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

Students in Favour Of Tuition Fee Reform Discussion Watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Do you not realise that raising tuition fees increases debt (not everyone can afford to pay them outright and therefore need a loan...though I'm sure YOU'LL all be fine with Mummy and Daddy paying it?) which in turn increases inflation? In the long run it will screw over the economy once and for all.

    Instead of making budget cuts and placing a huge amount of debt on the future (deterring many bright but poor students), we should be cutting the budget 100% on a futile Trident replacement and catch all the tax evaders that are wasting the tax payer billions and billions every year.

    Though this is a Tory government we're talking about...it's unlikely they'd ever have any economic sense so it has to be expected.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Haychee)
    We now have over 700 members

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Studen...2913221?v=info


    Fantastic effort, shows there are still rational students around.
    SUpporting the tuition fees rise does not make you rational. The ignorance on this thread is astounding. The increasing debt for students is designed off set the 80% cuts in the teaching grant. As this scheme begins in 2012 and thus the first repayments start in 2015 it does absolutely nothing to get rid of the deficit it just shifts is to another part of governments accounting book.

    No extra money comes in to the government this parliament due to these changes and thus it does bugger all to get rid of the deficit. It is pure idealogy, good god get your facts straight.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Taste of Honey)
    Do you not realise that raising tuition fees increases debt (not everyone can afford to pay them outright and therefore need a loan...though I'm sure YOU'LL all be fine with Mummy and Daddy paying it?) which in turn increases inflation? In the long run it will screw over the economy once and for all.
    That's some very dubious economics. Please explain how it causes inflation?

    And your caricature of everyone who is in favour of tuition fees reform is indicative of the low level of argument peddled by those on your side of the debate. I have a tuition fee loan and a means tested maintenance grant and university Opportunity Bursary. I am in favour of the reforms. Start engaging with the actual issues rather than trying to engage in class warfare.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Budgie)
    That's some very dubious economics. Please explain how it causes inflation?

    And your caricature of everyone who is in favour of tuition fees reform is indicative of the low level of argument peddled by those on your side of the debate. I have a tuition fee loan and a means tested maintenance grant and university Opportunity Bursary. I am in favour of the reforms. Start engaging with the actual issues rather than trying to engage in class warfare.
    love how you ignored my post but still say your first sentence.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    "If these cuts are not made, then in the long run the deficit will continue to grow and grow and grow."

    This is highly contentious. The cutbacks, according to a Nobel Prize winning economist, "will mean lower output and higher unemployment." He goes further: "Austerity converts downturns into recessions, recessions into depressions. The confidence fairy that the austerity advocates claim will appear never does, partly perhaps because the downturns mean that the deficit reductions are always smaller than was hoped."

    Furthermore, the Higher Education Policy Institute reports that the reforms cannot be expected to save money in the long term and that the Treasury is likely to demand changes which may include raising loan interest rates, reducing student numbers or a further fees hike.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ungeziefer)
    "If these cuts are not made, then in the long run the deficit will continue to grow and grow and grow."
    What cuts?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Haychee)
    If these cuts are not made, then in the long run the deficit will continue to grow and grow and grow. Surely for future generations cutting the deficit now will brighten their prospects and horizons rather than letting it build up to a catastrophic scale.
    I understood that the cuts referred to here are the government's public sector cuts (including the teaching budget for HE), as these are generally justified in terms of reducing the deficit.

    I'm sure Haychee will let us know if I'm incorrect.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JMG89)
    love how you ignored my post but still say your first sentence.
    Nothing in your post explains the link between student debt and inflation. It asserts that student debt is inflationary and then suggests alternative cuts.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ungeziefer)
    "If these cuts are not made, then in the long run the deficit will continue to grow and grow and grow."

    This is highly contentious. The cutbacks, according to a Nobel Prize winning economist, "will mean lower output and higher unemployment." He goes further: "Austerity converts downturns into recessions, recessions into depressions. The confidence fairy that the austerity advocates claim will appear never does, partly perhaps because the downturns mean that the deficit reductions are always smaller than was hoped."

    Furthermore, the Higher Education Policy Institute reports that the reforms cannot be expected to save money in the long term and that the Treasury is likely to demand changes which may include raising loan interest rates, reducing student numbers or a further fees hike.
    As ever, there are nobel prize winning economists on both sides of the debate. Joseph Stiglitz's nobel prize was not for work on fiscal stimulus - it wasn't even for macroeconomic work. It was for microeconomic work on asymmetric information.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Budgie)
    As ever, there are nobel prize winning economists on both sides of the debate.
    So, we agree: saying "If these cuts are not made, then in the long run the deficit will continue to grow and grow and grow" is contentious.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ungeziefer)
    So, we agree: saying "If these cuts are not made, then in the long run the deficit will continue to grow and grow and grow" is contentious.
    I don't think that specific claim is contentious. Obviously without any changes to fiscal policy from before the election the deficit would continue to grow, especially given the large interest bill we already have on our existing debt. The argument tends to be that we should cut back less, a la Labour.

