Minorities should go to University for FREE

Might have to look into this then. They are normally about 50ish but every quarter if we earn a bonus then the loan repayment goes up for that month.

How to work out your monthly repayment amount


For example, if you were earning £30,000 per year:

I finished a quite a few years ago so the threshold for starting to pay back might be lower?

Prior to 2012 starters were governed by:


The earnings threshold is:

You pay 9% of your income over the threshold.

For example, if you are paid monthly and earn £1,750 before tax per month you would repay 9% of the difference between what you earn and what the threshold is:
£1,750 - £1,481 = £269

9% of £269 = £24

So your student loan repayment would be £24 a month.

Under 18k, you'll be paying off pretty much zero, or should.

If you're from a minority / disadvantaged background you shouldn't have to pay anything, you certainly shouldn't have to accumulate a debt with interest. Instead, to level the playing field and ensure those who are talented get into university, we should be providing financial incentives to struggling students who defy the cruel and systematic class prejudice which prevents them from reaching their potential. Private school students, and indeed anyone who can afford to pay, should foot the bill entirely, as education is a public good it should be available to the public. This will lead to a decrease in 'white man syndrome', where white men dominate the institutions in our society and lack empathy for the poorest and most disadvantaged.

What tax is advertised as free money which you only pay back when you earn over a certain amount? That sounds too good to be true. Until you look at the conditions,

a) They can change the TOC at any time, meaning in the future they could demand it up front if they wanted to.
b) They charge interest on it.
c) Rich people won't use student loans anyway.

So who is really paying?

If you're from a minority / disadvantaged background you shouldn't have to pay anything, you certainly shouldn't have to accumulate a debt with interest. Instead, to level the playing field and ensure those who are talented get into university, we should be providing financial incentives to struggling students who defy the cruel and systematic class prejudice which prevents them from reaching their potential. Private school students, and indeed anyone who can afford to pay, should foot the bill entirely, as education is a public good it should be available to the public. This will lead to a decrease in 'white man syndrome', where white men dominate the institutions in our society and lack empathy for the poorest and most disadvantaged.

Well quite, because as we all know, it is literally impossible for a white man to feel empathy for the poor and disadvantaged. Non-whites on the other hand are an angelic class of empaths who are totally impervious to the lusts and temptations of power, greed and corruption. Which explains why third world countries are such spectacularly well run societies.

If you're from a minority / disadvantaged background you shouldn't have to pay anything, you certainly shouldn't have to accumulate a debt with interest. Instead, to level the playing field and ensure those who are talented get into university, we should be providing financial incentives to struggling students who defy the cruel and systematic class prejudice which prevents them from reaching their potential. Private school students, and indeed anyone who can afford to pay, should foot the bill entirely, as education is a public good it should be available to the public. This will lead to a decrease in 'white man syndrome', where white men dominate the institutions in our society and lack empathy for the poorest and most disadvantaged.

There is no case to be made. Everyone in the system is treated equally as it is, with their financial background and various other important factors (i.e. are they a looked after child, etc.) taken into account to assess their entitlement. People from minorities should not be positively discriminated against just because they are from a minority, this is inequality by definition and there is no qualifying factor to increase their right to more entitlement over someone else.

I don't feel the need to disprove your proposition as in the grand scheme of things it's your opinion and you're entitled to it. However, bringing logic into question and an understanding of how the system works, your logic is flawed and it makes absolutely no sense to get 'something for nothing' because someone belongs to a minority. If someone is more financially challenged, fine, that makes sense. Otherwise, no - it doesn't.