Government will prosecute students who don't repay student loans

Well a loan from a neighbour (assuming a contract isn't drawn up) is not the same as one from Wonga. Since you actually have to pay Wonga back, you don't have to pay back your neighbour.

Morals dictate otherwise.

Well that would depend upon the person.

They can't alter the terms of loans already taken out simple.


Posted from TSR Mobile

To anybody who has a problem with this? Does this mean you will also shut up about Google and the likes avoiding their taxes? Or those with big money? How about you go take out s loan from a high Street bank and avoid payment according to the terms and see if they will just let you walk away with the money?

Posted from TSR Mobile

People are told, over and over throughout school and college

"Go to university and get a good job"
"You need to go to university to get a good job"
"You'll only get a good job if you go to university"

etc etc etc

They are told over and over again at every step at college by teachers, because it makes their ranking stats look better and encouraged by the previous government to go to University and get a degree. They then form this oppinion that they'll be nobody and their life ruined unless they go to uni.

They then get out of uni with whatever less useful degree they have, lots of debt only to find that they've basically been lied to.

So you can't really blame them for going.

A loan is a loan. Doesn't matter if it's from your neighbour, Wonga or for university; you should expect to have to pay it back eventually.

tbh

degrees other than engineering, medic, dentistry, sciences, teaching, law and maybe languages, e.g degrees other than practical skills that require professional training shouldn't exist

scrap the degree requirement for civil service and just have an entry test

rest of the country should be doing crafts or employed doing what they would end up doing with a bad degree anyway

inb4 i like studying philosophy, so do i, go to the library douchebag

I'm afraid they just did. The T&Cs of current students stated that the repayment threshold would increase in line with inflation, meaning that repayment amounts would remain relatively static. Last year, the government announced that the £21,000 threshold would be fixed for five years, This means that as wages begin to rise in line with the economic recovery, a larger proportion of students will find themselves over the threshold, and more students will make larger repayments.

Whilst this might seem trivial, as you say, it's effectively a breach of contract. I think it's the government dipping their toe in the water to see how people react. If it doesn't look like they'll lose votes, my guess is that they'll start making more significant changes. Watch out for them starting to demonise students in the near future - if they can persuade the voting public that students are a bunch of layabout scroungers, there may even be votes to be won by making even harsher changes.

Martin Lewis is seeking a judicial review of the change, to determine whether it is actually even legal to impose it in retrospect:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/loans/12049856/Martin-Lewis-tackles-Government-over-student-loans.html

What will happen to philosophy as an academic discipline then if it is no longer taught at a university?You philistine. I'm not one for philosophy, but I appreciate it as a discipline, the same for other arts subjects. If it is not taught at university level, then there will be no schools for those subjects, so there will no longer be professors and other academics in those disciplines. So philosophy will be history. So you won't be able to get any new books from the library, well done m8, top logic.

I'm also curious as to why you think a languages degree is worthy, if not a philosophy degree?

Who cares about philosophy as an academic discipline? It hasn't had any relevance beyond pseudo nonsense for centuries, even the analytic philosophers themselves have made this admission many times, just pick up a book by Wittgenstein, one of the most admired philosophers in the 20th century who says it is basically a load of nonsense.

I sincerely hope you understand that most advancements in the arts are not made by university professors, Dickens, Tolstoy, Proust, Orwell. Are you noticing a pattern?

ignorance of some people never cease to surprise me
Studying at University isn't, by any means, mandatory. you took the loan, now you expect everybody else to pay for it. And yeah- having to pay the loans means that people will at least chose the important studies, not some BS.

You're so ignorant...

What you all make of this with the government punishing any student who fails to repay their student loan on time?
http://www.independent.co.uk/student/news/government-will-prosecute-those-who-fail-to-repay-their-student-loans-on-time-warns-jo-johnson-a6869221.html

I'm afraid they just did. The T&Cs of current students stated that the repayment threshold would increase in line with inflation, meaning that repayment amounts would remain relatively static. Last year, the government announced that the £21,000 threshold would be fixed for five years, This means that as wages begin to rise in line with the economic recovery, a larger proportion of students will find themselves over the threshold, and more students will make larger repayments.

Whilst this might seem trivial, as you say, it's effectively a breach of contract. I think it's the government dipping their toe in the water to see how people react. If it doesn't look like they'll lose votes, my guess is that they'll start making more significant changes. Watch out for them starting to demonise students in the near future - if they can persuade the voting public that students are a bunch of layabout scroungers, there may even be votes to be won by making even harsher changes.

Martin Lewis is seeking a judicial review of the change, to determine whether it is actually even legal to impose it in retrospect:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/loans/12049856/Martin-Lewis-tackles-Government-over-student-loans.html

I'm afraid they just did. The T&Cs of current students stated that the repayment threshold would increase in line with inflation, meaning that repayment amounts would remain relatively static. Last year, the government announced that the £21,000 threshold would be fixed for five years, This means that as wages begin to rise in line with the economic recovery, a larger proportion of students will find themselves over the threshold, and more students will make larger repayments.

Whilst this might seem trivial, as you say, it's effectively a breach of contract. I think it's the government dipping their toe in the water to see how people react. If it doesn't look like they'll lose votes, my guess is that they'll start making more significant changes. Watch out for them starting to demonise students in the near future - if they can persuade the voting public that students are a bunch of layabout scroungers, there may even be votes to be won by making even harsher changes.

Martin Lewis is seeking a judicial review of the change, to determine whether it is actually even legal to impose it in retrospect:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/loans/12049856/Martin-Lewis-tackles-Government-over-student-loans.html

It's not far from the truth though really is it? Nowhere near as much work as an average full time job in most cases. Depends on degree of course.