Tuition Fees Under Review: PM proposes to cut tuition fee cost for some courses
Scroll to see replies
The "He" referred to Paul Johnson of the IFS not you PQ
Original post by Sceptical_John
The government is announcing a fee overhaul on Monday.
It looks like they considering cutting fees to 6k and to pay for this they are going to cut bursaries that widen uni participation.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43106736
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/feb/18/cutting-tuition-fees-would-backfire-justine-greening-warns-theresa-may
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/feb/16/theresa-may-details-tuition-fee-overhaul?CMP=share_btn_tw
This essentially hands a big wad of cash to the already wealthy. Can anyone make a defense of this? (Other than it might win them a few votes)
It looks like they considering cutting fees to 6k and to pay for this they are going to cut bursaries that widen uni participation.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43106736
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/feb/18/cutting-tuition-fees-would-backfire-justine-greening-warns-theresa-may
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/feb/16/theresa-may-details-tuition-fee-overhaul?CMP=share_btn_tw
This essentially hands a big wad of cash to the already wealthy. Can anyone make a defense of this? (Other than it might win them a few votes)
To my knowledge, it will not be for all courses and a decrease in funding may correlate to how expensive the course actually costs to provide. Surely this will discourage participation in courses that lead to jobs that are in high demand in our country such as engineering and the sciences.
Oh well, Corbyn voters are lost causes anywayIf you truly believe the **** that comes out of his mouth and still support him I fear for your common sense.University is never free whether you're paying £9.25k p/y directly or the tuition fees are £0. The system we currently have is essentially a dedicated tax to fund Universities, those who attend university pay for it. Most pay it over their lifetime in installments using money borrowed from the government to pay upfront tuituon costs.Under a system with no tuition fees you pass the burden of your degree costs onto the tax payer. The government has several choices when deciding how to fund such a system. 1. Increase taxes2. Reduce spending on other areas3. Borrow Money to pay for it.Corbyn would pay for it using a mixture of option 1 and 2. This means your parents, my parents and other tax payers are paying for your education which benefits them in no way. Their money can be wasted on pointless fashion, art, media etc degrees which will add nothing significant in terms of tax revenues to the treasury. If people want to exercise their privillage to do a degree, fine. But don't expect other people to pay for it, it's not your god given right.Then in the future when these students on a medocre salary are paying massive taxes and facing austerity probably under the tories you will all moan about it, when once again they will be clearing up Labour's mess as they have been doing for the last 8 years.However, I don't agree with it being at 9.25k a year, as the Uni's clearly don't need to charge that much.What I would advocate is a system with degree bands. The government allocates degrees into bands based on importance and demand in the economy.Band 1 including courses like Engineering, Physics, Economics,Nursing etc would be the cheapest, capped at say 2kBand 2 including courses like History, Geography, English lit and language, Politics, business etc, capped at say 4kBand 3 including courses like Fashion, Media, Gender studies, Sports etc, capped at say 6kThis way you get a value for money system with a net benefit to tax payers with potential future earnings of graduates compensating the money they loose by paying more of their degree cost for Band 1 and 2 degrees.
Original post by Aszymanski1999
Oh well, Corbyn voters are lost causes anywayIf you truly believe the **** that comes out of his mouth and still support him I fear for your common sense.University is never free whether you're paying £9.25k p/y directly or the tuition fees are £0. The system we currently have is essentially a dedicated tax to fund Universities, those who attend university pay for it. Most pay it over their lifetime in installments using money borrowed from the government to pay upfront tuituon costs.Under a system with no tuition fees you pass the burden of your degree costs onto the tax payer. The government has several choices when deciding how to fund such a system. 1. Increase taxes2. Reduce spending on other areas3. Borrow Money to pay for it.Corbyn would pay for it using a mixture of option 1 and 2. This means your parents, my parents and other tax payers are paying for your education which benefits them in no way. Their money can be wasted on pointless fashion, art, media etc degrees which will add nothing significant in terms of tax revenues to the treasury. If people want to exercise their privillage to do a degree, fine. But don't expect other people to pay for it, it's not your god given right.Then in the future when these students on a medocre salary are paying massive taxes and facing austerity probably under the tories you will all moan about it, when once again they will be clearing up Labour's mess as they have been doing for the last 8 years.However, I don't agree with it being at 9.25k a year, as the Uni's clearly don't need to charge that much.What I would advocate is a system with degree bands. The government allocates degrees into bands based on importance and demand in the economy.Band 1 including courses like Engineering, Physics, Economics,Nursing etc would be the cheapest, capped at say 2kBand 2 including courses like History, Geography, English lit and language, Politics, business etc, capped at say 4kBand 3 including courses like Fashion, Media, Gender studies, Sports etc, capped at say 6kThis way you get a value for money system with a net benefit to tax payers with potential future earnings of graduates compensating the money they loose by paying more of their degree cost for Band 1 and 2 degrees.
