Should student maintanence loans be judged bases on your parent's income

We clearly are not going to be able to agree on this as we have very different views on the purpose of education

That's true, I think if they based it on our income though, we'd get more money as many young people don't have jobs etc. That's why they have to base it on parents/carers income, to make it fair (to an extent) for people.

Aye. Thanks for the debate, I enjoyed it greatly.

Obviously student's usually don't earn anything. Every student should at least be given enough money to live on, everything else, such as grants based on merit and parental income should come after that.

the governments idea to scrap EMA and raise the fees from 3k to 9k is quite ridiculous. seriously I know I would have benefited if I had EMA given to me now. Also I have to earn a lot after graduation to pay off my loan.

My opinion to the title question is "no, everyone should get grants which cover all reasonable accommodation and living costs and tuition fees should be zero."

Working on the basis that EVERYONE who deserves to, and has the ability to, study at a higher education institute should be able to do so regardless of how wealthy or generous their parents are.
Unrelated rant:

Finally some sense! Not all degrees are equal, why should someone studying a wishy washy degree with poor job prospects receive the same, or more funding than someone who's worked there arse off and is studying a degree which would be far more useful to society. It's this sort of nonsense culture of "oh I want the uni experience" that drives me up the wall.

the governments idea to scrap EMA and raise the fees from 3k to 9k is quite ridiculous. seriously I know I would have benefited if I had EMA given to me now. Also I have to earn a lot after graduation to pay off my loan.

One of the more ridiculous situations I heard was when a friend of mine, a mature student, was asked how much his partner earns by student finance, in aid of ascertaining the amount of support he should get. That's just ridiculous. Expecting his girlfriend to subsidise his education?

It's not so much the degree subject that annoys me - every subject has value to society in some way. It's the attitude of some of the people who study them that I find objectionable.
I think some degrees should be replaced by vocational equivalents, kind of like it used to be with polys. I can't imagine a degree in say, photography, is as academically rigorous as maths, history or politics. But that doesn't mean that people shouldn't study it at a high level and become really good photographers. I just think that a distinction should be made between vocational and academic qualifications.

A lot of people scoff at subjects like sociology as being non-subjects, but (for example) sociology researchers do come up with some pretty interesting and relevant findings.

What if you lived with housemates? People you're not in any kind of relationship with, just people you share a house with for financial reasons. I suppose their income would be taken into account.

Dear The Student Room,

I'd like to ask your thoughts on something which greatly frustrates me, why is your maintenance loan/grant based on your parental income? Once you're 18, you're a man/woman grown, independent of your parents. You can apply for mortgages on your own, purchase alcohol, join the army without parental permission etc etc. So why is it that your financial status regarding student loan and grant depends on your parents? If you're 25 and apply for a mortgage on a house, they won't ask how much your parents earn. The same should be true for when you're 18.

As of now student's who's parents earn over around 43 thousand pounds are only eligible for a maintenance loan of £3575 when studying outside of London, this isn't enough to cover the cost of accommodation, never mind other costs associated with university, including extortionately priced textbooks and general maintenance. This isn't a problem for the mega rich and the molly coddled, but it is a problem for the squeezed middle. Why should they be expected to bank roll there children's university experience? When other students receive far more than needed from the state. A significant proportion of graduates will go on to earn over the £43000 pound threshold, how many of you would like to fund your children through university because they simply aren't given enough resources for there education.

I'd like equality for all, every student who will study at the age of 18 or above should be judged based on there own merit, not there parent's income.

No. Why should someone from low-income family get more support from the taxpayer (people like my parents) when I get the bare minimum - with my parents not able to help out because they have 3 other kids and a mortgage and, you know, their own lives.

The difference is, being in London I can expect around 5k/year for my maintenance loan. However, someone who's parents earn 40k can get 7.5k in loans + a 550 grant. How is that fair? The government are basically saying then, that my parents should be making a 3k contribution to my studies either in direct capital contribution or through provision of food etc. That's *******s; if I told my Dad that he'll be subsidising me for 3k/year I'll be laughed me out the room.

I'm not crying because I want government handouts, quite the opposite, I have worked hard and saved and will get a part time job and can live comfortably but I don't see why other's should get handouts at the tax payers expense (especially if they're doing mickey mouse courses).

By what constraints do you believe that students should be judged by their own merit under?

totally agree with OP, there really needs to be a more level field to help out the middle earners.
Also here's my situation:
my mum is classed as a high earner and my dad doesn't work as he stays home to care for my handicapped brother. But my household is still classed as high earning. My parents can't afford to give me any money for uni as they have to pay for my brother to go to special school and for his care so I have to dip into my inheritance which will surely be gone when I finish uni, if it lasts that long.

Whereas, my friend is from a single parent household and her mum is a benefits fraud (but unreported). She still gets the max grants, loans and fee wavers from the govt. despite the fact that her mum actually has more expendable money than my parents as she has a large inheritance and receives more benefits than she should.

To say i'm bitter is an understatement