If you're angry about 9k fees blame the unis not the government

Everyone having to pay the same amount is just being fair. If degrees cost different amounts then you are basically saying that some degrees are worth more than others. That actual figure of the tuition fee doesn't really matter as you probably wont be paying it off anyway.

At Sixth form school a student gets 4k funding per pupil vs the 9.25k at uni. And this is with usually more hours than at sixth from.

What magical thing happens when someone turns 18 that they are that much more expensive to teach?

It's not like the class sizes are smaller. Lectures will tend to be much bigger than the average sixth form class.

Where does the money go? On self interested mental masturbation. Academics have to publish in order to get promoted so they have to spend large amounts of time doing 'research'. Some of this research is great; much of it a waste of time. To be honest I don't really care, what bothers me is that this is paid for by students.

Now not all departments are equal here there are some where expensive loans and research is legitimate such as the sciences but outside of that there's no reason why loans shouldn't be more than 5-6k a year.

I mean to read English at Wolverhampton is 9.25k a year. It's madness that they can seem to get away with this. It all seems based on some pride. Well if we don't charge a wedge and publish a load of journals no one will ever read students wont come to us...

The coalition govt massively cut the teaching grant by some 2/3rd, absolute BS that we should blame unis and not the govt

Also Unis get alot more than 9.25k per head, that is just the part students pay.

Unis also make make money off post grad students and other private sector work which they spend on students.

You seriously know nothing about education funding

While wages should increase in a similar way to inflation, in reality, for most people they don't, which is why the 6.9% should be considered as 6.9%.

This whole concept of 'fairness' doesn't take into account the earning potential of different degrees. The marketplace has already decided some degrees are worth more than others.
And you could be paying it back if it was 5k per year. But no at over 9k you probably wont.

It's decided my the marketplace as in it is graduates with certain skills that companies need. Also it's quite cynical just to think of uni as a means to get a job. It's a place to learn and that costs money which has to be fronted by someone. Also you don't actually know unis finances.

I dont think of it as a means to an end at all. As you can see from all my posts on this thread I'm arguing for courses like humanities / arts to be cheaper. I want more people to chose what they want to learn and not have to base the decision on money. That is the reason why I am so angry. It's the universities which are a major factor in preventing this through uneccessary high fees

It's not about some degrees 'being worth more ethan others' it's simply the case some are more expnsive to run. Those students should pay higher fees for it. But I I think that's fair as those courses tend to have a high earning potential in the market place.

The cycnical view putting them all at the same price exhorberant price which forces student to think of it as a means to an end.

There's a lot I don't know. It's quite hard to get specific figures. But my opening question has not been answered by most people on here: why does it cost 4k to educate a 17 year old and 9.25k (Or even a lot more as you suggest) to do the same for a 18 year old?

Universities are every bit as complicit in the outragous cost of higher education.

Then there's the other end of the spectrum where you discourage people from studying stem degrees as they don't feel like they can justify paying the higher fees.

You can't compare the two.

Why?