Truly tired of Labour BS on tuition fees.

Original post by saayagain

It allows the government to spend what is necessary on the specific areas. instead of being restricted by tax revenues unless they run a deficit. It will make individuals more accountable for their own finances. They take the burden for their endeavours. It reduces the stresses and strains that money brings and therefore allows them to live better lives. It is better management of finances and invests into the best asset in the world...people :smile:

The amount you pay in tax won't significantly effect your net pay so it's all good.

The Government isn't currently restricted by tax revenues or the deficit. They can just create money int he way you discribe. Many other Governments have before, Zimbabwewe did in the last decade for example.

Reply 65

Original post by billydisco

It would be if we stopped funding every single pleb a degree in Surf Studies.

Even though the students of surf science have gone on to well paying grad level jobs...?

You don't like people earning more and decreasing your tax burden?

Reply 66

The_Mighty_Bush

3

Original post by Quady

The Government isn't currently restricted by tax revenues or the deficit. They can just create money int he way you discribe. Many other Governments have before, Zimbabwewe did in the last decade for example.

Inflation may allow the government to keep up public spending in the here and now, but greatly harms the poorest people in society as it lowers their purchasing power. It also means that if governments cut less now that our generation and the next generation will be saddled with massive debt.

Reply 67

Observatory

Original post by Quady

If they hadn't got in there would have been incentives for early repayment.

They had an opt out on the tuition fee vote written into the coalition agreement. Why did they not exercise this, instead putting a three line whip on their MPs?

The current system is actually better for poorer students. The paper obligation is larger but those on median incomes and below will actually repay less.

The problem with this as a political strategy is it relied on voters and journalists understanding some high school level financial maths.

Reply 68

Original post by saayagain

Do you think higher education should be free?

Yes ideally higher education would be free.
We have to recognize this may not be realistic but i think £9000 is steep. That said people always seem to forget it is covered by a loan which you only pay back if you're earning enough and it's wiped away after 30 years.

What i do think needs to be addressed is the inequality of funding for higher education. For example people who's parents earn over a certain amount are given £9000 loan for their fees and then £3500 to live on. That £3500 doesn't even cover most peoples accommodation let alone allow them to eat. Therefore it's essentially a tax on middle class parents who can only send their kids to uni if they shell out a further £2500-3500 per year!
Poorer families on the other hand are given a multitude of grants and a higher loan because they can not afford to pay out of their own pocket. Well this is absolutely fine but i don't see why people who's parents make more money couldn't be given the larger loan so they don't have to rely on their parents to fund them.

Reply 69

Jammy Duel

21

Original post by em.d_4

Yes ideally higher education would be free.
We have to recognize this may not be realistic but i think £9000 is steep. That said people always seem to forget it is covered by a loan which you only pay back if you're earning enough and it's wiped away after 30 years.

What i do think needs to be addressed is the inequality of funding for higher education. For example people who's parents earn over a certain amount are given £9000 loan for their fees and then £3500 to live on. That £3500 doesn't even cover most peoples accommodation let alone allow them to eat. Therefore it's essentially a tax on middle class parents who can only send their kids to uni if they shell out a further £2500-3500 per year!
Poorer families on the other hand are given a multitude of grants and a higher loan because they can not afford to pay out of their own pocket. Well this is absolutely fine but i don't see why people who's parents make more money couldn't be given the larger loan so they don't have to rely on their parents to fund them.

And the rest

Reply 70

Original post by Jammy Duel

And the rest

Well i spend £4000 on accomodation so that's £500 from my parents, the rest from my loan plus £100 per week for the 38 weeks of term £3800 but many of my friends at uni live on more like £60-70 a week from their parents (£2660). So i recognise that I'm very lucky to have parents and family who can afford to support me in this way but it seems wrong that literally the only way i could have come to university is to expect that sort of funding from my parents.
The student loan company doesn't consider the other financial responsibilities of families. For example say we were having to support a family member through home or elderly care the chances are we wouldn't have the money to spend on my uni, or if i had multiple siblings in uni at the same time there's no way that could be possible. We also live in a very expensive area of the country which is ultimately our choice but means that our family income is not comparable to that of other people earning the same amount in other regions of the UK!
It is an extremely unjust system which targets the middle class completely, I don't mind paying £9000 that much for my fees i know it's worth it in the end but i do mind not getting equal support from the government when my family pay taxes just as much as everybody else if not more

Reply 71

ChaoticButterfly

Original post by Davij038

Well it depends what you want doesn't it? My point was that people are complaining about tuition fees and are blaming the lib dems instead of the majority labour/ cons who both wanted to increase them to higher than present levels.