I take it you don’t wear clothes, consume media or enjoy art then.
You’re in the minority though - the uk creative industry is one of the fastest growing areas of the economy (and least vulnerable to automation).
Original post by PQ
I take it you don’t wear clothes, consume media or enjoy art then.
You’re in the minority though - the uk creative industry is one of the fastest growing areas of the economy (and least vulnerable to automation).
You’re in the minority though - the uk creative industry is one of the fastest growing areas of the economy (and least vulnerable to automation).
You don't need degrees to access these Industries, the creative industry if very much that creative. You don't teach people creativity.
If you want to be a fashion designer just start designing pieces of fashion, practice, get good email design to companies, start a fashion blog.
I'm sure companies would prefer someone with genuine talent as a fashion designer as a pose to someone who is average but scraped a degree in fashion
Its the same with media, its getting to the point where some media companies like the Spectator for example categorically state you don't need a degree for any job at their company.
We are hoaxes into thinking having a degree in anything is the be all and end all, it's not.
Original post by Alex141199
You don't need degrees to access these Industries, the creative industry if very much that creative. You don't teach people creativity.
If you want to be a fashion designer just start designing pieces of fashion, practice, get good email design to companies, start a fashion blog.
I'm sure companies would prefer someone with genuine talent as a fashion designer as a pose to someone who is average but scraped a degree in fashion
Its the same with media, its getting to the point where some media companies like the Spectator for example categorically state you don't need a degree for any job at their company.
We are hoaxes into thinking having a degree in anything is the be all and end all, it's not.
If you want to be a fashion designer just start designing pieces of fashion, practice, get good email design to companies, start a fashion blog.
I'm sure companies would prefer someone with genuine talent as a fashion designer as a pose to someone who is average but scraped a degree in fashion
Its the same with media, its getting to the point where some media companies like the Spectator for example categorically state you don't need a degree for any job at their company.
We are hoaxes into thinking having a degree in anything is the be all and end all, it's not.
Over 80% of people working in the creative industries have a degree. Nearly 30% have a postgraduate degree. You don’t understand the industry.
Original post by PQ
They’re talking about any review taking a year or more.
It’s more fiddling while Rome burns from the tories.
It’s more fiddling while Rome burns from the tories.
So if I start a course on £9250 and it changes to £6000, will I change my fees mid course?
Original post by Appleorpear
So if I start a course on £9250 and it changes to £6000, will I change my fees mid course?
Ask your mp.
The government has launched a review on fees a month after ucas revealed a drop in demand for university that won’t make recommendations until a month after the application deadline for 2019.
If you’re considering a gap year anyway then it’s another reason to defer...but there’s no clear indication about what would happen to continuing students or recent graduates. Did I mention fiddling? They’re also incompetent.
Fwiw - one profession that doesn’t require a degree and where fees are much higher than costs - politician.
It’s going to be interesting to see what category PPE degrees end up in.
It’s going to be interesting to see what category PPE degrees end up in.
Original post by PQ
Over 80% of people working in the creative industries have a degree. Nearly 30% have a postgraduate degree. You don’t understand the industry.
Original post by PQ
Fwiw - one profession that doesn’t require a degree and where fees are much higher than costs - politician.
It’s going to be interesting to see what category PPE degrees end up in.
It’s going to be interesting to see what category PPE degrees end up in.
Is there not a contradiction in these two quotes?
Original post by Sceptical_John
Is there not a contradiction in these two quotes?
Is there?
Original post by PQ
Is there?
You seem to point to evidence that the creative industries have degrees they need them. Just as many politicians have degrees (we probably agree too many and they should have a wider life experience) but by that logic, they also need them like the creative industries. You seem to want it both ways.
Original post by Sceptical_John
You seem to point to evidence that the creative industries have degrees they need them. Just as many politicians have degrees (we probably agree too many and they should have a wider life experience) but by that logic, they also need them like the creative industries. You seem to want it both ways.
