Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Whats the deal with tuition fees? watch

  • View Poll Results: What would you prefer
    Tuition fees scrapped
    25
    18.80%
    Tuition fees lowered
    32
    24.06%
    Tuition fees scrapped and overall entry points increased
    31
    23.31%
    Keep things as they are
    45
    33.83%

    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ellingham)
    You on crack? i am not one hard core campaigner to be honest i couldn't care less if there are tuition fees, no tuition fees i dont care, i needed to pick something to campaign against to get through this module and i chose scrapping tuition fees. People love to get high and mighty over the internet. But still thank you for enlightening me on how the system works i don't get the 9% thing, explain?
    Lol but surely youre paying these so you should know the basic idea behind it and as you are doing it for a module and knew youd be doing work on it then started this thread with your alternative you should know what youre providing an alternative to. Otherwise youd end up with the same thing like you did. Thats not hard core thats common sense for someone with above.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ellingham)
    You on crack? i am not one hard core campaigner to be honest i couldn't care less if there are tuition fees, no tuition fees i dont care, i needed to pick something to campaign against to get through this module and i chose scrapping tuition fees. People love to get high and mighty over the internet. But still thank you for enlightening me on how the system works i don't get the 9% thing, explain?
    Am I on crack... because I explained something to you that you didn't know? :rolleyes: Don't expect anyone to help you out if that's your attitude.

    You pay 9% on anything above £15k.

    So if you're earning £20k, you pay 9% of £5k. Which is £450 a year.
    If you're earning £25k, you pay 9% of £10k. Which is £900 a year.
    If you're earning £30k, you pay 9% of 15k. Which is £1350 a year.

    Got it?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pink Bullets)
    Am I on crack... because I explained something to you that you didn't know? :rolleyes: Don't expect anyone to help you out if that's your attitude.

    You pay 9% on anything above £15k.

    So if you're earning £20k, you pay 9% of £5k. Which is £450 a year.
    If you're earning £25k, you pay 9% of £10k. Which is £900 a year.
    If you're earning £30k, you pay 9% of 15k. Which is £1350 a year.

    Got it?
    I agreed with you (see post above yours). Well done for all the info.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pink Bullets)
    And where does this 'right' come from? Who gave you this right? What entitles you to it?

    Your right to free education is just as real as my right to free ice cream. And my right to free holidays in the sun. And my right to free designer clothes.
    No.
    Ice cream and education are not comparable. When you consume ice cream, there is no benefit to anyone other than yourself. Education, on the other hand, is a merit good meaning that society as a whole benefits from your education. If you receive education you are more likely to get a decent job, a large salary and hence contribute more to society. Meanwhile if you don't get an education you're more likely to be a drain on society and engage in criminal behaviour, for example.

    And who do you think pays for it when the government pays?
    Lol at you using a condescending tone with me. The taxpayer pays, and which part of the public pay the most taxes? Graduates. It all goes back to the merit good idea - better educated people earn more money, in turn paying higher taxes and effectively 'paying back' the investment that the government gave to them in the form of free education.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I think tuition fees should stay as they are. The fees give the university a substanial amount which they reinvest so it can only be a good thing. Nothing in life is free so I cant see why my degree would be, especially if it gives me leverage in the job market, it has to come at a cost.

    I believe there should be one fixed amount and none of that "lower it for poorer students" crap. Thats why grants and loans have been introduced. You cant pay upfront for tuition so family income is irrelevant when in years to come you shalln't necessarily be as poor as you were when you were 18. Thats what really annoys me when there's talk of a two tier system. Sod the poor and sod the rich, family background is almost irrelevant when starting university money wise. I get by on a standard loan and a bit of a grant and that is it. My parents do not regularily support me. It is managable especially when if you have doubts about the cost of university, get a job before hand. I worked part time for 2 years before uni and saved £2,500 because I knew my parents couldnt support me all the way through and that grants wouldnt cover everything. If you're poor, do something about it instead of assuming others can pick up the slack!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aeonflux)
    No.
    Ice cream and education are not comparable. When you consume ice cream, there is no benefit to anyone other than yourself. Education, on the other hand, is a merit good meaning that society as a whole benefits from your education. If you receive education you are more likely to get a decent job, a large salary and hence contribute more to society. Meanwhile if you don't get an education you're more likely to be a drain on society and engage in criminal behaviour, for example.
    That doesn't answer my question, not even close.

    My question was: where does your right to a free education come from? You are basically saying 'Education should be free because I have a right to a free education'... in other words... absolute ********.

    Lol at you using a condescending tone with me. The taxpayer pays, and which part of the public pay the most taxes? Graduates. It all goes back to the merit good idea - better educated people earn more money, in turn paying higher taxes and effectively 'paying back' the investment that the government gave to them in the form of free education.
    What about people without degrees who earn a lot of money? You think they should pay as much for your education as you do? Somebody has to pay for your education. Why should it not be the person who derives the most benefit from it... you?

