Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CyclopsRock)
    I don't understand how people can support a graduate tax but not just an uncapping and the same loans system as now. The worst that'll happen with an uncapping is that someone will end up paying back the loan for the rest of their life, but that's exactly what a graduate tax is anyway. It's not like SLC hound you for the cash like Russian loan sharks. It's just with an uncapping, you won't pay more than you've received.

    It's worth noting that those paying a greater ammount were there a graduate tax - ie, those with well paying jobs - are those who already pay more income tax.
    Exactly. Graduate tax is a loan that you can never pay off
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NickB91)
    It's all about Lord Browne wanting to reduce the amount the Treasury (therefore the government) is subsidising the higher education system. If fees went up to £10,000 a year it would effectively privatise universities overnight.
    Absolute rubbish.

    The only solution seems to be a graduate tax
    You want to create a system which individuals can avoid even more? So what about foreign students? What about EU students? What about home students who get the degree then sod off?

    Sorry, but the arguments against a graduate tax far far far far far far far far far far far far far ... [Some far's later] outweigh the benefits.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If the government didnt subsidise so many people taking mickey mouse degrees, there would be more money to reduce the amount serious degree students would have to spend.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by future_hopeful_uk)
    If the government didnt subsidise so many people taking mickey mouse degrees,
    And I ask again on this thread, 'as definded how?'.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    And I ask again on this thread, 'as definded how?'.
    The only definition seems to be that the media can make fun out of the degree. Like Golf Course studies, which sounds ridiculous and can be easily ridiculed. Yet the graduates on that course are often head-hunted by Dubi within their second year; they are some of the most sort after graduates in the world market. Or media studies and Football studies; if such wide industries which generate billions in the UK and untold trillions across the world do not warrant their own fields of study at a higher level, then what subjects do?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mephistophilus)
    The only definition seems to be that the media can make fun out of the degree. Like Golf Course studies, which sounds ridiculous and can be easily ridiculed. Yet the graduates on that course are often head-hunted by Dubi within their second year; they are some of the most sort after graduates in the world market. Or media studies and Football studies; if such wide industries which generate billions in the UK and untold trillions across the world do not warrant their own fields of study at a higher level, then what subjects do?
    Quite.

    Not that I think there are courses without merit, but having a definition of how to distingish them is near on impossible.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mephistophilus)
    The only definition seems to be that the media can make fun out of the degree. Like Golf Course studies, which sounds ridiculous and can be easily ridiculed. Yet the graduates on that course are often head-hunted by Dubi within their second year; they are some of the most sort after graduates in the world market. Or media studies and Football studies; if such wide industries which generate billions in the UK and untold trillions across the world do not warrant their own fields of study at a higher level, then what subjects do?
    I'd quite like to see a breakdown of just how many graduates from these courses actually get head-hunted or get these top jobs we keep hearing about in the golf industry, and if there's any academic study(which is what university is supposed to be for) or research that can be done in the field.
    Maths, Economics, Medicine are subjects that do require academic rigour, there is a lot of further research possible in these areas, they lead to jobs and skills not limited to a single sector, so they are justified as a university degree. The question to ask is are subjects like "football studies" academic subjects that need 3 years of university or vocations that only require practical training?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ish90an)
    I'd quite like to see a breakdown of just how many graduates from these courses actually get head-hunted or get these top jobs we keep hearing about in the golf industry, and if there's any academic study(which is what university is supposed to be for) or research that can be done in the field.
    Maths, Economics, Medicine are subjects that do require academic rigour, there is a lot of further research possible in these areas, they lead to jobs and skills not limited to a single sector, so they are justified as a university degree. The question to ask is are subjects like "football studies" academic subjects that need 3 years of university or vocations that only require practical training?
    So languages are out then? French fails under those criteria pretty badly...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mephistophilus)
    The only definition seems to be that the media can make fun out of the degree. Like Golf Course studies, which sounds ridiculous and can be easily ridiculed. Yet the graduates on that course are often head-hunted by Dubi within their second year; they are some of the most sort after graduates in the world market. Or media studies and Football studies; if such wide industries which generate billions in the UK and untold trillions across the world do not warrant their own fields of study at a higher level, then what subjects do?
    You seem to confuse creating an academic qualification with successful industries......
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    Absolute rubbish.



