Students

lost_in_thought

DonDaddyD wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

The school I went to had roughly 10% of the students applying to Oxbridge every year. The percentage success rate was pretty damn low, but hey, if you don't apply you're never going to get in so why not give it a shot?

Out of curiousity did you go to a state or public school?

I know you went to boarding school, this I pressume was publicly funded. Was that the school you did your A-levels?

DDD, I reckon you're just fishing for me to say 'public school' so you can shout AHA and launch into another tirade about 'privileged people'.

But anyway...

I went here right the way through, and it was funded by my mother.

Sewinman

JonGinge wrote:

Sewinman, 7.5% interest. Blimey. Are those new rates for the new cap? Thought it was much lower than that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_lo ... rest_rates

The proposal is if you earn over £41k the interest rates are RPI plus 3% - in today's money that is 7.5%.

rick_chasey

lost_in_thought wrote:

I went here right the way through, and it was funded by my mother.

It's an expensive private school in Cambridge... More expensive than the Perse anyway...

jonginge

Sewinman wrote:

JonGinge wrote:

Sewinman, 7.5% interest. Blimey. Are those new rates for the new cap? Thought it was much lower than that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_lo ... rest_rates

The proposal is if you earn over £41k the interest rates are RPI plus 3% - in today's money that is 7.5%.

Ah, I see. Yoiks. Best to reduce the debt balance as fast as possible then...

DonDaddyD

lost_in_thought wrote:

DDD, I reckon you're just fishing for me to say 'public school' so you can shout AHA and launch into another tirade about 'privileged people'.

But anyway...

I went here right the way through, and it was funded by my mother.

In your ignorance you assume too much where you do not know enough.

Your background isn't my issue. No one's background is, nor should it be. But honestly, I can't be arsed.

It was just a question. Thank you for answering.

lost_in_thought

Rick Chasey wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

I went here right the way through, and it was funded by my mother.

It's an expensive private school in Cambridge... More expensive than the Perse anyway...

There's an old rivalry there, as I sense you may be aware! :twisted:

Sewinman

JonGinge wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

JonGinge wrote:

Sewinman, 7.5% interest. Blimey. Are those new rates for the new cap? Thought it was much lower than that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_lo ... rest_rates

The proposal is if you earn over £41k the interest rates are RPI plus 3% - in today's money that is 7.5%.

Ah, I see. Yoiks. Best to reduce the debt balance as fast as possible then...

Apparently you won't be allowed to.

DonDaddyD

JonGinge wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

JonGinge wrote:

Sewinman, 7.5% interest. Blimey. Are those new rates for the new cap? Thought it was much lower than that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_lo ... rest_rates

The proposal is if you earn over £41k the interest rates are RPI plus 3% - in today's money that is 7.5%.

Ah, I see. Yoiks. Best to reduce the debt balance as fast as possible then...

If you're talking about paying back your student loan then my understanding was that you don't get a choice of how much you pay back or how quickly. You can't pay more towards it for example. It's one rule for everyone.

They take the money out of your salary automatically.

jonginge

Sewinman wrote:

JonGinge wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

JonGinge wrote:

Sewinman, 7.5% interest. Blimey. Are those new rates for the new cap? Thought it was much lower than that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_lo ... rest_rates

The proposal is if you earn over £41k the interest rates are RPI plus 3% - in today's money that is 7.5%.

Ah, I see. Yoiks. Best to reduce the debt balance as fast as possible then...

Apparently you won't be allowed to.

Interesting. Contrary to current T&C's defined here: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/EducationAn ... /DG_171539 A change in terms?

lost_in_thought

DonDaddyD wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

DDD, I reckon you're just fishing for me to say 'public school' so you can shout AHA and launch into another tirade about 'privileged people'.

But anyway...

I went here right the way through, and it was funded by my mother.

Then you assume too much and do not know enough, most of my friends could be described as 'privileged people'.

Your background isn't my issue. But honestly, I can't be arsed.

It was just a question. Thank you for answering.

ORLY

DonDaddyD wrote:

... And LiT stand to one side you got to go to Oxford or Cambridge, dare I say you and yours could afford the increases for your kids to come....

DonDaddyD wrote:

You got to go because you and yours could afford it.

It is unfair that a low income family, who have lost or had their benefits reduced, have an extremely bright child who could go to University and is now priced out of doing so.

You are right, however, you are entitled to your opinion. It's weight I feel is somewhat light when talking about people and the lives of people who as a demographic can be identified as low income earners.