    It is important to remember that Keynes and Keynesian economists advocate debt-funded spending to solve depressions. No economist advocates debt-funded spending to close a deficit.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I am somewhat bemused that more is not made of the dividing lines amongst those that will need to pay for further education.

    Why is an entire section of the population, who received degrees with fully state paid fees , not expected to partly shoulder the burden. Especially as a large number of those legislating for fees to be increased benefited from paying no fees.

    If a levy was made on all existing graduates whose fees were paid by the state who are still alive/ under retirement age ,rather than fees/ greater fees on current and future graduates, the costs would be spread.

    A say 1% or 2% p.a. levy on all graduates would raise substantial funds. If half was used ongoing to support Universities through the current crisis and half was allocated to the Universities they attended to create future endowment funds I doubt most graduates would complain, most people I am still in contact with from University have very warm feelings for their "alma mater", some already make donations.

    Given a large number of pre 1998 graduates will have significantly above average earnings, the sums involved would be substantial.

    I accept the fact Universities need funding I am just not convinced that the economic effect of removing disposable income from those in their 20s is long term good for the economy.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Budgie)
    I don't think that specific claim is contentious. Obviously without any changes to fiscal policy from before the election the deficit would continue to grow, especially given the large interest bill we already have on our existing debt.
    Assuming 0.0% change in GDP.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DJKL)
    I am somewhat bemused that more is not made of the dividing lines amongst those that will need to pay for further education.

    Why is an entire section of the population, who received degrees with fully state paid fees , not expected to partly shoulder the burden. Especially as a large number of those legislating for fees to be increased benefited from paying no fees.

    If a levy was made on all existing graduates whose fees were paid by the state who are still alive/ under retirement age ,rather than fees/ greater fees on current and future graduates, the costs would be spread.

    A say 1% or 2% p.a. levy on all graduates would raise substantial funds. If half was used ongoing to support Universities through the current crisis and half was allocated to the Universities they attended to create future endowment funds I doubt most graduates would complain, most people I am still in contact with from University have very warm feelings for their "alma mater", some already make donations.

    Given a large number of pre 1998 graduates will have significantly above average earnings, the sums involved would be substantial.

    I accept the fact Universities need funding I am just not convinced that the economic effect of removing disposable income from those in their 20s is long term good for the economy.
    And how pray tell do you suggest we identify pre-'98 graduates?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Assuming 0.0% change in GDP.
    You'd need ridiculous levels of growth to maintain current spending and taxation levels and close the deficit at the same time, especially when taking into account the amount spent on debt interest.

    Edit: Also, most macroeconomic theory suggests that fiscal stimulus has only a short run effect, and has to be expected to be temporary or it gets crowded out via the exchange rate. So pursuing it as a long run strategy would be odd.
    • Study Helper
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    does this rise even affect me?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    And how pray tell do you suggest we identify pre-'98 graduates?
    The Universities already have substantial lists e.g all graduates of the University of Edinburgh have a vote at General Council. The University sends them a newletter (Edit) and Council minutes. Of course not everyone has kept their details up to date with their Alma Mater, however given the University will have a record of D.O.B. and name I expect Government databases and NI records would match them fairly easily.

    If it made a legal requirement akin to that of declaring all ones income I am sure the tax system could arrange identification with employee tax codes being given a say G suffix.

    Yes it involves some work but it is possible.

    My father receives the Queens College members list, one Oxford college, the list is a small book.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Budgie)
    You'd need ridiculous levels of growth to maintain current spending and taxation levels and close the deficit at the same time, especially when taking into account the amount spent on debt interest.

    Edit: Also, most macroeconomic theory suggests that fiscal stimulus has only a short run effect, and has to be expected to be temporary or it gets crowded out via the exchange rate. So pursuing it as a long run strategy would be odd.
    Surely you'd need growth in tax revenue of (£160bn x 0.035)/0.4 = £5.6bn?

    (assuming a lower tax take of 40% of GDP)

    So a rise in GDP/annum of 1%

    Since GDP rose by 0.8% in the last quarter alone how is 1% a ridiculously high rate of growth?

    http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=192
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Yes I do agree tuition fees should be reformed - to make them cost approximately £0 a year or any multiple thereof depending on the university
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DJKL)
    The Universities already have substantial lists e.g all graduates of the University of Edinburgh have a vote at General Council. The University sends them a newletter (Edit) and Council minutes. Of course not everyone has kept their details up to date with their Alma Mater, however given the University will have a record of D.O.B. and name I expect Government databases and NI records would match them fairly easily.

    If it made a legal requirement akin to that of declaring all ones income I am sure the tax system could arrange identification with employee tax codes being given a say G suffix.

    Yes it involves some work but it is possible.

    My father receives the Queens College members list, one Oxford college, the list is a small book.
    I think you're over estimating Govt IT :P

    I'd be interested to know if unis have lists of graduates (probably) and their dates of birth (unlikely), for say the 1950's.

    Not that it'd be computerised even if they do.

    There would be a lot of John Smiths arguing 'it wasn't me' :P
 
 
 
  • 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
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.