    The current system operates by the same principle as the one you're suggesting here. The difference is, you actually pay for the lion's share of your education, as opposed to everyone with a high salary taking equal responsibility for your education (what you're proposing). How is the current system not fairer for everyone?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aeonflux)
    No.
    Ice cream and education are not comparable. When you consume ice cream, there is no benefit to anyone other than yourself. Education, on the other hand, is a merit good meaning that society as a whole benefits from your education. If you receive education you are more likely to get a decent job, a large salary and hence contribute more to society. Meanwhile if you don't get an education you're more likely to be a drain on society and engage in criminal behaviour, for example.


    Lol at you using a condescending tone with me. The taxpayer pays, and which part of the public pay the most taxes? Graduates. It all goes back to the merit good idea - better educated people earn more money, in turn paying higher taxes and effectively 'paying back' the investment that the government gave to them in the form of free education.
    Your solution's long term though. Tuition fees werent introduced until early 2000 (i think) and in that case, not many graduates are out there earning to put it back into the system. You're looking at 20 years time!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    We don't pay for uni in Scotland (so I of course had to go to London...), and yet we don't have scores of people who are just there for the sake of it. Universities aim to pick the students that stand out to them as best-suited for the course after all. Plus, I doubt many people would want to spend three or more years of their life at university if they weren't really into the subject.

    Personally, I think the fees in England are absolutely extortionate! It would be good to see them lowered, though there is of course the worry that the standard of education would fall as a result. Perhaps one day the Lib Dems will get their way and we'll all be in gloriously well-funded institutions for absolutely free - we can dream, at least.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What I don't get is how the system worked just a few years ago with the tuition fees being entirely funded by the government and the "joke" degrees a non issue. How have we gotten to this state now that they need to be continually increased??
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jk1986)
    What I don't get is how the system worked just a few years ago with the tuition fees being entirely funded by the government and the "joke" degrees a non issue. How have we gotten to this state now that they need to be continually increased??
    A few years a go they still payed tuition fees but hundreds instead of thousands.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by harleygrant)
    We don't pay for uni in Scotland (so I of course had to go to London...), and yet we don't have scores of people who are just there for the sake of it. Universities aim to pick the students that stand out to them as best-suited for the course after all. Plus, I doubt many people would want to spend three or more years of their life at university if they weren't really into the subject.

    Personally, I think the fees in England are absolutely extortionate! It would be good to see them lowered, though there is of course the worry that the standard of education would fall as a result. Perhaps one day the Lib Dems will get their way and we'll all be in gloriously well-funded institutions for absolutely free - we can dream, at least.
    £3000 is extortionate? Wow, that sounds cheap as chips to me. I wonder what you'd think of the £12,800 I'm paying for my MA!

    You must realise that £3000 a year is a mere fraction of what a university education actually costs.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dlg3579)
    Your solution's long term though. Tuition fees werent introduced until early 2000 (i think) and in that case, not many graduates are out there earning to put it back into the system. You're looking at 20 years time!
    This was always the system before tuition fees were introduced.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pink Bullets)
    That doesn't answer my question, not even close.

    My question was: where does your right to a free education come from? You are basically saying 'Education should be free because I have a right to a free education'... in other words... absolute ********.
    Where does the right to anything come from? Where does your right to live come from? Oh look, I can ask stupid questions too.

    I believe in the right to universal education in the same way I believe in the right to education. The logic behind this belief is that, like universal healthcare, universal education is a merit good.

    What about people without degrees who earn a lot of money? You think they should pay as much for your education as you do? Somebody has to pay for your education. Why should it not be the person who derives the most benefit from it... you?

    The current system operates by the same principle as the one you're suggesting here. The difference is, you actually pay for the lion's share of your education, as opposed to everyone with a high salary taking equal responsibility for your education (what you're proposing). How is the current system not fairer for everyone?
    It's fairer because in the current system I pay twice for my education - once in the form of top-up fees, and again in the form of taxes on my earnings that I would be statistically much less likely of earning without my degree. In the old system that Blair and the politicians who introduced top-up fees grew up in, they didn't get into any debt paying for tuition fees at all, and only payed for their education once, in the form of taxes once they were earning.

    Again, you could say the same thing to argue against universal healthcare - isn't it unfair that healthy people have to pay for healthcare for unhealthy people? But the sensible person would say no, everyone is entitled to healthcare as we all benefit from a healthier nation.



    As an aside: Using bold repeatedly on random words is annoying and makes you look like a moron.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aeonflux)
    Where does the right to anything come from? Where does your right to live come from? Oh look, I can ask stupid questions too.
    Society. Rights are obviously entirely a societally constructed concept. You've just decided on a whim that you have a 'right to a free education' because you want a free education. Surely you can see how illogical that is?

