Equality of opportunity – unless you're one of the middle classes Watch

This discussion is closed.
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../ixportal.html

"By the time they graduate in 2010, Toby can expect to owe not far short of £30,000 - a debt that will hang over him throughout his twenties and perhaps even thirties. Bert, on the other hand, qualifies for all the extra help promised in Mr Clarke's Bill - an annual grant of £1,500, a bursary of £300 and a remission of the first £1,200 of the tuition fee.

This means that, after three years at Oxford, he can expect to owe no more than £18,000 - quite bad enough, but nothing like the financial and psychological burden that Toby will have to bear at the outset of his career.

The reason for this injustice has nothing to do with any difference between the financial circumstances of Toby and Bert, which are identical. Both are penniless students, who will start their working lives on the same square of the board, with the same advantage of an Oxford degree. Nor has the inequality of their treatment anything to do with their academic ability. Indeed, it has nothing at all to do with either of them, but only with the relative wealth of their parents. Toby is to be stung for the full whack because his parents earn more than £32,000 a year. Bert will get the maximum relief because his mum earns less than £15,200."
0
kildare
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#2
Report 16 years ago
#2
(Original post by vienna95)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../ixportal.html

"By the time they graduate in 2010, Toby can expect to owe not far short of £30,000 - a debt that will hang over him throughout his twenties and perhaps even thirties. Bert, on the other hand, qualifies for all the extra help promised in Mr Clarke's Bill - an annual grant of £1,500, a bursary of £300 and a remission of the first £1,200 of the tuition fee.

This means that, after three years at Oxford, he can expect to owe no more than £18,000 - quite bad enough, but nothing like the financial and psychological burden that Toby will have to bear at the outset of his career.

The reason for this injustice has nothing to do with any difference between the financial circumstances of Toby and Bert, which are identical. Both are penniless students, who will start their working lives on the same square of the board, with the same advantage of an Oxford degree. Nor has the inequality of their treatment anything to do with their academic ability. Indeed, it has nothing at all to do with either of them, but only with the relative wealth of their parents. Toby is to be stung for the full whack because his parents earn more than £32,000 a year. Bert will get the maximum relief because his mum earns less than £15,200."
Hmmm, I was wondering (and writing) about this earlier.
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3
Report 16 years ago
#3
We could go for the Tory approach of Graduation Tax, and end up paying more!!!
0
kildare
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#4
Report 16 years ago
#4
Anyone read the article in today's Econmist about the Tory's policy on tution fees? Summed them up pretty well in my opinion.
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#5
Report 16 years ago
#5
The Tory plans to abolish tuition fees would benefit the richest households and hit the poorest.
0
kildare
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#6
Report 16 years ago
#6
..... and fantastically oppurtunistic and hypocritical.
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#7
(Original post by Bigcnee)
The Tory plans to abolish tuition fees would benefit the richest households and hit the poorest.
how does that work?
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#8
Report 16 years ago
#8
(Original post by kildare)
..... and fantastically oppurtunistic and hypocritical.
That sums them up...

Give them some credit... they are desperate.

It made me laugh on our socieites fair, when the Tory society were bragging about the new tuition fees policy.

I took them to town on that one (at the cost of immediate popularity!)
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#9
(Original post by kildare)
..... and fantastically oppurtunistic and hypocritical.
possibly yes.
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#10
Report 16 years ago
#10
(Original post by vienna95)
how does that work?
Well according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies .
0
kildare
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#11
Report 16 years ago
#11
(Original post by vienna95)
possibly yes.
I think I might print that one out
0
Jamie
Badges: 18
#12
Report 16 years ago
#12
(Original post by vienna95)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../ixportal.html

"By the time they graduate in 2010, Toby can expect to owe not far short of £30,000 - a debt that will hang over him throughout his twenties and perhaps even thirties. Bert, on the other hand, qualifies for all the extra help promised in Mr Clarke's Bill - an annual grant of £1,500, a bursary of £300 and a remission of the first £1,200 of the tuition fee.

This means that, after three years at Oxford, he can expect to owe no more than £18,000 - quite bad enough, but nothing like the financial and psychological burden that Toby will have to bear at the outset of his career.

The reason for this injustice has nothing to do with any difference between the financial circumstances of Toby and Bert, which are identical. Both are penniless students, who will start their working lives on the same square of the board, with the same advantage of an Oxford degree. Nor has the inequality of their treatment anything to do with their academic ability. Indeed, it has nothing at all to do with either of them, but only with the relative wealth of their parents. Toby is to be stung for the full whack because his parents earn more than £32,000 a year. Bert will get the maximum relief because his mum earns less than £15,200."
The solution is to stop Darren, Gary, Tracey and Sharon who are doing a 3 year course in media studies at Scarborough University (minimum entry EE, average entry EE) from going to university.
(I'm fully against the drive to get everyone through university without taking mickey mouse courses into account)
J
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#13
(Original post by Bigcnee)

It made me laugh on our socieites fair, when the Tory society were bragging about the new tuition fees policy.

I took them to town on that one (at the cost of immediate popularity!)
oh really? how?
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#14
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#14
(Original post by foolfarian)
The solution is to stop Darren, Gary, Tracey and Sharon who are doing a 3 year course in media studies at Scarborough University (minimum entry EE, average entry EE) from going to university.
(I'm fully against the drive to get everyone through university without taking mickey mouse courses into account)
J
yep..it has to happen irrespective of the economic arguments..
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#15
Report 16 years ago
#15
(Original post by vienna95)
oh really? how?
By detailing to them how the plans to abolish tuition fees would benefit the richest households and hit the poorest. Further, meaning lower-income taxpayers would pay more of the cost of the nation's higher education, while fewer people from low income families would gain entry to university.
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#16
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#16
(Original post by Bigcnee)
Well according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies .
who say what exactly? that, no ****, capitalist society means some are better off than others?
0
llama boy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#17
Report 16 years ago
#17
who cares?

the middle classes aren't, and never have been, hard done by.

and as for....

Imagine two undergraduates - let's call them Toby Bourgeois and Albert Square - sharing rooms at Oxford three years hence.
eh? how long has it been since people at oxford had to share rooms?
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#18
(Original post by Bigcnee)
By detailing to them how the plans to abolish tuition fees would benefit the richest households and hit the poorest. Further, meaning lower-income taxpayers would pay more of the cost of the nation's higher education, while fewer people from low income families would gain entry to university.
im sorry? no tuition fees means you and I would have no cost burden..
where is the restriction? how do lower income tax payers on low tax bands pay more?
0
Vienna
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 16 years ago
#19
(Original post by llama boy)
who cares?

the middle classes aren't, and never have been, hard done by.
not a fan of history then?
0
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#20
Report 16 years ago
#20
(Original post by vienna95)
who say what exactly? that, no ****, capitalist society means some are better off than others?
The Fiscal Institute published (from a Conservative perspective, a rather
embarrassing) report detailing the research.

A capitalist society means that some will be richer than others.
Well all have the right to an education.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Do you get study leave?

Yes- I like it (2)
28.57%
Yes- I don't like it (1)
14.29%
No- I want it (3)
42.86%
No- I don't want it (1)
14.29%

Watched Threads

View All