Tony Blair is pushing it now!!!!! Watch

This discussion is closed.
Bigcnee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#101
Report 16 years ago
#101
(Original post by kildare)
These costs are irrespective of top up fees though?
Unfortunately, yes.
0
Kurdt Morello
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#102
Report 16 years ago
#102
(Original post by kildare)
-Precendent can have credibility if you suggest that it is perhaps more likely that change will be made because of past actions, but to suggest that it definitly WILL happen because of it is as I've said before pure speculation.
Justified speculation - and no i disagree with "if you suggest that it is perhaps more likely that change will be made because of past actions" because precedent is more frequently used as a yard-stick by which to judge the future actions rather than as u have put it.
0
Kurdt Morello
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#103
Report 16 years ago
#103
(Original post by kildare)
As well as this you still only lose 9% (over 15,000) of your salary, surely a small sacrifice to make if you really do love the law?
No because u assume that this promise of investment will be delivered - how do u know it isnt going to be used to cover a big hole in the government expense account - promises which are so well worked out are rarely delivered
0
kildare
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#104
Report 16 years ago
#104
(Original post by Kurdt Morello)
No because u assume that this promise of investment will be delivered - how do u know it isnt going to be used to cover a big hole in the government expense account - promises which are so well worked out are rarely delivered
I don't assume the promis will be delivered, unlike you I'm not assuming anything. I'm just dealing with the facts as they stand and the best (admittedly theoretical) solution. I don't think it's rational to base an arguement on anything else.
0
kildare
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#105
Report 16 years ago
#105
(Original post by Bigcnee)
Unfortunately, yes.
So why the opposition to top up fees?
0
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#106
Report 16 years ago
#106
(Original post by kildare)
Barristers are amongst the highest earners in the country ???
Well, those fortunate enough to find a pupillage and who don't go bancrupt during it or the following two or three very lean years.......maybe.

But, a mere call to the bar isn't reason enough to crack open the Don Perignon. The massive rate of failure in the profession is one reason that are many more "non-practicing" barristers than practicing ones and many more solicitors than barristers.
0
happysunshine
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#107
Report 16 years ago
#107
(Original post by Howard)
Well, those fortunate enough to find a pupillage
With a law degree from a top 10 university, you'll hardly be wiping tables in McDonalds for a living. Sure it may be hard to get in to law, but there are many fantastic careers you can get in to with a good law degree.
0
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#108
Report 16 years ago
#108
(Original post by happysunshine)
With a law degree from a top 10 university, you'll hardly be wiping tables in McDonalds for a living. Sure it may be hard to get in to law, but there are many fantastic careers you can get in to with a good law degree.
True. But I was talking about the sucsess rate of barristers and not alternative careers you can pursue with a LLb.
0
happysunshine
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#109
Report 16 years ago
#109
(Original post by Howard)
True. But I was talking about the sucsess rate of barristers and not alternative careers you can pursue with a LLb.
Ah okay! I wasn't directly replying to your post, I just remembered someone complaining about lawyers being hard up and just found the nearest post with the word 'law' in it.
0
Elle
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#110
Report 16 years ago
#110
So a poor student goes to a top uni for law.. they will probably work part time and study at the same time while the richer student has the luxury of studying without time contraints or financial worries. Who will perform better and get the better job?

I know that you can pay the debt back only when you earn a certain amount.. but I believe (and research by the government backs me up on this) that if you come from a poor background.. you'll be discouraged to build up so much debt and therefore discouraged to go to uni or simple study without taking on a part time job.

I think that Blair has had his day and I hope that the row over Top-Up Fees will allow Brown to take his place in the near future.
0
kildare
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#111
Report 16 years ago
#111
(Original post by Howard)
Well, those fortunate enough to find a pupillage and who don't go bancrupt during it or the following two or three very lean years.......maybe.

