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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Now to the flip side...this does have benefits for some people

    If you happen to be rich, yet not so super smart, you can essentially buy yourself the degree at this rate. This leads to a case where you have rich average intelligence people going to top universities and poor smart people going to less strong universities.

    Now if they were to completely eliminate the ceiling on tuition fees and let the market dictate it, through supply and demand, you could really see this horrible rich/poor hypothesis come into effect.

    I mean why not do it, they've done it to the masters degree, you can't do a top masters degree at a top university if you are poor. They might as well put the final nail in the coffin, the system is broken enough as it is.

    And mind you the universities want to charge what they want, universities are run like businesses, the vice chancellors job is to make as much money for the university as he can.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Somebody has to pay the costs of providing your higher education. Why should it be my nan and the postman, as you seem to want it to be? You're in many cases going to university precisely so that you can be better off than these people.

    It's an opt-in tax that you can choose to take on if you consider that the benefits outweigh the costs. If you don't consider that they do, don't opt in for it.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Exceptional)
    Whether you accept it or not, fees influence some people to forego university, and the concept of higher fees exacerbates that. You previously said that if students want to go to a cheaper university, then they can. That's acknowledgement that some people will opt for cheaper choices, and the people most likely to do that are from low income backgrounds. Therefore, if they're applying to lower priced institutions, which are likely to have lower grade expectations, then of course many applicants are going to 'aim' for the grades demanded by that university, because where's the incentive to exceed them?
    1. Its good that some people are influenced and decide uni is not worth getting into debt for, because its not suitable for all. There are too many people who go, when they might have veen better doing soemthing vocational and less expensive.

    2. The Unis which might do price rises are only oing to eb those who cna meet certain targets. they will offer a more attractive product in terms of employability, so they can raise their prices and still be value for money. the market cna decide if its wiorth it or not as students can decide to go elsewhere. It doesnt have to be people from cheaper backhrounds at all.

    At the front end the cost of a uni coirse is picked up by the government. No student is going to be put off by paying say 25% more for the extra benefit of going to a good uni. That would be flase economy.

    If students had to find the money themselves and pay up front then obviously it would have an effect, but they dont have to. they get the fees paid 100%.

    3. This idea that you will aim for lower grades is a nonsense. they can still go to Oxbridge. Nobody is going to study for poorer grades just because they have to pay an extra £5k, 10k or 15k of government debt they might never pay back anyway.

    People will want to get into the best unis. As long as the govvernment is covering the fees 100% up front, then they arent going to be put off by paying a small amount of extra debt especually if they know the degree will pay for itself. Its an investment.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by lolakirk)
    Disgusting. Thats the Tories for you though, not surprising in the least.
    Why did we even vote the Tories in? I knew that something like this would happen...

    Firstly the removal of maintenance grants, now this? Are we trying to make it so that only the richest people can afford to go to university?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    It is not a punishment. It is taking the cost for higher education for where it should come from, i.e. taxes. Germans do not have an issue with this because contrary to the British public, they seem to appreciate the idea of a society and social responsibility.
    If we re-labelled our student loan repayments as a graduate tax would you suddenly be okay with it because it's now a tax? The idea that forcing people to pay for something through taxation is somehow more ethical than the exact same situation but merely via a loan instead is laughable.

    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    Completely agree with the bolded text which is precisely why the cost of university should come from taxes. The wealthiest in society, whether they went to university or otherwise, pay more and the poorer in society, regardless of whether they went to university or otherwise, pay less. If you think that there's too much inequality, which I would totally agree with, raise the taxes for the wealthy. Rather than sheltering the wealthy as this government is doing.
    The government still heavily subsidises higher education. Let's get that out in the open.
    The current system simply means those who directly benefit the most from this particular entitlement pay more back towards it's running. You're argument merely seems to be you want it to be paid all by the taxpayer just because it can be.

    (Original post by Plagioclase)
    Your argument about those who directly benefit the least paying the least would be more understandable if it wasn't for the fact that you pay interest and inflation on the student loans, which means for a significant spectrum of incomes, your debt rises at a greater rate at which you're paying it back. Those on the highest incomes will actually pay less for their university education than those who do manage to eventually pay off their loan, but not until it has accumulated a lot of interest.
    If you're earning enough to pay it all off over 30 years but too much to have any written off, you've still done extremely well for yourself. We're talking about a career trajectory where you're earning over 40k during your thirties and ends up on about 65k a year. They'll be slightly, slightly worse off than someone who managed to pay it off in 15 years. I'll be sure to cry them a river.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ZiggyStarDust_)
    No, that's not necessarily true. This depends on the TYPE of degree you go for. If more people went for, physics degrees,say, it's going to encourage more people to get jobs in higher sectors.

    So more people,taking a physics degree, are likely to get jobs in quaternary sectors -> More money(higher paid jobs) -> Better economy -> Society is benefitted

    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.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Not really. It's just you've been fortunate enough to have the costs paid for. Doesn't mean they don't exist in the first place.

