Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fleff)
    :ditto: I hate it when people say I shouldn't be rewarded because some people are abusing the system. Which is why I originally said it needed amendments...
    Everything you've said Fleff, I can relate and understand - maybe not 100% but I know what it's like to be 'not so well-off'. When my parents split up we were on income support for about 6 years and it is not easy, is it? I know your situation was slightly different but it must have felt the same. My mum couldn't work but she still had to look after me and my 2 sisters and it's not nice at all. It really annoys me when people think they understand what it's like but they don't. They probably never will.

    MissSurfer
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MissSurfer)
    Everything you've said Fleff, I can relate and understand - maybe not 100% but I know what it's like to be 'not so well-off'. When my parents split up we were on income support for about 6 years and it is not easy, is it? I know your situation was slightly different but it must have felt the same. My mum couldn't work but she still had to look after me and my 2 sisters and it's not nice at all. It really annoys me when people think they understand what it's like but they don't. They probably never will.

    MissSurfer
    All very sad, but it does not justify compulsory taxation
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    Pay no attention. He's just bitter that he cant counter my arguments. You said you were going to Durham, so's this chap, i pity you.
    He? She, dear boy, she. I'm a female.

    I can't counter your arguments because they make no sense to me, I can't argue from another perspective unless I understand the perspective the other person has.

    Well, it's either that or I can actually see the fact that it's pointless.
    I know from the way you say things that you'll never accept my point of view, or, for that matter, the point of view of anyone in a similar situation to me. Call it womans intuition.

    You don't seem to realise how much we need public services, and that these services will only continue to work if people pay taxes. Just becuase you may not need them, doesn't mean other people don't. Would you prefer to give to charity? It's the same concept, really. Giving to the needy, only you dislike not having the choice. I'd dislike not having the choice to go into higher ed. What you're proposing is we remove one persons choice, to make way for another persons. You'd prefer to have the choice to pay for other people, which would result in EMA collapsing, and many other benefits, as many people simply wouldn't pay. I'd like the choice to make a life for myself, a life that many people are lucky enough to have because their parents have money. Frankly, humans are greedy. They wouldn't pay that much if they had a choice, and you know it, I know it. Despite the fact that many people could easily afford it.

    At least that's what I've made of your argument. Please, fell free to tell me where I've gone wrong.

    And I have to say, I'm amazed you have the capacity to pity someone.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Objectivism: What you're actually against, is compulsary taxation, which, I admit, has relevance to EMA. But if you wish to argue about whether or not people should have the choice to be taxed, I suggest you go elsewhere. Because this thread is about whether or not young people should get benefits if they want to go into higher ed. Whether or not tax pays for that, I don't care.

    I'll just laugh when there comes a day when you need a public service. Tell me, would you put out a fire in your home yourself, or let it burn down? Would you call the police if someone smashed your head in? I'm curious as to how the hell your mind works.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2 + 2 = 5)
    First idea perhaps misses the point somewhat. Although it would be a good idea on top of the EMA, the point is that those on the financial borderline are able to continue in HE, regardless of actual academic achievement. Still, I wouldn't mind this introduced by individual schools and colleges... although one might have a hard job persuading the taxpayer to foot the bill.
    I guess it comes down to the fact that I believe that doing well is just as important as taking part. One can turn up for two years and get poor A-level grades, but what has it acheived? The individual has wasted two years of their life where they could have been earning.

    The second idea: I see the principle you're putting forward, and it's largely a good one- but the idea in itself seems more than a little impractical. The line when defining "educational" would be a pain in the arse, and the logisitical problems would stretch on forever (issuing the vouchers to students, instructing retailers, etc). Secondly, it makes assumptions as to the expenses of an individual student.
    One has to make assumptions when dealing with these things, it happens all the time for all sorts of educational bursaries so I don't really see it as a negative. One could have a set list of materials plus the option to apply to the school for other items, that would ensure it was individual, but controlled.

    Thirdly- and this may well be the most controversial objection- one may consider that as well as a facilitator, EMA actually acts in its cash form as an incentive to remain in education- to put it extremely simply, I wouldn't mind £30/week, and neither would the original threadstarter. Although this is the point that may prove most arguable, EMA may also be essential in ensuring that those students that may have dropped out for other reasons than crippling financial problems, are also retained. In any other form, potential students may object to being told how and where to spend their money, and yet another student may be lost- which I'm sure is agreed to be a bad thing.
    But it should be performance-based then. It is damaging to keep individuals in a system that will not benefit them by bribing them to do so. If people don't like being told to act responsibly with their handouts then they can go whistle for it.

    Therefore, it would have to be provided to those who need the money, but also as an incentive to others who would recieve it, although this second argument may be much weaker than the first. The system would be ideal if we could establish exactly which students would require financial help, but what we have now is little more than a blunt instrument. Yet it may still, unfortunately, be as good as we can get.



    For now. I have never been a fan of 'well it's not ideal but it's better than nothing' attitude. If it isn't ideal then it should be improved.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fleff)
    Objectivism: What you're actually against, is compulsary taxation, which, I admit, has relevance to EMA. But if you wish to argue about whether or not people should have the choice to be taxed, I suggest you go elsewhere. Because this thread is about whether or not young people should get benefits if they want to go into higher ed. Whether or not tax pays for that, I don't care.

