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

Do you agree with the Coalition Tuition Fees policy? Watch

  • View Poll Results: Do you agree with the Coalition Tuition Fees policy?
    Yes
    63
    50.81%
    No
    61
    49.19%

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think university should be free or almost free.

    Since the policies are moving in the opposite direction to that I do not support them.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dededex)
    Ironically, asking this question on the student room doesn't actually give an accurate representation of student views; a poll at our school sixth form showed that, roughly speaking, 81% of our students were opposed to the newly introduced tuition fees policy.

    I think it all depends on who's answering methinks
    I think it also depends when you ask. I've been frequenting this section of the site ever since it was created, and I've noticed a marked change in attitudes towards the policy up to the present. When it was first announced, I pretty much never saw anyone agree with me that the plans are perfectly reasonable. Then I began to see a couple of posts here and there in support. Now there are tonnes of people here who are for the plans, and this poll reflects that.

    Personally, I think it's a result of the real details of the plan settling in after the blinding headline of "fees being increased to £9000".
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Excandersham)
    I think university should be free or almost free.

    Since the policies are moving in the opposite direction to that I do not support them.
    Please explain why you think the taxpayer should subsidise your university education at a time when there are massive cuts to other services, job losses on a massive scale and many other austerity measures?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AskMeAnything)
    Please explain why you think the taxpayer should subsidise your university education at a time when there are massive cuts to other services, job losses on a massive scale and many other austerity measures?

    Same reasoning finland and sweden use. If you take more out of society you pay more back.

    Graduates are part of the "taxpayer" you are referencing so they already pay for their university education as they work. In this system graduates are effectively being charged twice for their education due to the greed of the wealthy, both for avoiding tax and causing the financial collapse.

    It's my opinion that the military should be cut before education.

    And in regards to your austerity measure, this change will not make much difference. The government still has to use taxes to subsidise these massive loans students will have to pay back and now default on.

    Since we are in a deficit I do not condemn utterly a student contribution to the cost of university, but not a full contribution.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Excandersham)
    Same reasoning finland and sweden use. If you take more out of society you pay more back.

    Graduates are part of the "taxpayer" you are referencing so they already pay for their university education as they work. In this system graduates are effectively being charged twice for their education due to the greed of the wealthy, both for avoiding tax and causing the financial collapse.

    It's my opinion that the military should be cut before education.

    And in regards to your austerity measure, this change will not make much difference. The government still has to use taxes to subsidise these massive loans students will have to pay back and now default on.

    Since we are in a deficit I do not condemn utterly a student contribution to the cost of university, but not a full contribution.
    It's almost impossible for a student to 'default' on this type of loan. If they have the money to pay for it they pay - the second their income drops below 21,000 they stop paying.

    It's my opinion that our military is as important as ever in remaining a world power.

    I believe, truly, this system will cause an increased prestige for UK Universities, I am quite willing to pay 6-9 thousand pounds a year towards my education. If it's worth it, if I come out with an excellent degree, then it's not going to matter in the grand scale of my life. It is helps the country get out of recession, into the black, and without deficit, meanwhile helping poorer students get into university, then I'm happy to pay the price.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AskMeAnything)
    It's almost impossible for a student to 'default' on this type of loan. If they have the money to pay for it they pay - the second their income drops below 21,000 they stop paying.

    It's my opinion that our military is as important as ever in remaining a world power.

    I believe, truly, this system will cause an increased prestige for UK Universities, I am quite willing to pay 6-9 thousand pounds a year towards my education. If it's worth it, if I come out with an excellent degree, then it's not going to matter in the grand scale of my life. It is helps the country get out of recession, into the black, and without deficit, meanwhile helping poorer students get into university, then I'm happy to pay the price.
    You can default by going bankrupt, leaving the country or it gets written off after 35-30 years.

    The government will lose money even with the interest rises.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Excandersham)
    You can default by going bankrupt, leaving the country or it gets written off after 35-30 years.

    The government will lose money even with the interest rises.
    I severely doubt that you, who does not have the figures, can calculate this better than senior economist Vince Cable. Do you think he would bring in this policy if it would lose the country money? And that the chancellor, another economist, would agree to it if that was such?

    Pure armchair speculation.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AskMeAnything)
    I severely doubt that you, who does not have the figures, can calculate this better than senior economist Vince Cable. Do you think he would bring in this policy if it would lose the country money? And that the chancellor, another economist, would agree to it if that was such?

    Pure armchair speculation.
    Argument from authority.

