Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrsSheldonCooper)
    It's English Language and Literature with a semester abroad in New Zealand
    OR
    European Studies.

    Both of them say they want pass grades but I'm aiming for AAB
    That one?: https://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl/...pean-studies-0

    I'd say take European Studies. It's multidisciplinary so you'll have more options at the end (history, law, business, politics, etc.) than literature (for which there are already too many graduates with limited prospects).
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    That one?: https://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl/...pean-studies-0

    I'd say take European Studies. It's multidisciplinary so you'll have more options at the end (history, law, business, politics, etc.) than literature (for which there are already too many graduates with limited prospects).
    Nope Clear your inbox bebs
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lahorizon)
    How about the government also pays for all new hair salons and grocery shops because they make money from it? Oh wait.. it doesn't work like that.
    The government shouldn't pay for an investment which it makes a profit off because of a strange strawman you have invented about hair salons and grocery shops? Form a coherent argument please.


    (Original post by lahorizon)
    Yes the government will benefit but why should tax money from people who decide to not go to university go towards those who do want it.
    I've already explained to you multiple times now that the cost of the degree is paid off multiple times over by the graduate through the extra tax they pay due to their higher income. The money is completely paid off by the graduate, they are not "taking" money from other people.

    (Original post by lahorizon)
    The degree holder benefits first THEN the government and at the very end is the individual taxpayer.
    Why should the government stop doing something that currently makes it money? The fact that the person who gets the degree benefits is not relevant, because there is no net loss by the government, but a net gain.

    (Original post by lahorizon)
    Not all degrees are useful and worth the government paying for. Besides where is all this money supposed to come from exactly?
    That is a completely different debate, which is not worth debating while you continue to hold the stance that all graduates should pay more for their degree.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Hopefully more people will think twice before getting a degree that is 'useless'.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    Just because you aim for a high paid job and would be disappointed with less doesn't mean you're going to get one. Do you honestly, genuinely believe that everyone working a **** job is there because they didn't work hard enough? Even the very top universities have graduates coming out unemployment. Do you honestly believe they're all just lazy? You're lying to yourself. There aren't enough jobs in the country for everyone, there will ALWAYS be a certain amount of unemployed people, and there are far more factors than just hard work that determine who those people are.

    Unless you're doing computer science, there's a reasonable chance that when you finish uni there'll be no demand for your particular skills, and all the jobs are being filled by people who worked EVEN HARDER than you, or people living closer to those jobs, or people with connections in those fields.

    You're a dreamer. I've worked hard all my life but I'm not pretending to myself that I'm guaranteed a good job. I aim high too, the only difference is I realize there are factors outside my control that might stop me getting to where I aim. Like I said, you'll probably come to realize this after graduating.
    I think you're the dreamer here. You're saying that even people that work their absolute hardest throughout their education, go to a top Uni and do a favourable degree ending up with excellent results, end up being unemployed. You're making it look like there's absolutely no point in trying hard at school/ university. Working hard does put you in a better position career wise and therefore financially, and saying otherwise is just being incredibly pessimistic. Obviously it doesn't all work out for every single person. But you're making it seem like there's no point in trying at school, which is just silly.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    I think you're the dreamer here. You're saying that even people that work their absolute hardest throughout their education, go to a top Uni and do a favourable degree ending up with excellent results, end up being unemployed.
    I'm saying they can end up unemployed. They'll usually have a better chance of being employed, but they can end up unemployed or employed in low-skill, low-pay work. I don't really understand how you can disagree with this.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I just think courses that have high rates of graduates never paying back their student loans because of awful career prospects should just be capped, make them harder to get into and reduce numbers of people admitted. Then they wouldn't need to increase fees, because more people would be paying it back. Stop the government losing money for people doing a degree frankly for the experience and nothing else.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    I'm saying they can end up unemployed. They'll usually have a better chance of being employed, but they can end up unemployed or employed in low-skill, low-pay work. I don't really understand how you can disagree with this.
    Your argument is "some people win the lottery" and mine is "well the vast vast vast majority don't so I should not expect to win the lottery" and then you're replying with "but you can win so you should therefore expect to win I don't really understand how you can disagree with this". Why should I expect to be the one in a million that does outstanding throughout their education and ends up unemployed? Why can't I just work hard and let the prospects open up to me, without being so pessimistic about it all. This is not a logic question in an A level paper. There's always going to be a special case you don't need to be so pedantic I'm obviously not going to pretend people don't get unlucky. So because of the chances of what you're explaining, that should not be my main worry. My main worry should be achieving the best I can and it's beyond fair to assume that I will get what I deserve - whether good or bad.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    Your argument is "some people win the lottery" and mine is "well the vast vast vast majority don't so I should not expect to win the lottery" and then you're replying with "but you can win so you should therefore expect to win I don't really understand how you can disagree with this". Why should I expect to be the one in a million that does outstanding throughout their education and ends up unemployed? Why can't I just work hard and let the prospects open up to me, without being so pessimistic about it all. This is not a logic question in an A level paper. There's always going to be a special case you don't need to be so pedantic I'm obviously not going to pretend people don't get unlucky. So because of the chances of what you're explaining, that should not be my main worry. My main worry should be achieving the best I can and it's beyond fair to assume that I will get what I deserve - whether good or bad.
    Can I ask what you're studying?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MrsSheldonCooper)
    Poor people will go to university as long as there's loans. But there are people who have dodged the debt.