All the data collected on MP qualifications give slightly under 300MPs with a degree (out of 650) and around 40 with a PPE degree (and a similar number with STEM degrees).
I wouldnt say some courses need fees cutting: ALL OF THEM DO!!
but in all seriousness, I wish They would go back to £3225/year tuition fees again. Even £4000 is good as well and if need be £5000 in worst scenario. But £9250+ is a ripoff.
Also I think student loans should be 0% interest. Who is with me?
but in all seriousness, I wish They would go back to £3225/year tuition fees again. Even £4000 is good as well and if need be £5000 in worst scenario. But £9250+ is a ripoff.
Also I think student loans should be 0% interest. Who is with me?
The PM is doing too little too late for many who have already left Uni
with huge debts. She know she has to win over the young voters and
witnessed the result JC got when he said he would amend the current
system so she has to act now. Doubt it is being done out of any genuine or moral concern. As it stands I will be giving JC my vote in my FIRST
ever General election when it comes around.
with huge debts. She know she has to win over the young voters and
witnessed the result JC got when he said he would amend the current
system so she has to act now. Doubt it is being done out of any genuine or moral concern. As it stands I will be giving JC my vote in my FIRST
ever General election when it comes around.
This is a stupid move to get young voters back to the Conservatives which will both not work and expand the budget deficit.
First of all the lower tuition fees will mean universities will have less funds. Cuts in staff or services.
Second of all lower tuition fees mostly benefit the well-off. More than 3 in 4 students will never pay back the whole amount.
If the government wanted to get young voters back to the Conservative Party and away from the womb of Caracas Corbyn, they should have solved the easier and cheaper issue for the young: extortionate house prices. There's many ways to solve this all the way from higher taxation on buy to lets and progressive taxes on the number of houses one owns, to cracking down on land banking by developer companies and relaxing planning laws away from the shackles of the NIMBYs.
There also should be some kind of rental control in the issue of nationality rather than cost - excessive migration puts downward pressure on wages and upward pressure on rental cost. Very few countries have rents more expensive than mortgages - ours is one of them due to this issue.
Cheap housing and high tuition fees are compatible. Expensive housing and high tuition fees are not. Housing is cheaper and easier to solve than tuition fees.
------
Should have capped the interest rate to something closer to the market and tax relief for people paying a mortgage and student loan repayments at the same time.
There should also be a limit on the amount of people going to university. Greenwich, Richmond, Solent et al are not universities. Universities are losing value due to grade inflation because too many people go and study. There should be alternative routs to a well-off life without going to university. Apprenticeships should see an expansion and the government instead decided to slap a payroll tax and expect companies to try to get out of it by getting apprentices. Didn't work.
Overall, just the usual idiots thinking about dumb policy solutions in order to get more voters without actually consulting the people that are borderline going to vote for you if you stop forcing people into 200k debt before age 25 (house+tuition) and also without examining the effects (cost±benefit) of what you're proposing.
Why oh why has the Conservative Party gone from Churchill and Thatcher to .. May? I'd really like a pragmatist.
First of all the lower tuition fees will mean universities will have less funds. Cuts in staff or services.
Second of all lower tuition fees mostly benefit the well-off. More than 3 in 4 students will never pay back the whole amount.
If the government wanted to get young voters back to the Conservative Party and away from the womb of Caracas Corbyn, they should have solved the easier and cheaper issue for the young: extortionate house prices. There's many ways to solve this all the way from higher taxation on buy to lets and progressive taxes on the number of houses one owns, to cracking down on land banking by developer companies and relaxing planning laws away from the shackles of the NIMBYs.
There also should be some kind of rental control in the issue of nationality rather than cost - excessive migration puts downward pressure on wages and upward pressure on rental cost. Very few countries have rents more expensive than mortgages - ours is one of them due to this issue.
Cheap housing and high tuition fees are compatible. Expensive housing and high tuition fees are not. Housing is cheaper and easier to solve than tuition fees.
------
Should have capped the interest rate to something closer to the market and tax relief for people paying a mortgage and student loan repayments at the same time.
There should also be a limit on the amount of people going to university. Greenwich, Richmond, Solent et al are not universities. Universities are losing value due to grade inflation because too many people go and study. There should be alternative routs to a well-off life without going to university. Apprenticeships should see an expansion and the government instead decided to slap a payroll tax and expect companies to try to get out of it by getting apprentices. Didn't work.
