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

Why not cut university places instead of raising fees? Watch

    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Am I the only one who thinks this is a good idea? I believe in free or very cheap university education for all those, of sufficient intelligence, who wish to do a degree which will benefit them, and, indirectly, society. But I don't think the taxpayer should foot the bill for thousands of non-degrees which do little to improve people's opportunities and have no tangible benefit for society. Before Labour last came to power, there were few problems with university funding, because not so many people went to uni. The target of sending 50% of people to university is ridiculous and unnecessary. Degree level education should be something for those who really need it for their vocation, or are studying something which will have a definite benefit to them and society.

    We should be open minded about new universities and degrees, and be prepared to fund those which are very rigerous and respectable, but many useless degrees at bad institutions should not be funded by the taxpayer. Those attending them would be better off with a job, and some on task training, than with £15k of debt. Yet it seems this idea has become taboo nowadays, and we must all subscribe to the idea that 50% of people are bright and motivated enough to merit a degree level education at the taxpayer's expense.

    Thoughts? Please try to keep it to decent arguments, back up your points etc.
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Oh what the hey, just found out someone else did an identical thread further down the page. Nvm, let's have another one :P

    TBF this one is slightly different. I'm not proposing we fund solely science and maths.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I think languages are important too.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by michael321)
    Am I the only one who thinks this is a good idea? I believe in free or very cheap university education for all those, of sufficient intelligence, who wish to do a degree which will benefit them, and, indirectly, society. But I don't think the taxpayer should foot the bill for thousands of non-degrees which do little to improve people's opportunities and have no tangible benefit for society. Before Labour last came to power, there were few problems with university funding, because not so many people went to uni. The target of sending 50% of people to university is ridiculous and unnecessary. Degree level education should be something for those who really need it for their vocation, or are studying something which will have a definite benefit to them and society.

    We should be open minded about new universities and degrees, and be prepared to fund those which are very rigerous and respectable, but many useless degrees at bad institutions should not be funded by the taxpayer. Those attending them would be better off with a job, and some on task training, than with £15k of debt. Yet it seems this idea has become taboo nowadays, and we must all subscribe to the idea that 50% of people are bright and motivated enough to merit a degree level education at the taxpayer's expense.

    Thoughts? Please try to keep it to decent arguments, back up your points etc.
    Basic Economics really.
    The idea is to increase Unviersity places, to increase our skill based economy, to hence further grow our economy further, we are far behind other countries in the terms of graduates it produces.
    You are saying reduce that skill base, resulting in slower growth of the economy.
    • PS Helper
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Either way, the public will still complain. If it isn't "I simply refuse to pay for my own education, even though it will benefit me more (despite people arguing it will help society, who will benefit the largest from your higher income? You, so therefore you should pay the bulk because I just read an article on the guardian website, where they have worked out that it costs the taxpayer on average £400 a year to educate university students)", it's that they argue that the only jobs are for graduates so they must go to uni because a cut in places will hamper their future quality of life. It is just one vicious circle that the government simply can't escape from unless... a bit controversial... unless the universities follow the American example and go private. They then remove themselves from state control and the executive will have no responsibility over future university decisions.
    • Offline

      13
      (Original post by michael321)
      Am I the only one who thinks this is a good idea? I believe in free or very cheap university education for all those, of sufficient intelligence, who wish to do a degree which will benefit them, and, indirectly, society. But I don't think the taxpayer should foot the bill for thousands of non-degrees which do little to improve people's opportunities and have no tangible benefit for society. Before Labour last came to power, there were few problems with university funding, because not so many people went to uni. The target of sending 50% of people to university is ridiculous and unnecessary. Degree level education should be something for those who really need it for their vocation, or are studying something which will have a definite benefit to them and society.

      We should be open minded about new universities and degrees, and be prepared to fund those which are very rigerous and respectable, but many useless degrees at bad institutions should not be funded by the taxpayer. Those attending them would be better off with a job, and some on task training, than with £15k of debt. Yet it seems this idea has become taboo nowadays, and we must all subscribe to the idea that 50% of people are bright and motivated enough to merit a degree level education at the taxpayer's expense.

      Thoughts? Please try to keep it to decent arguments, back up your points etc.
      Because it would make the Tories be perceived as "elitist". With these reforms they are seen as "protecting the rich". :rolleyes:

      They can't win either way tbf.
      • Offline

        13
        (Original post by SPMS)
        Basic Economics really.
        The idea is to increase Unviersity places, to increase our skill based economy, to hence further grow our economy further, we are far behind other countries in the terms of graduates it produces.
        You are saying reduce that skill base, resulting in slower growth of the economy.
        Wouldn't you argue that some skills are more useful than others? Is it really necessary to have a surplus of Media graduates, in comparison to graduates from STEM courses that are so highly needed in order for Britain to maintain technological advancements in scientific research and development?
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        If someone wants to do a degree for the sheer interest.. why shouldn't they?
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        Why not sell the westminster and go and buy a big mac with the money.
        • PS Helper
        • Thread Starter
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by SPMS)
        Basic Economics really.
        The idea is to increase Unviersity places, to increase our skill based economy, to hence further grow our economy further, we are far behind other countries in the terms of graduates it produces.
        You are saying reduce that skill base, resulting in slower growth of the economy.
        But I'm arguing that a degree in Golf Management is total wastage of resources. It will not reduce our skill base - someone would be better learning "Golf Management" on the job - and it will save the taxpayer thousands of pounds, plus the degree recipient thousands of pounds in debt for little to no gain.