    You want to create a system which individuals can avoid even more? So what about foreign students? What about EU students? What about home students who get the degree then sod off?

    Sorry, but the arguments against a graduate tax far far far far far far far far far far far far far ... [Some far's later] outweigh the benefits.
    How is it rubbish? Of course the universities would end up being privatised, they would not be financially backed by the government any longer. They might not be privately owned by they will be privately run.

    And I am on the fence about a graduate tax. The government hasn't released enough information for me to decide which option is better. Graduate tax would be better if the student didn't pay exceedingly more over their lifetime as they would over their course. With regards to EU and foreign students, I'm sure there will be a procedure where they sign up to pay the tax or something along those lines. However, if fees go up to £10,000 a year, that could result in medics (for example) being £60,000-£70,000 in debt purely with fees (not accommodation or living costs). Perhaps this is a poor example as they would earn enough to negate the impact of the debt, but a simple three year course would cost £30,000 minimum which the average British family is unlikely to be able to afford or want to pay at all. There would have to be a grant system set up by the universities separately from the government's own ones, otherwise there will be roughly a 10% drop in attendance and a very unfavourable opinion towards universities for decades.

    The only benefit I can see of raising the fees to £10,000 in the long run is that the universities might end up with more money, therefore they could afford to lower the fees. However, raising the fees edges the progression dangerously close to a spiral where the costs keep mounting.

    Personally, assuming the graduate tax is reasonable with regards to which degree you take, income, cost of living and so on, I would rather pay a lifetime tax - and then be able to work my life around it like any other tax - then be a minimum of £30,000 in debt before I have any income to speak of.

    Furthermore, on average graduates earn £100,000 over their lifetime than non-graduates. If one is then shelling out a minimum of £30,000, so more likely £50,000 including living and accommodation costs, then it's rather questionable whether one should go to university at all.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NickB91)
    How is it rubbish? Of course the universities would end up being privatised, they would not be financially backed by the government any longer. They might not be privately owned by they will be privately run.
    Don't be silly -_-
    The ownership of Universities and how they are managed will probably not change, just how they are funded. How you manage to conclude that they are being privatised is nonsensical.

    However, if fees go up to £10,000 a year, that could result in medics (for example) being £60,000-£70,000 in debt purely with fees (not accommodation or living costs).
    There was me thinking medical students get support from the NHS.

    Perhaps this is a poor example as they would earn enough to negate the impact of the debt, but a simple three year course would cost £30,000 minimum which the average British family is unlikely to be able to afford or want to pay at all.
    £30,000 and you have around 20 or 30 years to pay it off and if you can't, it's written off. Hardly going to break the bank.

    There would have to be a grant system set up by the universities separately from the government's own ones, otherwise there will be roughly a 10% drop in attendance and a very unfavourable opinion towards universities for decades.
    10% drop in attendance? What, random people just "drop into" lectures? If people think its a clever solution to drop out, they obviously think a £10,000 debt is a great way to leave with nothing.... You can drop out, but you will still have that debt regardless.

    The only benefit I can see of raising the fees to £10,000 in the long run is that the universities might end up with more money, therefore they could afford to lower the fees. However, raising the fees edges the progression dangerously close to a spiral where the costs keep mounting.
    No, you don't raise more money and thus lower fees... You raise fees to fund Universities... There will be no lowering of fees.

    Personally, assuming the graduate tax is reasonable with regards to which degree you take, income, cost of living and so on, I would rather pay a lifetime tax - and then be able to work my life around it like any other tax - then be a minimum of £30,000 in debt before I have any income to speak of.
    You want to pay it now, but in the future, I doubt you will.

