Turn on thread page Beta

READ: What university is going to cost watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    I urge everyone to read this excellent article by the BBC's Education correspondent.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4749575.stm

    Any comments??
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Very interesting! Glad I finally understand that - I've always been far too bemused by it all to have much of an opinion on the new fee system.

    Good find

    ZarathustraX
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Nothing I didn't know already.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Its the whole redistribution of wealth idea that many in Labour still hanker after. I think it is a terrible business, and whilst I salute the attempt to encourage more people from poorer backgrounds, I think this is the very worst way of going about it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    is the answer: A lot more under labour?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bikerx23)
    is the answer: A lot more under labour?
    Says a member of a party who wants to put commercial rates of intrest on student loans.....
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    That was to encourage people to pay the loans back - education should always be free.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Its amazing the costs that you can occur. Bring back grants!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VVV1)
    Its amazing the costs that you can occur. Bring back grants!
    We have!!!!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Essentially the government is doing two things:

    1) increasing the burden of debt for higher education
    2) removing that debt from the middle-aged financially secure middle-classes and putting it on financially insecure graduates who are at a stage in their life where they have to taken on many other large debts as well (such as a mortgage).

    This is just a cynical attempt to please their voter-base, which is both incredibly short-term and could easily backfire. They certainly will not encourage more people into higher education as initially the costs look frightening and many people will be put off before investigating it further.

    Just the sort of thing I'd expect from a hypocritical government with paradoxical policies.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    well said chemistboy :congrats:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    What are the alternatives though? I haven't really thought about it granted, but the present system seems OK. Somebody hoping to go to Bristol told me contact time has been cut on the Politics course to 1 hour. If they are cutting hours and raising costs this is terrible. I hope this isn't a sign of things to come.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    what? so for 4 years, it costs £7300
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Why couldn't I be 7 months older???? OK, I'm actually quite narked now, first the EMA thingy and now this.

    "High income
    Finally, at the top end of the scale, students with families earning over £50,000 a year will almost certainly be worse off under the new system.

    They will get no grant or university bursary. They will only be eligible for 75% of the student loan, worth about £3,300 a year.

    Government ministers have always been nervous of spelling this out for fear of sounding like socialists
    They will therefore need parental help, their own earned income, or a commercial loan to meet the full living costs of university.

    And, of course, they will have to pay £9,000 in fees after graduation, compared to the current pay-as-you-go fees of £3,450 over three years.

    In short, the post-2006 system generally looks a better bet for students from low-income homes, perhaps marginally more expensive for those from the middle-income bracket, but much more expensive for those from higher income families. "

    :mad: It is quite easy to earn £50,000 in a family if both parents work, AFAIK. Maybe I should tell my parents to divorce? And just because a family is considered 'high earners' it doesn't mean they don't have a massive mortgage? It doesn't mean the parents give kids much of their money! It doesn't consider the extortionate amount taken off as tax. It doesn't consider if you have 1 child or 11?!! FFS. :mad:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    ^ Exactly!
    And why should what your parents earn have any bearing on the amount you should pay in the revised system. The point of the new scheme is to eliviate the need of financial help from parents, so then why base what you should pay on what you parents earn? Its just nonsensical.
    Its just one of the many ways the government screws over the hard working majority. £25k for each parent, who will probably be in there late 40s-early 50s is well below the average for professionals at this point in their lives. The majority of higher education is made up of this group, so really its the very poor who will be better off, which only make up a very small percentage of higher education.
    I REALLY hope the new system backfires.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I actually feel that this method i better than the current method. I have seen how my sister has had to use her loan to pay for her accomodation and her fees and thus has used up quite a large portion. therefore she has had to fall deep into her overdraft and work excessive hours just so that she can afford to live. when i go to university - the first year of the new scheme - i will have my whole loan to pay for my accomodation and living costs saving me over £1000 a year in the short term. Then I wont be paying back until i am earning good money by which time the payments are minimal unlike what you pay on a credit card or a bank loan. Thus I do not feel that for me the system is a bad one. If I were from a family earning over £50000 a year then yes i would feel a little peeved that a poorer student had double the money of me but then they must also consider that their family can offer more help/ To those who hope the new system fails i ask why? If it fails it will lead to a large number of students even worse off and not being able to afford university.