    They already agreed with the points I raised. It is why they are increasing interest.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Keckers)
    Having looked at the proposals I actually think the new proposal is fairer than the previous system. £21,000 seems like a very reasonable starting point to pay back your student debt, and I don't think anyone can dispute that is certainly more favourable than £15,000.

    For all intents and purposes, the actual amount of debt seems completely arbitrary, after all, anything remaining is written off after 30 years regardless of what you earn.

    Not to mention the rise in the maintenance loan makes the living costs of university far more accessible to the working class and the middle classes.
    I agree with you, I think given the current circumstances and the large numbers of people wishing to go to University then this new proposal is a much fairer system. Also the cap on the number of students will be removed, so to maintain current expenditure with current numbers I have read that uni's would need to charge £7200.00 pa, but if they can have more students this figure can go down and they can still increase spending and the government will still be contributing around 40% with the remaining 60% funded by students when they graduate.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Azimuth)
    I think it also depends when you ask. I've been frequenting this section of the site ever since it was created, and I've noticed a marked change in attitudes towards the policy up to the present. When it was first announced, I pretty much never saw anyone agree with me that the plans are perfectly reasonable. Then I began to see a couple of posts here and there in support. Now there are tonnes of people here who are for the plans, and this poll reflects that.

    Personally, I think it's a result of the real details of the plan settling in after the blinding headline of "fees being increased to £9000".
    I agree with this, most the people at my 6th form college and friends didn't understand the details, they just thought they would have to payout £9k each year, 99% didn't have a clue about the current system of loans, let alone the new system. Now they are all starting to support it as they get it explained, especially how it helps poor students.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prince Rupert)
    As a tax payer who has to get up at the crack every day in the freezing cold to pay the rent and bills while many students lie in bed till 3 in the afternoon with a hangover, I agree 100% with this policy and everyone I know feels the same. Why should the state fund what is a lifestyle choice for so many?

    As a student who happens to have a regular job and other commitments (like many fellow students), I beg to differ.
    Why students are so unfairly classed as the lazy tax-dodgers who never get to see the sunrise- I will never be able to comprehend.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Excandersham)
    Same reasoning finland and sweden use. If you take more out of society you pay more back.

    Graduates are part of the "taxpayer" you are referencing so they already pay for their university education as they work. In this system graduates are effectively being charged twice for their education due to the greed of the wealthy, both for avoiding tax and causing the financial collapse.
    Please explain how "the wealthy" avoid tax, and caused the financial collapse?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I'm shocked by the poll's results in here..I think that's not so bad since you can still take the loan and you will only pay after you win more than 21.000 pounds..but we can see on the streets that the general opinion is totally different.

    I didn't vote.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    yes you only pay it back after earning more than 21k p.a but... its a fricking massive amount to pay back which most people will end up paying for the majority of their lives?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BoltonFan123)
    yes you only pay it back after earning more than 21k p.a but... its a fricking massive amount to pay back which most people will end up paying for the majority of their lives?
    It may seem a lot now, but it isn't and you'll hardly feel it as the rate is so low. By the time you are paying it off, you will have more and far tougher expenses to pay off, believe me!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by profoflife)
    Please explain how "the wealthy" avoid tax, and caused the financial collapse?
    Unregulated banking and speculation. And the wealthy avoid paying tax through the use of offshore funds or corporations base there head offices elsewhere.

    Like in the case of a british trading buisness claiming it's head office was a postoffice in switzerland.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Excandersham)
    Unregulated banking and speculation. And the wealthy avoid paying tax through the use of offshore funds or corporations base there head offices elsewhere.

    Like in the case of a british trading buisness claiming it's head office was a postoffice in switzerland.
    You are assumking everyone in banking is wealthy. Define wealthy please?

    If you are resident in the UK for more than 90 days average over 3 years, you are eligable for income tax and still have to complete a tax return. Moving funds offshore does avoid some tax but not all.

    If you had a considerable net worth you would do the exact same thing. If your income was £200k and were taxed £25,000 just on £50,000, wouldnt you want to try and do something about it?

    No one is escaping the cuts - everyone is going to be effected. Public services, privite enterprises, "wealthy" people, "poor" people., students, employed people, unemployed, the elderly, those on benefit...it is no more fair or unfair on anyone.

    Stop complaining, take it on the chin and do your best to make good with what youve got. The government does not owe you and neither do the taxpayers.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'll never have to pay hahaha
 
 
 
  • 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
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    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.