    Furthermore, on average graduates earn £100,000 over their lifetime than non-graduates. If one is then shelling out a minimum of £30,000, so more likely £50,000 including living and accommodation costs, then it's rather questionable whether one should go to university at all.
    If people don't consider University an investment, they shouldn't bother attending.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    There was me thinking medical students get support from the NHS.
    Only in year 5+ and the bursary does not make up for the loss of student loan so most have to take out a commercial loan.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by crazylemon)
    Only in year 5+ and the bursary does not make up for the loss of student loan so most have to take out a commercial loan.
    Ahh so there is support, but its not great.

    Anyway, as I said before, tuition fees should be raised if there are proper channels for supporting students financially.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    Ahh so there is support, but its not great.

    Anyway, as I said before, tuition fees should be raised if there are proper channels for supporting students financially.
    It doesn't matter wrt fees though as 5th year NHS pays for so max if 10k is 40k debt from that so still doable.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by future_hopeful_uk)
    You seem to confuse creating an academic qualification with successful industries......
    The same could be said of architecture, medicine and chemistry...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    £30,000 and you have around 20 or 30 years to pay it off and if you can't, it's written off. Hardly going to break the bank.
    If that is the case then sign me up right now! But it won't be, the £30,000 will generate interest, albeit a low interest, therefore the sum will be larger. Accumulating debt at such a young age isn't a good idea.

    10% drop in attendance? What, random people just "drop into" lectures? If people think its a clever solution to drop out, they obviously think a £10,000 debt is a great way to leave with nothing.... You can drop out, but you will still have that debt regardless.
    I didn't mean dropping out, I mean not going to university in the first place.

    If people don't consider University an investment, they shouldn't bother attending.
    That's a fair point. I am going to university starting in 2011, hopefully all this business will have sorted itself out. Ideally, I don't want to be paying more than the current £3,290/y but I am sceptical as to whether the government will keep that sum. Of course it's the Labour government's fault that we're in this dilemma (ignoring governmental needs), fees didn't exist pre-1997.

    As I said before I'm on the fence about all this. Repaying the loan would be a sum out of my income per month as would a graduate tax. Fees would be a larger sum taken out of my income but over a shorter period of time, whereas the tax would be a smaller amount but over a longer period of time (presumably). When the government release more details then I shall conclude my opinion.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NickB91)
    If that is the case then sign me up right now! But it won't be, the £30,000 will generate interest, albeit a low interest, therefore the sum will be larger. Accumulating debt at such a young age isn't a good idea.
    Not entirely true. Although one should avoid debt, sometimes accumulating debt is a good idea; such as a mortgage, loan for a car, loan for machinery for a business, a loan to cover your tuition fees etc

    The loan to cover your tuition is charged at a very concessionary rate and represents a brilliant investment.

    I didn't mean dropping out, I mean not going to university in the first place.
    Oh well. If they don't consider it an investment they shouldn't go.
    As I said before I'm on the fence about all this. Repaying the loan would be a sum out of my income per month as would a graduate tax. Fees would be a larger sum taken out of my income but over a shorter period of time, whereas the tax would be a smaller amount but over a longer period of time (presumably). When the government release more details then I shall conclude my opinion.
    A tuition loan is quite far; in my opinion. You pay for your education. A graduate tax means other people pay for your education in regards to University.

    Why should you keep taxing graduates who have paid off their education? People won't stay in the UK, its that simple.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    The same could be said of architecture, medicine and chemistry...
    i dont agree with architecture being a degree, but the other two are VERY academic.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by future_hopeful_uk)
    i dont agree with architecture being a degree, but the other two are VERY academic.
    Medicine is is applied and vocational much more so than it is academic.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Medicine is is applied and vocational much more so than it is academic.
    Medicine is applied? To what? How can this be true :p:
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

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.