    It's fairer because in the current system I pay twice for my education - once in the form of top-up fees, and again in the form of taxes on my earnings that I would be statistically much less likely of earning without my degree. In the old system that Blair and the politicians who introduced top-up fees grew up in, they didn't get into any debt paying for tuition fees at all, and only payed for their education once, in the form of taxes once they were earning.
    Current system: Two people both earn 30k. Person A went to university, Person B didn't. Both people pay the same amount of taxes. Additionally, Person A pays a small extra fee to cover the cost of the education they received.

    Your proposed system: There are no tuition fees. Taxes are raised to cover tuition. Two people both earn 30k. Person A went to university, Person B didn't. Both people pay exactly the same amount of (the now increased) taxes. Both people make the same financial contribution to the cost of Person A's education.

    You seriously think your system is fairer? You're mad. You want all people to have less disposable income so you can have more, while still enjoying all the benefits of a university education. I would not feel right about exploiting other people like that. I suppose that's where we differ.

    Your point about paying for your education 'twice' is completely nonsensical. The cost of your education is not 3,000 pounds a year. :rolleyes: Whether you're paying back your loan or paying taxes, you're simply making a contribution to your education, you're not paying for it once or twice or three times. Your comparison to healthcare is also completely ridiculous, since going to university is a choice. Getting sick is not a choice. For god's sake, THINK.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pink Bullets)
    £3000 is extortionate? Wow, that sounds cheap as chips to me. I wonder what you'd think of the £12,800 I'm paying for my MA!

    You must realise that £3000 a year is a mere fraction of what a university education actually costs.
    Oh believe me, I know how bad MA fees are. I plan on doing one after my BA. Also, I'm well aware that it costs much more than £3000 as I'm at university right now, where my halls are ridiculously overpriced due to being in central London and my materials cost a bomb.

    What I meant was, it's such a huge jump from free education to paying thousands of pounds every year.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You have skewed your survey from the start. Where's the increase fees option or the let the market decide option?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jennie1987)
    A few years a go they still payed tuition fees but hundreds instead of thousands.
    Well it's not been that long at all since there were no fees. Pretty sure student paid tuition fees were brought in by Blair..
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pink Bullets)
    Society. Rights are obviously entirely a societally constructed concept. You've just decided on a whim that you have a 'right to a free education' because you want a free education. Surely you can see how illogical that is?
    Erm, not illogical at all actually. Our society considers that we have the right to free healthcare, and the right to free primary and secondary education. Why should tertiary education be any different?


    Current system: Two people both earn 30k. Person A went to university, Person B didn't. Both people pay the same amount of taxes. Additionally, Person A pays a small extra fee to cover the cost of the education they received.

    Your proposed system: There are no tuition fees. Taxes are raised to cover tuition. Two people both earn 30k. Person A went to university, Person B didn't. Both people pay exactly the same amount of (the now increased) taxes. Both people make the same financial contribution to the cost of Person A's education.

    You seriously think your system is fairer? You're mad. You want all people to have less disposable income so you can have more, while still enjoying all the benefits of a university education. I would not feel right about exploiting other people like that. I suppose that's where we differ.

    Your point about paying for your education 'twice' is completely nonsensical. The cost of your education is not 3,000 pounds a year. :rolleyes: Whether you're paying back your loan or paying taxes, you're simply making a contribution to your education, you're not paying for it once or twice or three times. Your comparison to healthcare is also completely ridiculous, since going to university is a choice. Getting sick is not a choice. For god's sake, THINK.
    The system I propose (which incidentally is the system used for decades prior to the installation of New Labour) is fair because it means everyone has completely equal opportunities when it comes to higher education. Its fairer because although in the short term the taxpayer will fund this generation of students, there will soon be more high earners and higher rate tax payers as a result. The difference in lifetime earnings between the average graduate and the average school leaver is well over £100,000 (don't have the time or inclination to find the exact figure now, look it up if you're interested). At 40% tax rate thats at least an extra £40,000 to the government. There are also numerous other benefits to society generally of having a better educated population.

    I don't see what choice has to do with anything. The government pays for loads of things you choose. You choose to have a child, it doesn't mean the government shouldn't pay child benefit.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by harleygrant)
    We don't pay for uni in Scotland (so I of course had to go to London...), and yet we don't have scores of people who are just there for the sake of it. Universities aim to pick the students that stand out to them as best-suited for the course after all. Plus, I doubt many people would want to spend three or more years of their life at university if they weren't really into the subject.
    You don't? I always thought Scottish students still had to pay tuition fees (though not top-up fees), so they were paying something in the region of £1,700 a year or so, i.e. basically what people were paying before the - fairly recent - introduction of top-up fees. Or am I getting this mixed up with the Welsh universities?:confused:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's simple. Don't fight wars. Cut the defence budget. Don't let banks pay £billions in bonuses. Fund education and NHS.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources
Uni match

Applying to uni?

Our tool will help you find the perfect course

Articles:

Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

Quick link:

Educational debate unanswered threads

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.