themselves at University, and that you are indeed the one that suffers, but trust me, you're not.

[tpxvs]

(Original post by shezshez)
Yes, but we're not talking about tuition fees here are we? We're talking about maintenance grants and loans which is a completely different story, but again, in my eyes are fair. I come from a family with 5 children, and my parents earn around 22k a year, they struggle to feed and house us and get little help from the government, despite working 65 hours a week between them, and taking on another child due to family circumstances... this is why I will get the maximum funding from the government, because my parents are poor. You however, by the sounds of it, will struggle to get by because your parents earn significantly more than mine. The idea of the loan/grant is that the more your parents earn the more they are expected to help you afford the costs that come with university.

Now, you may think that it's unfair that the poorest people in society are helped more to better themselves at University, and that you are indeed the one that suffers, but trust me, you're not.

Now, you have not a single clue where parents money is going. Yes they have worked hard to get their "good" jobs and work something like a 100 hours combined. But maybe we live in a shed and have no vehicle to commute and every single penny after what is needed for us to get by goes towards a disabled relative? Maybe.. or maybe it goes to other equally important cause, something you have little control over. Don't assume things. Fortunately for me, my parents value education highly and only had enough kids to make sure they can afford (that includes higher education) so perhaps they couldnt have their fairytale 4 kids etc..... and its ended up just me, or maybe i have another sibling, maybe that sibling is dying and where the money is going. Again, don't make assumptions.

Anyway bottom line is, I AM lucky, I will be fine. However, i know of people who's parents earn over the 56k/annum but simply wont contribute a penny towards their childs education.. this child despite getting AABB (i think) at a level in the sciences.. is unable to go to university and she just simply cannot afford it because her parents are "rich". She is now having to work, she might do this for like 5+ years and go to uni when it can finally be afforded or just stick at a job. This is why i think it is unfair.

[shezshez]

(Original post by tpxvs)
Now, you have not a single clue where parents money is going. Yes they have worked hard to get their "good" jobs and work something like a 100 hours combined. But maybe we live in a shed and have no vehicle to commute and every single penny after what is needed for us to get by goes towards a disabled relative? Maybe.. or maybe it goes to other equally important cause, something you have little control over. Don't assume things. Fortunately for me, my parents value education highly and only had enough kids to make sure they can afford (that includes higher education) so perhaps they couldnt have their fairytale 4 kids etc..... and its ended up just me, or maybe i have another sibling, maybe that sibling is dying and where the money is going. Again, don't make assumptions.

Anyway bottom line is, I AM lucky, I will be fine. However, i know of people who's parents earn over the 56k/annum but simply wont contribute a penny towards their childs education.. this child despite getting AABB (i think) at a level in the sciences.. is unable to go to university and she just simply cannot afford it because her parents are "rich". She is now having to work, she might do this for like 5+ years and go to uni when it can finally be afforded or just stick at a job. This is why i think it is unfair.

Okay, I probably came across like I was having a go, I wasn't. I didn't mean to sound like I assume anything, I simply tried to state how the government anticipate how things should work.

I don't for one minute think richer parents have any more disposable income, because richer people tend to own their own home, a mortgage to pay, have a car to run...etc etc... than someone from a poorer background and I doubt they actually pay a significant amount more to their child's education....

I know parent's who won't pay a penny for their child's education too, and sure the system may have it flaws, but I don't think many people could come up with a better alternative. I agree that the government won't take into account mitigating circumstances etc...

I'm lucky, I have parents who will help me out if I ever need it. Though that's unlikely at University. I've worked for a year and saved 60% of everything I've earned.

Anyway, this isn't what the thread was asking, the question was do you think we should pay for our own University education, or should we get it free like the Lib Dems were suggesting...


1) Internet in a shed? Really?

[chrisawhitmore]

Funding for degrees should be proportional to expected increase in earnings, meaning degrees with poor job prospects (whose graduates will pay less tax on average) are more expensive while degrees which are in short supply and thus highly valued in the market would get more funding, encouraging students towards degrees that are more likely to get them a well paid job, so they pay more tax.

[Ben Butler]

(Original post by r4ndom)
It works like that in Spain, and it can seem fair and all that.

But if we count all the people who are going to University, doing nothing, living life and party and taking 6 to 9 year to gain a degree...

I wonder how much money that cost to tax payers...

So I don't agree 100% with the 9000 fee but I also think it avoids wasting time and money. Time for "students" who shouldn't be in University and money for tax payers.

Yes but people who don't go to uni can have the same good time living life and partying. The £9,000 fee is just putting the poorest in our society off going to university and Nick Clegg betrayed all students.

[AverageExcellence]

Who would vote for unlimited fees?

[Alexandra's Box]

Yeah, I suppose we really have to pay for it, but it's just annoying when the politicians who decided this were paid to go to university.

[Dam]

(Original post by KickingKat88)
I'm curious, how did you mess up your first degree? I dropped out of a degree after the first year as it was not at all for me but they told me I would be able to receive funding for another subject degree. What happened?

Would you believe I dropped out in my final year. My reasons for this are many, but the over-riding one is that I believed the course to be poor quality.

So yes I wasted some tax-payers money. But I've also worked for 10 years full-time, so I've paid a lot of tax too. I think the government are probably up on the deal overall so I won't feel too bad, at least not while there are work-shy scum sitting in wetherspoons all day drinking their dole money never contributing anything.

[dominicjohnson]

You know what? It is a nice thought to think that some people want to go to university to learn something; to better their education. Nowadays there's all this worry about fees and maintenance loans and what not, which puts people from poorer backgrounds off going. I think a small graduate tax would be a better way of funding university, so in the short term, you focus on learning. Not to mention the student loans company could be better run by the monkeys at the beginning of 28 days later.