    http://www.theguardian.com/education...ity-lower-fees

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34721679
    So no-one has been unable to go to university due to the tuition fees :rolleyes:
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    I just think courses that have high rates of graduates never paying back their student loans because of awful career prospects should just be capped, make them harder to get into and reduce numbers of people admitted. Then they wouldn't need to increase fees, because more people would be paying it back. Stop the government losing money for people doing a degree frankly for the experience and nothing else.
    Be careful about assuming which degrees have "good" prospects...



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lahorizon)
    You still benefit more due to the higher income. Your impact on the economy is likely to be very small in terms of the tax you pay. If you discover something ok but that is very unlikely. And if you don't study physics then someone else will do it instead and get that job. The only reason someone would want to do a physics degree is to either learn more/do research or because they know they will earn a much higher salary. They don't do it mainly because they think society is going to benefit so much.

    Teaching someone basic maths/science/english has a much bigger impact on society. Also because you are 16 or under, your parents might decide to neglect you/spend their money on something else and not send you to school. That is why it is free to prevent that. With university you can make your own choice and you don't have to go university. If you decide to, then that is your choice because you want a higher income. That is obvious.
    LOL I never said people take physics degrees to benefit society. I know, they do it for themselves. But someone with a higher salary is going to be paying more tax, though.

    I understand that - the fact that school is free is perfectly acceptable.
    But when it comes to A Levels, these are also free. By this time you'll be over 16 and making your own choice. And like you said for Uni, people who take A Levels are often also doing it because they want a higher income.

    So if A Levels are free, why can't University be as well? No one's forcing anyone to take A Levels - yet they're penniless. (which is absolutely a good thing)
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Juichiro)
    It was expected. Given the current state of affairs, fees will just increase over time.



    You mean university students?



    1. That's naive. Someone has to pay for it. Either you or the tax payer.
    2. Irrelevant. You are given loan. You don't pay upfront.
    3. Again, she doesn't seem to understand how it works. See point 2.
    4. Irrelevant. Poor people can still go to uni. See point 2.

    2,3,4 - I agree. You're right - the whole loan thing makes it far more fair. I learnt something new yesterday actually, can't argue about that. It's changed my mind on lots.

    However.

    1 - "naïve". Oh. oh . It's naïve wanting education to be free? Well, in that case Mr Obnoxoious tw*t, please explain to me why it's "naïve" for me wanting University to be free.


    I mean, if it's naïve to want university to be free, I guess it's totally naïve for healthcare to be free as well. I mean, obviously, right?



    What a Self righteous bore.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Be careful about assuming which degrees have "good" prospects...



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yeah I should use more quotation marks in my posts. Like "good" and "prospects".

    I don't care what subject, whatever is causing a lot of money to be wasted, something should be done about it. All that implies to me is that either there's too many people doing Computer Science or too many people planning to study it aren't good enough at it?

    (Original post by JordanL_)
    Can I ask what you're studying?
    Currently doing my A levels but my offers are for Computer Science degrees
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CAPTAINSHAZAM)
    Then youre friend is a moron as well as others who say they cant "afford it". Its not even like a typical loan what isnt there to afford by that, i can assume shell be entitled to the full 8200 loan which is more than enough to live off for a year. After wards you pay back such minuscule amounts which you never actually see anyway, and after a certain number of years its wiped off.

    You make out "splashing on degrees" is something as a luxury, when getting education is for the good of your future. Poor people arent excluded from unis because some do offer scholarships and you have the full loan which way more than enough.
    yep yep yep

    I'm getting loads of sh*t for my previous post thank you for the extra sh*t. always a pleasure

    I know what a loan is now ok

    pls don't hurt me

    I didn't know. now I do.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    Yeah, as witness the crumbling US university sector. Such woes has the market wrought there.


