Truly tired of Labour BS on tuition fees.

OP

Original post by Quady

If they hadn't got in there would have been incentives for early repayment.

That sounds like a really stupid idea tbh.

They had an opt out on the tuition fee vote written into the coalition agreement. Why did they not exercise this, instead putting a three line whip on their MPs?

Quite a few defied the whip. More than half actually.

Besides , do you not think that it is ridiculous that labour planned to increase fees and then U turned when they lost the GE? Regardless of what party it is that's just dishonest.

Reply 6

Quady

20

Original post by Davij038

That sounds like a really stupid idea tbh.

Quite a few defied the whip. More than half actually.

Besides , do you not think that it is ridiculous that labour planned to increase fees and then U turned when they lost the GE? Regardless of what party it is that's just dishonest.

Pretty useful when you want to reduce the deficit and improve repayment rates.

More would have voted against had their not been a whip on it.

Have they u-turned? I don't think they've said they'd reduce fees ahve they? They are in opposition, their job is to oppose the Government.

Reply 7

OP

Original post by Quady

Pretty useful when you want to reduce the deficit and improve repayment rates.

Is their any evidence to support that claim?

I think if there is money for incentives it should be put so that people have to borrow less to begin with. Not only that but the ones who repay it quickest are going to be people that need less help.

More would have voted against had their not been a whip on it.

Possibly but that may have split government and led to a labour minority (and higher tuition fees not yo mention the lib dems being out of power and unable to bring ANY policies through)

Have they u-turned? I don't think they've said they'd reduce fees ahve they?

They planned to raise tuition fees in 2010 and then criticised the coalition when they raised them (but not as high as a labour/ tory majority). Maybe it's not a U turn as such but it is utter hypocrisy.

They are in opposition, their job is to oppose the Government.

Some might see it as their job to do what is best for their country instead of making cheap political shots. This is true of all parties but is particularly prominent in labour.

Reply 8

Do you think higher education should be free?

Reply 9

Simes

16

Original post by saayagain

Do you think higher education should be free?

I do.

Reply 10

OP

Original post by saayagain

Do you think higher education should be free?

I presume you're talking to me?

Yes.

Reply 11

Original post by Davij038

I presume you're talking to me?

Yes.

Why?

Reply 12

Original post by Simes

I do.

Why?

Reply 13

Simes

16

Original post by saayagain

Why?

(a) Society investing in its own future by supporting those able and willing to undertake research or gain advanced or specialist skills. I believe - but do not have the data to prove it and I'm too busy to go looking - that it is a worthwhile investment that pays a return greater than the cost.

By having it free, people who could not afford to participate can do so. It also encourages those who would otherwise be put off. This maximises the return on the investment by helping ensure all of the cream can be skimmed off.

(b) It makes society more fair by allowing people who could not afford to participate to do so.

My assumptions are that the education will be repaid to society in:

- greater quality, variety and quantity in the arts;
- more diversity in services and products available to consumers;
- more rapid research in all fields;
- a more informed, more questioning, population.

There will be some layabouts and scroungers who abuse the system, but I'd rather they turned up to a few lectures and were mixing with people getting on with their lives that hanging around on street corners or watching Jeremy Kyle. At least they will get to the end of the process knowing they were given an opportunity and wasted it, rather than blaming society for their woes.

Reply 14

Original post by Simes

(a) Society investing in its own future by supporting those able and willing to undertake research or gain advanced or specialist skills. I believe - but do not have the data to prove it and I'm too busy to go looking - that it is a worthwhile investment that pays a return greater than the cost.

By having it free, people who could not afford to participate can do so. It also encourages those who would otherwise be put off. This maximises the return on the investment by helping ensure all of the cream can be skimmed off.

(b) It makes society more fair by allowing people who could not afford to participate to do so.

My assumptions are that the education will be repaid to society in:

- greater quality, variety and quantity in the arts;
- more diversity in services and products available to consumers;
- more rapid research in all fields;
- a more informed, more questioning, population.

There will be some layabouts and scroungers who abuse the system, but I'd rather they turned up to a few lectures and were mixing with people getting on with their lives that hanging around on street corners or watching Jeremy Kyle. At least they will get to the end of the process knowing they were given an opportunity and wasted it, rather than blaming society for their woes.

lol...by free you mean no debt is incurred and the cost is passed onto the taxpayer and,

Why can't all the benefits that you stated be realized under the current system? I am not referring to the amount, I am referring to the system of owing the government for going to university and only paying when you make a certain amount of money.

The current system needs some changes but the system as a whole is fair.

Reply 15

OP

Original post by saayagain

Why?

Social mobility
Increased opportunities
Greater research and development
Gives people choice
Education is a public good
...

I think there IS an argument that university education has been devalued with the sheer number of entrants. I think this should be addressed by reducing the number if universities and stressing less need to go to university at college/sixth form. Uni isn't for everyone but should be free for those who do decide to go.

Reply 16

OP

Original post by Simes

At least they will get to the end of the process knowing they were given an opportunity and wasted it, rather than blaming society for their woes.

Unfortunately people like that aost always don't think like that- these people are the blamers of society.

Reply 17

Simes

16

The question I answered:

Original post by saayagain

Do you think higher education should be free?

I answered and got:

Original post by saayagain

lol...by free you mean no debt is incurred and the cost is passed onto the taxpayer

Well, what did you mean by 'free'?

Reply 18

Original post by Simes

The question I answered:I answered and got:Well, what did you mean by 'free'?

That's what free means in this context.

You didn't answer my reply. bad times

Reply 19