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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A is for Awesome)
    All the people who want tuition fees scrapped: How are universities supposed to be funded? Pay the lecturers with IOUs?
    Presumably the way they were funded back in the 80s. And the way schools are funded.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a.posteriori)
    There is no such thing as free lunch. You can vote away tuition, but that doesn't make education free.

    Edit: and you guys have it easy in Britain. In the US, the cost of my education is going to be roughly £125k before any sort of financial aid kicks in, and there's not very much financial aid to go around.
    So if someone is stabbed they had it easy because in nigeria they would have been shot?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by A is for Awesome)
    All the people who want tuition fees scrapped: How are universities supposed to be funded? Pay the lecturers with IOUs?
    Don't fight wars that cost billions. Don't let banks pay bonuses of billions. Maybe with that money being saved, chuck it into education and the NHS?
    Offline

    20
    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??
    Because more people are going to university as more people can afford to be supported through A Levels.

    You're implying the system worked pre 97.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slipend)
    Don't let banks pay bonuses of billions. Maybe with that money being saved, chuck it into education and the NHS?
    If the money didn't go to bankers it would go to the shareholders instead. Same difference.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aeonflux)
    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?
    Because our society doesn't consider that we have a right to free tertiary education. Just as it doesn't consider we have the right to free cars.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    If the money didn't go to bankers it would go to the shareholders instead. Same difference.

    We are the shareholders of RBS. Royal Bank of Scotland is over 80% owned by the tax payers. Maybe 80% of their bonuses be paid to the taxpayers?
    Offline

    20
    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?
    Hang on, so you're at uni, presumably taking out a fees loan. You're doing a campaign about fees. But you don't have a clue how the system works...?

    Nice
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slipend)
    We are the shareholders of RBS. Royal Bank of Scotland is over 80% owned by the tax payers. Maybe 80% of their bonuses be paid to the taxpayers?
    OK, I get ya. The state owned banks are different to 'the banks'.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by grippet)
    Presumably the way they were funded back in the 80s. And the way schools are funded.
    now don't be silly. Everyone has access to health care. Priamry and secondary education are compulsory. Therefore they are paid for by all taxpayers. University education is voluntary. It is untenable to expect it to be funded by people who will never get the opportunity to go.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hypocriticaljap)
    It is untenable to expect it to be funded by people who will never get the opportunity to go.
    Yet, I fund lots of things I don't ever get a chance to have or use?
    Offline

    0
    I think I disagree with consensus, but I was looking for an option for an increase in tuition fees, and a reduction in loans/bursarys/free money! The American universitys have huge endowments and still charge large fees because this model is sustainable. In Britain, people who arn't capable of higher education are still persuaded into going. We end up with hundreds of thousands of people in debt, with meaningless degrees. By incresing the tuition fees, you put off university to all but the best students, who really need a degree for their chosen profession. The majority of school leavers will get jobs, and learn skills through their work as it is their only option. The value of a degree will be assured, because they wont be as common. People who failed at school, can still get into a job where they can be sucessfull. There is more jobs avaliable for people without formal qualifications, because employers cant afford for every employee to have a degree. Taxes are reduced because the government isnt subsidising students to avoid working and paying taxes and contributing to society. The benifits are massive to society.

    I'n not saying the working classes should be prevented from university level education, but funding should only be avaliable to good students. Would preventing access to all universities to people who achieve 3 B grades at A-Level be an easy workable solution?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tcb1992)
    I'n not saying the working classes should be prevented from university level education, but funding should only be avaliable to good students. Would preventing access to all universities to people who achieve 3 B grades at A-Level be an easy workable solution?
    In a word no.

    You'd single handedly cull 50% of physics, chemistry, biology and engineering entrants.

    Or was that the aim?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tcb1992)
    I'n not saying the working classes should be prevented from university level education, but funding should only be avaliable to good students. Would preventing access to all universities to people who achieve 3 B grades at A-Level be an easy workable solution?
    Let me guess who you are going to vote for? :facepalm:

    Impossible to work. Would you still have the same opinion if you got 3 B's and they said you could not do further education?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by slipend)
    Yet, I fund lots of things I don't ever get a chance to have or use?
    Such as?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    It's an investment. Everyone is able to borrow enough to make that investment. That is as good as can be expected. The Government cannot afford to cover the entire funding of universities.

    My favourite solution would be to stop Government funding of useless courses and use that money to preven tfurther rises in tuition fees. Universities have set up so many ridiculous and cheap to run courses to earn extra money. There's no reason the Government should pay for someone to do a degree that won't benefit the society or benefit the person in terms of opportunities. The reason the Government pays for courses at the moment is so people of all classes can afford to go. This to help social mobility, preventing poor kids remaining poor because they can't afford qualifications. But a course which will not provide opportunities does not help social mobility; therefore it is done purely for pleasure and as such is a luxury that should not receive Government funding.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by Quady)
    Such as?
    The queen?:p:
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hobnob)
    The queen?:p:
    Everyone has the opportunity to use the Queen.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Such as?
    London Underground.
    Local Public transport.
    Welfare Housing.


    If you think about it the tax payers fund a lot of things they never use or ever will use. Everybody who gets disability allowance, everybody who has long term sick get money form the tax payers.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddyman4)
    It's an investment. Everyone is able to borrow enough to make that investment. That is as good as can be expected. The Government cannot afford to cover the entire funding of universities.
    It could it just chooses not to, in line with the thining of the electorate.

    If you made the NHS paid for again you'd easily be able to afford funding universities entirely.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
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.