The Times: 3000% increase in graduates owing more than 6 figures in student loans

For most graduates it wont make any difference at all. I'm concerned about the multiple posts on different forums which don't understand this. The real question is how you feel about an additional 9% tax above a certain threshold - not whether you 'owe' £60k or £600k.

The 9% repayment (effective graduate tax) is especially punishing now with the cost of living crisis. That's why I think the interest on loans is abhorrent. Forces you to pay for your loan for longer. Made worse by that only those on the highest graduate salaries will ever be able to afford to pay their loans, and even then from how it's looking right now, even they might struggle

The interest rate is a tragic

So many people will be essentially having a 9% default tax added to their income for 30 years without any way around lmao. Imagine making 50ish grand and paying 51-53% in deductions a month.

What does the SLC even do with the money?

Those figures aren’t right. Assuming a salary of £50k and pension contributions of say, 10%, your total deductions are 37.2%.

Was referring to the marginal rates should have clarified, which to me is still tragic.

*Shurg*

You borrowed money. If you racked up these figures from a normal loan or a credit card you'd be expected to pay them back, including interest, regardless of the state of the economy. It's a risk you take with loans like this. Student loans should be no exception, you're still borrowing money.

Quite frankly, I believe student loans should be treated like any other loan. No silly 'oh you only start paying back after earning so much'. You should have minimum repayments you absolutely must make and failure to make them should go against your credit file. Perhaps then people would reconsider just going to uni because it is just the next step and instead go because it's what they desire to do and shop around to avoid, or at least reduce the extortionate fees they have to pay.

Don't see why my tax money should go towards writing off your loans if they're so ridiculous when said money could be put towards something far more likely to contribute to society, like the NHS. Any other time, you'd avoid loans that are just as ridiculous...

That's a heck of a millstone to be expecting 18 year olds to make a sensible decision about.

Taking on a 'hard' loan is a high stakes gamble at different odds for students with differing levels of social capital. Carrie Johnson wasn't going to end up in a wage cage at the Amazon fulfilment centre whether or not she got a degree in art history from Warwick.

University is for people of all ages. Can't make a sensible decision or can't afford Uni/the loan repayments? Don't go until you can. If you can't afford a car yet live in an area where having a car would massively benefit you in terms of job prospects, you don't get a cushy loan you could theoretically not pay a penny towards. You just don't have a car.

As above, the chances the majority of students will pay back all or even most of their loan is negligible. It's functionally become a graduate tax, they may as well just make it one and that would remove a lot of misconceptions and worries students have - which especially concern students from less affluent backgrounds who already face barriers to entering higher education and are underrepresented in HE.

Yeh, no thanks. A permanent tax for being a graduate is worse than what currently exists.

Heaven forbid someone actually pays it back.

Yeh, no thanks. A permanent tax for being a graduate is worse than what currently exists.

Heaven forbid someone actually pays it back.

Why though? It seems fair that those who do not attend Uni do not pay for it at all, while those that do should pay for it. That leaves the options of either paying back the cost (which can be a lot of money and bring up a lot of misconceptions, worries about interest, and so forth- see the current systems around the world for how messy they are) or simply contending with a graduate tax for a few decades, which is much easier to understand and frankly, much fairer. No one has said it would be permanent- I would think keeping the 30 year limit would be fair... anything beyond that wouldn't be fair, given that newer students would be disadvantaged against the older ones even more than those who got Uni free a decade+ ago.

Unlike the NHS, roads, and most other public infrastructure, Uni education directly benefits only those who get it- I don't think it should be entirely subsidised by the general population- graduates should contribute more than the average person to it (i.e. an extra tax on top of the general taxes people pay.) Now you can debate the rate of the tax/etc- 10% over a threshold seems fair- but there should be some way for a graduate to pay back, and currently it is a tax effectively.