        My argument is that it won't reduce the skills base, because these degrees offer little value.
        • PS Helper
        • Thread Starter
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by chlobofro)
        If someone wants to do a degree for the sheer interest.. why shouldn't they?
        Well it depends whether or not you are for big government. Personally I'm not, the government should help increase equality, provide essential services, and do things that are economically beneficial to society, but not a huge amount else. I don't see why the government should spend tax money paying for someone to do a useless degree when that money could be spend on better things or not taxed at all. The government's job is not to throw around tax money so people can get drunk for three years and do something they find interesting.
        • PS Helper
        • Thread Starter
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by yahyahyahs)
        X
        Well clearly it's the mentality that needs to change, and that needs to come from the top (as it has done in previous years - e.g. Labour with its "50% in HE" target. Society benefits hugely from people gaining a genuine, quality education at university, not just the person who personally benefits.
        • PS Helper
        • Thread Starter
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by chronic_fatigue)
        I think languages are important too.
        I agree.
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by michael321)
        Well it depends whether or not you are for big government. Personally I'm not, the government should help increase equality, provide essential services, and do things that are economically beneficial to society, but not a huge amount else. I don't see why the government should spend tax money paying for someone to do a useless degree when that money could be spend on better things or not taxed at all. The government's job is not to throw around tax money so people can get drunk for three years and do something they find interesting.
        Cutting University places won't be economically beneficial. Less people are going to get that level of education meaning less people will be trained for the different niches in the job market. I don't care about fees going up personally. However, I disagree on cutting places and cutting "useless" degrees. Every degree is useful.
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by chlobofro)
        If someone wants to do a degree for the sheer interest.. why shouldn't they?
        That's fair enough if they were paying for it by themselves, but as it is, it's subsidised by the taxpayer. And the average taxpayer shouldn't have to pay for someone to go to university if the only benefit to anyone is that the student finds it interesting.
        Offline

        1
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by chlobofro)
        If someone wants to do a degree for the sheer interest.. why shouldn't they?
        People don't pay taxes to fund your 'interests'.
        • PS Helper
        • Thread Starter
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by chlobofro)
        Cutting University places won't be economically beneficial. Less people are going to get that level of education meaning less people will be trained for the different niches in the job market. I don't care about fees going up personally. However, I disagree on cutting places and cutting "useless" degrees. Every degree is useful.
        Not every degree is useful enough to justify a maximum outlay to the taxpayer of tens of thousands of pounds. The problem is that currently there's the mentality that no-one can do anything w/o a degree. Not every vocation needs a degree, most are much better served with on the job apprenticeships. A degree in "metalworking" which leaves the taxpayer and student over £20k out of pocket is much worse than a paid apprenticeship with a metalworking company.
        Offline

        1
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by im so academic)
        Wouldn't you argue that some skills are more useful than others? Is it really necessary to have a surplus of Media graduates, in comparison to graduates from STEM courses that are so highly needed in order for Britain to maintain technological advancements in scientific research and development?
        Of course more are useful than others. I see what you are saying but as an economy a media graduate is still considered more 'skilled' than that of someone who hasn't gone to university. This is where it gets subjective however, I am just stating one of the ideas behind the increased university fees.

        Personally, I don't have a problem with the increased university fees and the reasoning that they have, in fact I think it is very sound economically but like you this is what I have an issue with the type of degree and how skilled it makes you. Obviously very subjective, but certainly we need to encourage the core degrees of sciences etc. however I wouldn't completely get rid of the likes of media degrees (entertainment for us one of our major exports for the UK) but we need to vastly reduce the amount of places that are on offer. I would explain the reasons for the reducing of these degrees but you can get a very good idea, as I believe you have similar ideas to my own.
        Offline

        13
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by michael321)
        Not every degree is useful enough to justify a maximum outlay to the taxpayer of tens of thousands of pounds. The problem is that currently there's the mentality that no-one can do anything w/o a degree. Not every vocation needs a degree, most are much better served with on the job apprenticeships. A degree in "metalworking" which leaves the taxpayer and student over £20k out of pocket is much worse than a paid apprenticeship with a metalworking company.
        Where can you do these metalworking degrees then?
        • PS Helper
        • Thread Starter
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by The_Great_One)
        Why not sell the westminster and go and buy a big mac with the money.
        Perhaps I should have made the title clearer, but if you didn't read the OP, I was advocating cutting degrees which are not socially/economically beneficial, not just in general.
       
       
       
    • 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.

    • Poll
      Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
      Useful resources

      Groups associated with this forum:

      View associated groups
    • 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.

    • 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

      Quick reply
      Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.