    I'll just laugh when there comes a day when you need a public service. Tell me, would you put out a fire in your home yourself, or let it burn down? Would you call the police if someone smashed your head in? I'm curious as to how the hell your mind works.

    Thats why i suggested you go to my thread 'is taxation theft'. If you can't keep up, get out of the forum.

    I expalin your questions in the thread, mostly in the last few pages or so.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    He? She, dear boy, she. I'm a female
    .

    I was referring to the other person actually whose also hoping to go to Durahm (killer or some name like that)

    I can't counter your arguments because they make no sense to me, I can't argue from another perspective unless I understand the perspective the other person has.

    Its very simple. Im against compulsory tax. How can't you understand this and YOU hope to go to university!!!



    You don't seem to realise how much we need public services, and that these services will only continue to work if people pay taxes. Just becuase you may not need them, doesn't mean other people don't. Would you prefer to give to charity? It's the same concept, really. Giving to the needy, only you dislike not having the choice. I'd dislike not having the choice to go into higher ed. What you're proposing is we remove one persons choice, to make way for another persons. You'd prefer to have the choice to pay for other people, which would result in EMA collapsing, and many other benefits, as many people simply wouldn't pay. I'd like the choice to make a life for myself, a life that many people are lucky enough to have because their parents have money. Frankly, humans are greedy. They wouldn't pay that much if they had a choice, and you know it, I know it. Despite the fact that many people could easily afford it.
    Read the other thread. Ive explained this and the role of the market.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    Thats why i suggested you go to my thread 'is taxation theft'. If you can't keep up, get out of the forum.

    I expalin your questions in the thread, mostly in the last few pages or so.
    Yes - I can read, just because I'm poor doesn't mean I'm illiterate, or slow - and the reason I didn't want to go into that thread, is because I don't want to debate over why I think it should be forced. But there we go. I suggest you use your common sense, in realising that I'm perfectly with it
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i like the idea of ema, it encourages people to work hard and meet targets.

    what i don't understand is why students of better off families don't need this encouragement.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yes - I can read, just because I'm poor doesn't mean I'm illiterate, or slow - and the reason I didn't want to go into that thread, is because I don't want to debate over why I think it should be forced.
    Or can't?
    Offline

    11
    (Original post by objectivism)
    Or can't?
    I spy constructive discussion going out of the window. Let's not forget the spirit of compromise, friends!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I was referring to the other person actually whose also hoping to go to Durahm (killer or some name like that)
    Your post implied otherwise, I'm sorry... So who exactly do you pity, me, or him?

    Its very simple. Im against compulsory tax. How can't you understand this and YOU hope to go to university!!!
    I do understand it. I don't understand the reasoning behind it. Well, no, that's not strictly true, I do. You resent having to pay for other people to have a life. I plan on going to uni to study chemistry or biology, or a mix of the two, please explain to me how reasoning behind taxation comes into how a cell works? Or was it just my supposed lack of understanding? Meh, no one's perfect...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    Or can't?
    No, want.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Your post implied otherwise, I'm sorry... So who exactly do you pity, me, or him?
    No it didn't. Thats why i said 'chap' because he is a male and your a female.
    I pity you, because he is very aggressive.


    I do understand it. I don't understand the reasoning behind it. Well, no, that's not strictly true, I do. You resent having to pay for other people to have a life.
    Nonsence. Read the thread.

    I plan on going to uni to study chemistry or biology, or a mix of the two, please explain to me how reasoning behind taxation comes into how a cell works?
    Whose paying your fee's? Government. Who funds government? Taxpayers.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Maybe the EMA does need changeing but it shouldn't. It give speople the change to carry on their studies. Maybe they won't get great results but should people realy be put down for that. Also do you realy think that a person with maybe an extra £30 from a weekend or parttime job can really afford xboxs or other things. So what if they get extra money from parents. Its education.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Let's not forget the spirit of compromise, friends!
    I dont compromise my beliefs. Its called sticking to your principles.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    I dont compromise my beliefs. Its called sticking to your principles.
    Even though I oppose nearly everything you stand for, I must admire your adherance to principles. I have to agree with you here. Principles are the most important.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by objectivism)
    I thought external benefits for you were things like street lights. Now its schools?
    No no, you're quite wrong once again, I mentioned street lights as one of a few examples of goods to which the principle of non-excludability applies, as a criticism of a policy of (near) zero taxation.

    Edaucation and healthcare are examples of Merit Goods, the economic and taxation policy implications of which, I outlined briefly in my post - if you still cant understand it, go read an economics text book.

    (Original post by objectivism)
    What wrong with creationism? Give them both theories and let the pupil decide.
    Ha! That's extremely rich coming from someone who just days ago was so keen to extoll the virtues of objective truth and the weaknesses of relativism; what happened to "sticking to your principles" objectivism? :rolleyes:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lirael)
    Maybe they won't get great results but should people realy be put down for that.
    They should be aiming for a minimum level of acheivement or else the government (i.e. taxpayers) are throwing away money and wasting young peoples' time.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zaf1986)
    Even though I oppose nearly everything you stand for, I must admire your adherance to principles. I have to agree with you here. Principles are the most important.
    Many thanks
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

3,398

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
Will you be tempted to trade up and get out of your firm offer on results day?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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.