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

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    Slightly depressed after listening to a load of Labour students saying they would be voting labour to get rid of Nick Clegg after he wasn't able to win a majority and thus make tuition fees free.

    I am duly trying to remind people that Labour not only CREATED THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE but then wanted to increase them to a higher rate in 2010. If the Lib dems did not enter into a coalition, we would be paying far more than we would now under a labour or tory government.

    THIS is what the Lib dems have done: http://www.markpack.org.uk/libdem-infographic/

    THIS is what they have stopped: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...dems-two-party
    We are bloody lucky to have them as opposed to the blue and red team.
    So basically we are screwed no matter who we vote for?

    I hope the lib dems gets completely destroyed
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saayagain)
    Do you think higher education should be free?
    It would be if we stopped funding every single pleb a degree in Surf Studies.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    They could create money for free anyway - no need for a 'credit card'.

    I don't see what the difference is between what you propose and the current system tbh, apart from your tax increases the more you owe, rather than the more you earn. So
    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

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

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    So basically we are screwed no matter who we vote for?

    I hope the lib dems gets completely destroyed
    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?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (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

    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.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (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?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (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
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (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...
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (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...
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (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.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (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
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (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...
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (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?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saayagain)
    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.
    Pretty much everyone works so technically basically everyone is working class. However i live in one of the most expensive affluent areas of the country, my parents are both professionals who went to uni and have city jobs one in trading one in law. It's pretty much the definition of middle class, i only didn't go to private school because we have some of the best state schools around in my area.
    That can't really be compared to coming out of working class scunthorpe, and living on minimum wage can it.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    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

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