    SinghFello currently the "very poor" as you put it make up such a small percentage of higher education because they cannot afford it. Would you prefer that they did not have the chance?? Is that not a selfish view?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by josh1988uk)
    If I were from a family earning over £50000 a year then yes i would feel a little peeved that a poorer student had double the money of me but then they must also consider that their family can offer more help/ To those who hope the new system fails i ask why? If it fails it will lead to a large number of students even worse off and not being able to afford university.

    SinghFello currently the "very poor" as you put it make up such a small percentage of higher education because they cannot afford it. Would you prefer that they did not have the chance?? Is that not a selfish view?
    A family earning over £50,000pa. cannot necessarily offer more help! They probably have a higher mortgage, more than one kid, and it's unlikely they'll want to contribute anything when there are no pressures for them to do so (e.g. no forms to fill in etc) I hope it fails because I disagree with a loan system based on what your parents earn. Every student should be able to get by on the same amount of money for that course and uni, from the government. Why should someone who's parents don't actually earn that much, but are considered high earners have to pay more?!

    I know people from less well off families and it won't deter them from going to uni if they have the grades or ambitions to. They said EMA was to stop people dropping out after GCSEs due to lack of money. All the people I know that get it, would have carried on regardless. Another point- all the people I know that get EMA (this is quite a few) live with just one parent- well great, I have to endure my parents at each others throats AND get less uni money [and no EMA] as a bonus . Cheers Blair.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I'm not objecting to poorer student studying to university level, I'm objecting to the fact that the majority should'nt be so much worse off just to allow this small group to be better off.
    The current system heavily subsidises tution fees for those who do not have families to back them up, and they can also get larger loans, so its not like they cannot go. Grants are available for those that get high grades too.

    I just dont believe that those whos parents are togather, and have worked hard to earn a high wage should be penalised.
    University is mainly full of middle-class students, with professional parents. And its this group that will be severly disadvantaged. Especially the group that just over the £50k thesehold. Perhaps they need to take into account the number of children in the household of the "high earners", and also the amount of disposable income this group has, which will probably be similar to a "middle earner".
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    the new system is quite sneaky, i had indepth training cos i was working as an widening participation ambassedor for uni and i'm so glad i went under the old system. its a very underhand way of running students into debt.

    from what i've been told, the bbc is actually underestimating the debt in this article because it is assming that studetns won't take out the largest loan. in its calcuations it only factors in a loan of 1500 whereas most students will take out the full loan which could be over £5000 in london. In addition, the BBC is vastly underestimating the cost of uni by saying that £5,200 is enough to live on. My accomodation alone is around £3600 for the year which would leave me around 53 per week for food, bills, books, clothes travel etc. It could probably be done by someone a bit more frugal than me but i would rather enjoy uni life to the full.


    personally i missed the introduction of grants by a year (which i'm slightly pissed off about). My parents retired early for health reasons so couldn't really afford to support me though uni. I currenctly don't pay fees and take out the max loan. I'm doing a 4 year course including a year abroad (which i get a loan of about 5000 for). at the end i'll be about £17000 or £18000 in debt.

    Hoewver, for comparrison say i was doing a three year course without the year abroad i would be 12000-13000 in debt. Under the new system this would be much higher.

    using the BBc's figures, i would get 2700 from the government, 1000 from the university and personally i would take out the full loan of around 4200 and face it not many people are going to say no to easy money. This would leave me with a more generous budget of around £140 per week. This would mean that i could afford to travel in the holidays etc and generally not have to worry. In this respect, the new system is good because i would be able to afford non paid work experience instead of slaving away in a crap job for most of the holidays. Also i would not have to work during term time. However, over three years i would be around 21 thousand pounds in debt instead of the 12 i would have been before and even though you don't have to pay it back until you are earning a certain ammount of money i would rather work during the holidays to fund my degree than spend the rest of my life paying off a large debt run up during a few years of my life.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Yes but what you are forgetting is that unlike commercial debt this debt is fixed to inflation - most wages rise with inflation anyway thus you are only paying very little. I mean about £500 p/a when on £20,000 p/a salary is pittance. On the current system students end up taking and commercial loans and thus this affects their credit rating and can actually lead to greater debts.
 
 
 
Poll
Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?
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.