In truth I think its too easy 'to harp on' and say

"yeah the University fees should be increased. Students and would-be students have nothing to complain about, dossers".

I question whether some who are saying that are truly affected by this.

http://www.bikeradar.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12740986

lost_in_thought

JonGinge wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

JonGinge wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

JonGinge wrote:

Sewinman, 7.5% interest. Blimey. Are those new rates for the new cap? Thought it was much lower than that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_lo ... rest_rates

The proposal is if you earn over £41k the interest rates are RPI plus 3% - in today's money that is 7.5%.

Ah, I see. Yoiks. Best to reduce the debt balance as fast as possible then...

Apparently you won't be allowed to.

Interesting. Contrary to current T&C's defined here: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/EducationAn ... /DG_171539 A change in terms?

I don't know much about the small print on the new proposals, but I paid mine off much more quickly than I could have done if I'd just carried on with the normal payments.

sketchley

DonDaddyD wrote:

If you're talking about paying back your student loan then my understanding was that you don't get a choice of how much you pay back or how quickly. You can't pay more towards it for example. It's one rule for everyone.
.

Without looking it up, that would breach the comsumer credit act. You should be able to recieve and pay an early settlement figure at any time or chose to pay off part of a loan if you wish.

Sewinman

From the beeb:

Can students pay back their loans early?

The rules have not yet been set on this. Mr Willetts said it was "important" that higher earners were "not able unfairly to buy themselves out" of the system by paying their loans back early.

He said the government would consult on penalties for early repayments, saying that there might be a 5% levy on repayments over a certain amount each year - or on early repayments made by graduates with incomes above a certain threshold, such as £60,000.

Wealthy students will, however, be able to pay their own university fees up front, avoiding accruing any debt at all.

sketchley

Sketchley wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

If you're talking about paying back your student loan then my understanding was that you don't get a choice of how much you pay back or how quickly. You can't pay more towards it for example. It's one rule for everyone.
.

Without looking it up, that would breach the comsumer credit act. You should be able to recieve and pay an early settlement figure at any time or chose to pay off part of a loan if you wish.

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/EducationAn ... G_10034868

Agent57

Sewinman wrote:

Mr Willetts said it was "important" that higher earners were "not able unfairly to buy themselves out" of the system by paying their loans back early.

I don't get it; what's unfair about paying off one's debts early?

jonginge

Sewinman wrote:

From the beeb:

Can students pay back their loans early?

The rules have not yet been set on this. Mr Willetts said it was "important" that higher earners were "not able unfairly to buy themselves out" of the system by paying their loans back early.

He said the government would consult on penalties for early repayments, saying that there might be a 5% levy on repayments over a certain amount each year - or on early repayments made by graduates with incomes above a certain threshold, such as £60,000.

Wealthy students will, however, be able to pay their own university fees up front, avoiding accruing any debt at all.

Ok, so possible but there may be conditions attached. Sounds rather similar to a mortgage, no?

wgwarburton

Hi,
It strikes me that there's a great deal of misunderstanding here about the many and complex roles of higher education. I dare say this is reflected in society as a whole.

Higher education in the UK is a mess at the moment. As a sector, it's trying to meet competing demands from a wide variety of interests, many of them conflicting.

A "degree" these days can mean several things. Even a particular type of degree can mean something different, depending on where it's from (an M.A. for example, as cited above, can be a postgraduate taught or research degree; a "conversion" between disciplines or an undergraduate, "first degree", depending on who awarded it and why).

Grade inflation and political pressure to increase "graduate numbers", with no clear picture of what those graduates will do for whom have exacerbated the problem.

Expecting candidates who, at sixteen or seventeen, are considering entering this system to understand it and the implications their choices will have on their careers is... optimistic... shall we say. Expecting school "careers advisers" to do the same is almost as bad, even schools which send a significant number of candidates to university fail, let alone those who don't even aspire to do so...

To cap it all, the primary driver for reform is financial... in a sector where finance has traditionally had a relatively minor role to play... The other, often highly significant, aspects of the system are sidelined by the need to meet commercial and political targets... What about academic targets, for example?
It ought to be fairly obvious but often seems to be missed: the number of degrees awarded is not an academic target.

I don't have a solution to this. To be honest I don't think there is "a solution", there needs to be a set of solutions available to address the various problems being posed, preferably in several different ways, so that people, organisations and project which don't fit one model can be accomodated elsewhere.

I'm not holding my breath...