What party are you supporting?

Green for all the fat lot of good it will do.

Reply 72

Original post by The_Mighty_Bush

Inflation may allow the government to keep up public spending in the here and now, but greatly harms the poorest people in society as it lowers their purchasing power. It also means that if governments cut less now that our generation and the next generation will be saddled with massive debt.

Possibily you might like to direct that at the other poster?

It wasn't my idea...

Reply 73

Original post by em.d_4

Yes ideally higher education would be free.
We have to recognize this may not be realistic but i think £9000 is steep. That said people always seem to forget it is covered by a loan which you only pay back if you're earning enough and it's wiped away after 30 years.

What i do think needs to be addressed is the inequality of funding for higher education. For example people who's parents earn over a certain amount are given £9000 loan for their fees and then £3500 to live on. That £3500 doesn't even cover most peoples accommodation let alone allow them to eat. Therefore it's essentially a tax on middle class parents who can only send their kids to uni if they shell out a further £2500-3500 per year!
Poorer families on the other hand are given a multitude of grants and a higher loan because they can not afford to pay out of their own pocket. Well this is absolutely fine but i don't see why people who's parents make more money couldn't be given the larger loan so they don't have to rely on their parents to fund them.

Only if the middle class child is too lazy to work over the summer.

Reply 74

Original post by Observatory

The current system is actually better for poorer students. The paper obligation is larger but those on median incomes and below will actually repay less.

The problem with this as a political strategy is it relied on voters and journalists understanding some high school level financial maths.

How is it better for poorer students?

I can see how its better for poorer graduates...

Reply 75

saayagain

8

Original post by em.d_4

Yes ideally higher education would be free.
We have to recognize this may not be realistic but i think £9000 is steep. That said people always seem to forget it is covered by a loan which you only pay back if you're earning enough and it's wiped away after 30 years.

What i do think needs to be addressed is the inequality of funding for higher education. For example people who's parents earn over a certain amount are given £9000 loan for their fees and then £3500 to live on. That £3500 doesn't even cover most peoples accommodation let alone allow them to eat. Therefore it's essentially a tax on middle class parents who can only send their kids to uni if they shell out a further £2500-3500 per year!
Poorer families on the other hand are given a multitude of grants and a higher loan because they can not afford to pay out of their own pocket. Well this is absolutely fine but i don't see why people who's parents make more money couldn't be given the larger loan so they don't have to rely on their parents to fund them.

I agree £9000 is expensive and has no relationship to the costs borne by the university.

The inequality in funding is an issue too. The middle class end up getting squeezed all the time even though they vote for governments that rip them off...

If you call yourself middle class you're already doing yourself over. Middle class are working class. The sooner they understand which side of the line they stand, the better for humanity.

Reply 76

Original post by saayagain

I agree £9000 is expensive and has no relationship to the costs borne by the university.

Could you evidence that? Given £9k doesn't even cover what Universities charge the Government, with LEAs paying the remaining £4-5k

Reply 77

saayagain

8

Original post by Quady

Could you evidence that? Given £9k doesn't even cover what Universities charge the Government, with LEAs paying the remaining £4-5k

Look at the financial statements of a university and see if they have made losses...lol see if their profit margins have decreased. 9k is the max a uni can charge a national citizen. I checked out the University of Greenwich's financial statements and they are fine. No losses. Good cash flows. Did the government say universities are struggling to cope due to tuition fees...no. Can you prove to me that the government didn't pick the 9k figure out of the sky?

I don't know what LEAs are...

Reply 78

Original post by Quady

Only if the middle class child is too lazy to work over the summer.

I spent the last 3 years of my life doing voluntary work for your information.
And now I'm a medical student we have a significant amount of work to do and a much shorter summer than other students. I'm not saying it's impossible to do because plenty students do do it but why should the middle class kids all have to work over the summer to save their parents paying for them when the government is handing out loans to other people which mean they don't need to?
It's a very unequal system. You could argue let the poorer kids work all summer then they won't need that extra gov. loan they get, how does that sound?

Reply 79