    There's no such thing as a free lunch.
    There absolutely is. A huge amount of people in the UK have no idea what real poverty is, actually having to struggle etc. I would say as much as 60% of the population. I'm not necessarily blaming them for it, especially if they were just born into comfort, but really those with well off parents have a very different set of pressures. They are expected to do very well in life, which can be a real curse. But let's not pretend that's the same thing as struggling to truly work your way up from nothing while constantly getting whacked by apparently 'for aspriation' governments.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    In what other walk of life do you get something for nothing?
    Healthcare? Infrastructure? All education before university? That's why we pay taxes.

    Disgusting. The US has a huge problem with tuition fees, university is for the well-off, and that's the way this country is going. Of course all the privileged ***** that have paid for anything in their lives without mummy and daddy subsidising them don't see a problem.

    There are too many stupid people in this country already. We need more people going to university, not less.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    Healthcare? Infrastructure? All education before university? That's why we pay taxes.

    Disgusting. The US has a huge problem with tuition fees, university is for the well-off, and that's the way this country is going. Of course all the privileged ***** that have paid for anything in their lives without mummy and daddy subsidising them don't see a problem.

    There are too many stupid people in this country already. We need more people going to university, not less.
    So you think sending a stupid university to a university where writing your name gets you a 2:2 and the best degree they offer is women's studies makes the country smarter and better off?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I think RIP this generation. A life of debt and insecurity
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    The future:

    A 50k debt laden degree needed to gain employment at mcdonalds or starbucks. No houses so everybody is crammed inside dirty small accomadtion for a price per month which leaves them with just enough for travel to work and a loaf of bread
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Betelgeuse-)
    I think RIP this generation. A life of debt and insecurity
    I didn't realise life expectence had crashed to 51, nor had I realised that this was a payday loan with dreadful terms for the stupid.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ZiggyStarDust_)
    what's wrong with wanting to get an education without having to pay for it?

    You know, some of us aren't so loaded that we could easily splash out on degrees.

    I have a friend who's absolutely desperate to go to university but she worries she can't because she might not be able to afford it.

    And what, you like the fact that the poorer people would be excluded from unis? Even if they have the sheer intelligence to be able to go to one?
    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)
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I didn't realise life expectence had crashed to 51, nor had I realised that this was a payday loan with dreadful terms for the stupid.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    What?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pol pot noodles)
    Not against the concept in the slightest. Higher education funding has to come from somewhere so it's probably for the best if it's seen that graduates are taking that burden. Try telling that to self-entitled students though.
    Don't agree with the corporate for-profit universities though, but hey ho if there's a demand...
    Where do you get this nonsense from? Graduates tend to earn more, which means they pay more tax, and over the course of their life they pay off the cost of their degree many times over in the form of the extra tax they pay. They already took the burden before the 9k fees.

    An educated population pays for itself in many different ways. From the extra tax they pay due to higher income, to the extra services they offer the country. This is just short sighted and greedy, You are hallucinating that they are not paying it back just because you have a poor understanding of the topic.

    All this will encourage people to do is leave the country after studying their degree to avoid paying the money back, leading to brain drain, stripping the country of educated people just because the tories are greedy.

    (Original post by Drewski)
    In what other walk of life do you get something for nothing?
    Another person who can't see the big picture and can't comprehend that a more educated population benefits the country as a whole.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    Healthcare? Infrastructure? All education before university? That's why we pay taxes.

    Disgusting. The US has a huge problem with tuition fees, university is for the well-off, and that's the way this country is going. Of course all the privileged ***** that have paid for anything in their lives without mummy and daddy subsidising them don't see a problem.

    There are too many stupid people in this country already. We need more people going to university, not less.
    University isnt a right, not everyone should be entitled to go, in the US people that are genuinely clever get scholarships so no matter their income they can afford to go which is how it should be, if you work hard and do well you are rewarded, if you dont and perform average you shouldnt be allowed to get into university

    There isnt a shortage of graduates for graduate level jobs so clearly we dont need more people going to university.

    Not not going to uni doesnt mean people are stupid, there are plenty of other paths that lead to useful careers
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I was going to worry, then I saw "Universities that reach targets".
    Ain't no way DMU reaching any targets, so I'm safe :rofl: :rofl:
    Offline

    2
    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.
    Graduates still pay off the cost of their degree multiple times over due to the extra tax, so you have absolutely no case. There is no net loss due to funding education.

    (Original post by lahorizon)
    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.
    Their motivation is not relevant. All that is relevant is that it is paid for multiple times over, over the course of the graduates life due to the higher income (which means there was no loss for the government), and any research produced benefits the country as a whole. I'm sorry if you think that there is no benefit to educating a population above GCSE level, but this is simply not true.

    (Original post by lahorizon)
    Teaching someone basic maths/science/english has a much bigger impact on society.
    Irrelevant. Higher education still pays for itself many times over.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Things like this demotivates me. Sfe. :top:

    Let's start rioting right now.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Um I mean protesting.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bob5124)


    Another person who can't see the big picture and can't comprehend that a more educated population benefits the country as a whole.
    I think this is complete bs.. I went to Oxford and studied Maths (and got an excellent grade) and I know quite literally nothing about my degree/my subject, nor is it of any use to me.

    I can't even comprehend how little less academic degrees would 'educate' anyone.

    In this country most people just see university as a chance to go and get pissed up on the government for a few years.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
    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.