But, a mere call to the bar isn't reason enough to crack open the Don Perignon. The massive rate of failure in the profession is one reason that are many more "non-practicing" barristers than practicing ones and many more solicitors than barristers.
I accept that, but any prospective barrister should be aware of this and be taking the choice to bear the risk themselves. No one forces them to take this chance.
0
kildare
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#112
Report 16 years ago
#112
(Original post by Elle)
So a poor student goes to a top uni for law.. they will probably work part time and study at the same time while the richer student has the luxury of studying without time contraints or financial worries. Who will perform better and get the better job?
.
This decision only has an effect on fees paid after you start full time employment and is based on a percentage of your salary so why is this point relevant?
0
PQ
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#113
Report 16 years ago
#113
In my experience the poorest families are more than well aquainted with debt and credit and know a good deal when they see it. However I've encountered an odd reluctance to debt of any sort in middle class families who've never needed to pay on tick.

The poorest students will have a marginally smaller debt (although it will be as good as identical if you consider the means tested £1000 component of the loan) however they'll have £1000 in grants (to be increased to £1500 shortly) + £1000 in means tested loan to live on while they're at university making working while studying less of a requirement.
0
kildare
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#114
Report 16 years ago
#114
(Original post by Elle)
I know that you can pay the debt back only when you earn a certain amount.. but I believe (and research by the government backs me up on this) that if you come from a poor background.. you'll be discouraged to build up so much debt and therefore discouraged to go to uni or simple study without taking on a part time job.
I can accept this point, however I still think it's based on a misconception and as such educating people as to the reality of the situation is the best course of action.
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#115
Report 16 years ago
#115
(Original post by Pencil Queen)
In my experience the poorest families are more than well aquainted with debt and credit and know a good deal when they see it. However I've encountered an odd reluctance to debt of any sort in middle class families who've never needed to pay on tick.

The poorest students will have a marginally smaller debt (although it will be as good as identical if you consider the means tested £1000 component of the loan) however they'll have £1000 in grants (to be increased to £1500 shortly) + £1000 in means tested loan to live on while they're at university making working while studying less of a requirement.
didnt you see the telegraph article link that vienna posted
0
ChemBOOM
Badges: 0
#116
Report 16 years ago
#116
Personally,
Blair tells us that they want more young adults going to uni. There wont be more people going, just more spread out over the different classes of people.

Without offending anyone, I think there will be real slackers taking up places on courses because they can get on them for free rather than working.

*-*
0
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#117
Report 16 years ago
#117
(Original post by kildare)
I accept that, but any prospective barrister should be aware of this and be taking the choice to bear the risk themselves. No one forces them to take this chance.
For this reason I postponed doing the BVC. I'll do it later in life when I can afford the luxury. Everything comes to he (or she) that waits!
0
JSM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#118
Report 16 years ago
#118
(Original post by ChemBOOM)
Personally,
Blair tells us that they want more young adults going to uni. There wont be more people going, just more spread out over the different classes of people.

Without offending anyone, I think there will be real slackers taking up places on courses because they can get on them for free rather than working.

*-*
there will be more people going, i understand why they are trying to cram people into higher education as we have lost a phenomenal amount of unskilled labouring jobs and most first world countries know should aim for skilled labour providing services as their niche. However, there are some people who are unsuited but are being steamrollered into further education.
0
Howard
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#119
Report 16 years ago
#119
(Original post by Pencil Queen)
In my experience the poorest families are more than well aquainted with debt and credit and know a good deal when they see it. However I've encountered an odd reluctance to debt of any sort in middle class families who've never needed to pay on tick.

The poorest students will have a marginally smaller debt (although it will be as good as identical if you consider the means tested £1000 component of the loan) however they'll have £1000 in grants (to be increased to £1500 shortly) + £1000 in means tested loan to live on while they're at university making working while studying less of a requirement.
Nothing wrong with debt provided it's the right sort.
0
PQ
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#120
Report 16 years ago
#120
(Original post by JSM)
didnt you see the telegraph article link that vienna posted
Yes - and I'm afraid it's inaccurate.

lets compare 2 students one not entitled to any help, one entitled to all of it (and for simplicities sake lets call them Rich and Poor).

Rich

£3000 fees * 3 yrs = £9000
£3000 loans * 3 yrs = £9000

Total debt £18000, income from loans while studying £3000pa.

Poor

£2000 fees * 3 yrs = £6000
£4000 loans * 3 yrs = £12000

Total debt £18000, income from loans while studying £4000pa + £1300pa in grant+bursary


The resultant debt will be the same - however the living costs funded by the state/loans will be much higher for a student from a low income family.
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

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (388)
67.24%
No (189)
32.76%

Watched Threads

View All