    There's nothing wrong with wanting a sports car or a manor house without having to pay for it. That doesn't mean you're going to get it, or even that you should.

    Your friend ought to google it. She'll likely find out that she will of course be able to afford it, by way of generous, taxpayer-funded loans.
    the difference between a sports car and free uni, though, is that getting a sports car has always been costed money no matter what. you've always had to pay for a car.

    That's not the case with University. There was a time when it was free. So why not introduce that again?

    and seriously, comparing a sports car and University? lol!

    As for the friend thing, me and her both didn't know about the whole loan deal until today. so opinions on uni fees have changed a lot. I still don't see why it shouldn't be free.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by madmadmax321)
    How would changing the fee system change her ability to go to uni though? She can get all the money she is entitled to dependent on her house hold income for living, even if it does mean more debt if she wants it thats what it is going to take, hell if uni was free all the support for low income students would disappear such as bursaries

    I think uni should cost money, the money has the come from somewhere but I dont think paying more than £9000 a year plus living loans is fair either (it needs to be a bit lower tuition fee wise like £4500 to £6000)
    ok so with the whole friend thing, she didn't realise the whole loan deal. neither of us did. so it looks like she probably will be able to afford it (we're both just ignorant sh*ts). she presumed she'd have to pay upfront. Silly.

    Yeah, the whole loan thing has changed my mind a LOT about Uni fees in general. I don't despise them as much I did before. But HEY.

    Why do you think Uni should cost money? I don't see why it can't be free. I mean, why shouldn't it be free? People act like it would be such a bad thing - but I just cant see it ever being negative.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by J'zargo)
    I tend to agree, provided that the money is truly being spent on raising education standards. I mean at the end of the day it's called further education and we choose to do it for our own personal gain so I guess it's fair that we pay for it ourselves.
    Education should be free. otherwise we should only pay for the resources. Maybe if the government pulled out the money from inside their a s s e s funding in the education department would mean cheaper fees.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    Lies

    You're just lying, stop it.

    My family are in huge debt, I have not a single penny to my name. But guess what, I'm still going to University.

    Want to know why? Because I know that if I work hard enough it is beyond worth my time, and it's exactly the same for everyone else.

    The only problem is that everyone else is lazy and doesn't put the effort in so claims costs are holding them back when in reality it's their grades.
    Dude. Dude. I might be an ignorant sh*t for not knowing about loans.

    My friend might be an ignorant sh*t for not know about loans either.

    But I'm sure as hell not a liar.

    Don't ever call me a liar because I wouldn't waste my time posting a crock of sh*t lies when I could be revising. Everything I said was true.My friend and I were just ignorant of the loans system, ight? We didn't know. We know now. And I mean, seriously, I'm doing GCSE's. Don't expect me to be A* at everything "uni-based"And you're accusing me of lying? Dear God.

    You're a JERK.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ZiggyStarDust_)
    2,3,4 - I agree. You're right - the whole loan thing makes it far more fair. I learnt something new yesterday actually, can't argue about that. It's changed my mind on lots.

    However.

    1 - "naïve". Oh. oh . It's naïve wanting education to be free? Well, in that case Mr Obnoxoious tw*t, please explain to me why it's "naïve" for me wanting University to be free.


    I mean, if it's naïve to want university to be free, I guess it's totally naïve for healthcare to be free as well. I mean, obviously, right?



    What a Self righteous bore.
    There is no need to lower yourself to insult anyone. You can do better. Anyway, it is naive because there is no evidence that a free model of education is sustainable without risking the quality of those reputations. If you look at the university rankings, the best universities in the world are either not free or they are brutally selective. Healthcare and higher education are different. Everyone needs healthcare at some point of their lives but it is not true that everyone needs higher education at some point of their lives. Hence, they cannot be compared. People die without proper healthcare, no one dies without higher education. Hence, healthcare needs to be universally available (aka free) while higher education does not need to be. If you are happy to contribute to society and are decently capable, you will probably get a job that pays decently and you will be able to pay the loans back and contribute to the system for future generations. Under the free model, which operates in many European countries, entry to university is way tougher and this works against people of disadvantaged backgrounds as they are likely to perform worse than people from other backgrounds. While the "free" in your model sounds desirable, it isn't. The current model is far from optimal but it is definitely better than the one you propose.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.