Should students HAVE to pay back university loans?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by mangala
that's exactly my point you ****ing window licker, make it free
So you think of the government says "no fees" suddenly the universities can operate with absolutely zero expenses?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Arsenal96
Life is very much easier. Life expectancy and standard of living has increased as well as human rights and so on.
I don't see why a taxpayer who decided not to go to university should pay for a spoilt brat who went to university, ends up earning more but does not repay the taxpayer.
And one question- where will the money come from to pay for this. Don't say borrowing, don't say money trees, don't say illuminati
I don't see why a taxpayer who decided not to go to university should pay for a spoilt brat who went to university, ends up earning more but does not repay the taxpayer.
And one question- where will the money come from to pay for this. Don't say borrowing, don't say money trees, don't say illuminati
Compare the cost of housing....
No it isn't.
Also we used to provide free education we chose to change that too a 1000 fee a small contribution then changed to 3000 hmmm ok but now it's significant to now 9000.
That's on top of your living cost debts which double it again
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by paul514
I'm on the same side as you education should be free however.....
You asked a question and I answered.
The level will be the same the grant amount has been added to the loan and every tuition fee rise has not put the poor off from going the numbers has risen.
Posted from TSR Mobile
You asked a question and I answered.
The level will be the same the grant amount has been added to the loan and every tuition fee rise has not put the poor off from going the numbers has risen.
Posted from TSR Mobile
the grant being added to the loan just adds to the debts that poor students would be in. it is no longer an encouragement to go to university.
Original post by Jammy Duel
So you think of the government says "no fees" suddenly the universities can operate with absolutely zero expenses?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
The government still pays them what it used to it just stopped increasing it......
They get something like 20k per person
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by paul514
Compare the cost of housing....
No it isn't.
Also we used to provide free education we chose to change that too a 1000 fee a small contribution then changed to 3000 hmmm ok but now it's significant to now 9000.
That's on top of your living cost debts which double it again
Posted from TSR Mobile
No it isn't.
Also we used to provide free education we chose to change that too a 1000 fee a small contribution then changed to 3000 hmmm ok but now it's significant to now 9000.
That's on top of your living cost debts which double it again
Posted from TSR Mobile
Life is still easier. For example the welfare system has never been so generous.
These things are expected with mass population growth anyway. Anyone who thinks you can support unlimited people (as we have no cap on breeding) on the same scale as a handful needs their head medically examined.
Original post by mangala
the grant being added to the loan just adds to the debts that poor students would be in. it is no longer an encouragement to go to university.
Yes that's what I said it's all loan now but all previous changes racking up the debt show it doesn't lower the numbers of poor students going.
They have indeed increased!
I agree it should be free but it doesn't lower numbers
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by mangala
those are application figures, not the amount of people actually in uni. it also stops people from applying to the universities they may actually want to, because they cannot afford the extra living costs.
Why would application figures be significantly different from acceptances? Show me data that demonstrates otherwise.
Original post by Arsenal96
Life is very much easier. Life expectancy and standard of living has increased as well as human rights and so on.
I don't see why a taxpayer who decided not to go to university should pay for a spoilt brat who went to university, ends up earning more but does not repay the taxpayer.
And one question- where will the money come from to pay for this. Don't say borrowing, don't say money trees, don't say illuminati
I don't see why a taxpayer who decided not to go to university should pay for a spoilt brat who went to university, ends up earning more but does not repay the taxpayer.
And one question- where will the money come from to pay for this. Don't say borrowing, don't say money trees, don't say illuminati
Because graduates don't pay tax lol
Original post by mangala
the grant being added to the loan just adds to the debts that poor students would be in. it is no longer an encouragement to go to university.
That they don't have to repay at all unless they earn >£21k
Original post by Arsenal96
Life is still easier. For example the welfare system has never been so generous.
These things are expected with mass population growth anyway. Anyone who thinks you can support unlimited people (as we have no cap on breeding) on the same scale as a handful needs their head medically examined.
These things are expected with mass population growth anyway. Anyone who thinks you can support unlimited people (as we have no cap on breeding) on the same scale as a handful needs their head medically examined.
The welfare system is similar to 50 years ago. Try again.
The population has only gone up 5 million since these changes were made in the early 2000's
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by JackEDeakin
Because graduates don't pay tax lol
I'm talking about the tax which goes directly to the tax payers who funded their education
Original post by jneill
That they don't have to repay at all unless they earn >£21k
it still adds to the debt?
Original post by jneill
Why would application figures be significantly different from acceptances? Show me data that demonstrates otherwise.
ur dad
Original post by paul514
The welfare system is similar to 50 years ago. Try again.
The population has only gone up 5 million since these changes were made in the early 2000's
Posted from TSR Mobile
The population has only gone up 5 million since these changes were made in the early 2000's
Posted from TSR Mobile
Actually the welfare system has been reformed many times over since the 50s. Try again.
My point on population growth was to do with standards of living. On the topic of university that is attributed to there once being 5% of school leavers attending uni compared to 50+%
Original post by mangala
it still adds to the debt?
No, it's a notional debt. That they don't have to repay. It only becomes a due (repayable) debt when earning are high enough.
The debt isn't included in any personal credit checks etc. Although repayment liabilities are.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by mangala
yeah or you could provide it for free and actually get more people in to university. a better educated population gives you a better country in the future, it's a long-term investment.
The funny thing is there probably too many people going to University already, doing degrees that aren't necessarily needed for the betterment of society. The post graduate environment is extremely tough these days. There aren't enough people pursuing apprenticeships
Anyway completely free higher education is impractical, unworkable and downright silly.
Original post by paul514
The government still pays them what it used to it just stopped increasing it......
They get something like 20k per person
Posted from TSR Mobile
They get something like 20k per person
Posted from TSR Mobile
The point is that somebody has to pay and "free" education is just code for "I think somebody else should pay"
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by mangala
ur dad
is dead.
Original post by sevchenko
The funny thing is there probably too many people going to University already, doing degrees that aren't necessarily needed for the betterment of society. The post graduate environment is extremely tough these days. There aren't enough people pursuing apprenticeships
Anyway completely free higher education is impractical, unworkable and downright silly.
Anyway completely free higher education is impractical, unworkable and downright silly.
it has only recently NOT become free you idiot. it worked fine when it was free
Original post by mangala
it has only recently NOT become free you idiot. it worked fine when it was free
Once again no need to get Butthurt.
Considering the economic policies of the current government making higher education completely free would be "impractical, unworkable and downright silly"
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