Overall, just the usual idiots thinking about dumb policy solutions in order to get more voters without actually consulting the people that are borderline going to vote for you if you stop forcing people into 200k debt before age 25 (house+tuition) and also without examining the effects (cost±benefit) of what you're proposing.
Why oh why has the Conservative Party gone from Churchill and Thatcher to .. May? I'd really like a pragmatist.
Original post by PQ
I take it you don’t wear clothes, consume media or enjoy art then.
You’re in the minority though - the uk creative industry is one of the fastest growing areas of the economy (and least vulnerable to automation).
You’re in the minority though - the uk creative industry is one of the fastest growing areas of the economy (and least vulnerable to automation).
The creative industry is not an industry which genuinely requires degrees to do what they do.
Are you implying people cannot go into fashion, media or art in France or Germany if they haven't gone to university?
I mean take France or Italy, they have burgeoning fashion industries. Do you really think that every entrant needs a government-funded degree?
In most countries, degrees are seen as a luxury. They are for the very best in society who are bound to jobs that will be highest prized and salary-compensated in society.
In the UK and US, degrees are seen as a human right. It's stupid. Not long left until Masters will be seen as a human right as well.
(edited 6 years ago)
Original post by LostAccount
The creative industry is not an industry which genuinely requires degrees to do what they do.
Are you implying people cannot go into fashion, media or art in France or Germany if they haven't gone to university?
I mean take France or Italy, they have burgeoning fashion industries. Do you really think that every entrant needs a government-funded degree?
In most countries, degrees are seen as a luxury. They are for the very best in society who are bound to jobs that will be highest prized and salary-compensated in society.
In the UK and US, degrees are seen as a human right. It's stupid. Not long left until Masters will be seen as a human right as well.
Are you implying people cannot go into fashion, media or art in France or Germany if they haven't gone to university?
I mean take France or Italy, they have burgeoning fashion industries. Do you really think that every entrant needs a government-funded degree?
In most countries, degrees are seen as a luxury. They are for the very best in society who are bound to jobs that will be highest prized and salary-compensated in society.
In the UK and US, degrees are seen as a human right. It's stupid. Not long left until Masters will be seen as a human right as well.
I’d suggest you look into italian and French art and fashion schools but it’s a waste of time. Anyone with any sense would have done that before making a post like this.
Original post by LostAccount
In most countries, degrees are seen as a luxury. They are for the very best in society who are bound to jobs that will be highest prized and salary-compensated in society.
In the UK and US, degrees are seen as a human right. It's stupid. Not long left until Masters will be seen as a human right as well.
In the UK and US, degrees are seen as a human right. It's stupid. Not long left until Masters will be seen as a human right as well.
Most countries? I'd like to see that data.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Top universities ‘will turn away more UK students’
- University isn’t as good as it used to be?
- Do you get paid to do a PhD or do you pay to do a Phd? Or both??
- Doing grad medicine?
- Seeking Advice on Student Finance Refusal for Second Degree Funding
- St Andrews 5 year VS England 4 year degrees
- Student Finance Problem- Second Degree
- 2 years of previous study can I get funding for Midwifery?
- help with finances, graduate medicine?
- OU funding
- Mature student maintenance loans and grants
- Tuition Fee Loan rejected for second degree - but it's an AHP course?
- Funding for a PGCE course?
- NHS and Student Finance Wales
- transfer to open university- student finance
- Accelerated Medicine
- Medicine 2nd Degree
- maintainance loan for eu students
- veterinary medicine as a second degree
- Kingston University Study Abroad Program
Latest
Last reply 3 minutes ago
What'll happen if a uni told me that my application is given to other schools?Last reply 16 minutes ago
Meeting Uni requirements via college AND GCSEPosted 26 minutes ago
yet to receive a woodhouse interviewLast reply 29 minutes ago
So I made the worst decision of my life. I chose Biochemistry as my degree.Last reply 42 minutes ago
Zoom to Zoology? Uni open days, applications & more 2021-Present - a parents takeLast reply 54 minutes ago
Deloitte Graduate Scheme 2024Last reply 1 hour ago
Official London School of Economics and Political Science 2024 Applicant ThreadPosted 2 hours ago
BAE systems advanced apprenticeshipTrending
Last reply 4 weeks ago
Freshers on TSR: Getting Ready for University - Let's Share Top Tips!Trending
Last reply 4 weeks ago
Freshers on TSR: Getting Ready for University - Let's Share Top Tips!