Cheers,
W.

rick_chasey

When people are talking about the actual debt they have to pay off early, they're forgetting the elephant in the room - Student Loans Company.

Even the Wiki article mentions their incompetance.

No words can describe the rage that their kafka-esq incompetance brings out in me.

Sewinman

Agent57 wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Mr Willetts said it was "important" that higher earners were "not able unfairly to buy themselves out" of the system by paying their loans back early.

I don't get it; what's unfair about paying off one's debts early?

Because you would pay less interest if you paid back early, so the wealthy graduates would pay less back than those on a middle income (who might not be able to afford extra payments).

gtvlusso

DonDaddyD wrote:

You got to go because you and yours could afford it.

It is unfair that a low income family, who have lost or had their benefits reduced, have an extremely bright child who could go to University and is now priced out of doing so.

You are right, however, you are entitled to your opinion. It's weight I feel is somewhat light when talking about people and the lives of people who as a demographic can be identified as low income earners.

In truth I think its too easy 'to harp on' and say

"yeah the University fees should be increased. Students and would-be students have nothing to complain about, dossers".

I question whether some who are saying that are truly affected by this.

Epic FAIL:

Went to State School - in Worcestershire

Accepted to Cambridge - failed (expelled)
Accepted to Reading - failed (walked off)
Accepted to Rutgers - failed (suspended pending investigation - walked off)

You all payed for me to get drunk and do allot of illegal stuff. How do you feel about that? I had no idea what I wanted to do and as a result I got binned.

I think the fees will make prospective students think about the decision they are making and if it is right for them and what they want to do and where they want to go. Bring back the Poly Technics for more hands on education and stop this rubbish about Uni being for everyone - for some people it does not work and does not lead where they want to go.

So - I was not priveliged, just "bright". My folks did not pay a bean for my education, aside tax. And I have just paid off most debts in the last 5 years.

sketchley

Agent57 wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Mr Willetts said it was "important" that higher earners were "not able unfairly to buy themselves out" of the system by paying their loans back early.

I don't get it; what's unfair about paying off one's debts early?

I think the thought process is that someone well off enough to pay for their fees outright might choose to take the loan then pay it off as soon as they come out of university instead of paying directly for the fees, thereby taking an unfair advantage of the preferential interest rates of the student loan. As the cost of running the loans comes out of the interest charged this is not a good thing for the lender as they would receive very little in interest payments for running the scheme.

lost_in_thought

Rick Chasey wrote:

When people are talking about the actual debt they have to pay off early, they're forgetting the elephant in the room - Student Loans Company.

Even the Wiki article mentions their incompetance.

No words can describe the rage that their kafka-esq incompetance brings out in me.

I've heard many a horror story, but they were absolutely great with me!

Agent57

Sewinman wrote:

Agent57 wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Mr Willetts said it was "important" that higher earners were "not able unfairly to buy themselves out" of the system by paying their loans back early.

I don't get it; what's unfair about paying off one's debts early?

Because you would pay less interest if you paid back early, so the wealthy graduates would pay less back than those on a middle income (who might not be able to afford extra payments).

Meh. It's no more unfair than making people pay more than they have to by locking them in to interest payments they don't need to make. I can't afford to overpay/pay off my mortgage early, but I don't QQ about it.

DonDaddyD

lost_in_thought wrote:

ORLY

I stand by everything I've said. It's not your background I take an issue with or what life has afforded you.

It is that you take that perspective and seemingly apply it to everyone without ever considering that the constraints on their life are different to your own.

I question how much you really do try to relate or understand lives that are different to your's or mine as you make sweeping statements after sweeping social/society based statement. "State schools that don't offer swimming and not being able" for example.

Take for example your statement "You don't need to go to Uni, I didn't and I turend out all right". Well you did but that won't be the same for everyone. For various reasons.

This isn't a attack on your background (I'm looking at public school costs for my own) but on your seemingly unwillingness to accept that there are those with lives and constraints different to your own and who will come up to different obsticles you faced.

Sewinman

Agent57 wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Agent57 wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Mr Willetts said it was "important" that higher earners were "not able unfairly to buy themselves out" of the system by paying their loans back early.

I don't get it; what's unfair about paying off one's debts early?

Because you would pay less interest if you paid back early, so the wealthy graduates would pay less back than those on a middle income (who might not be able to afford extra payments).

Meh. It's no more unfair than making people pay more than they have to by locking them in to interest payments they don't need to make. I can't afford to overpay/pay off my mortgage early, but I don't QQ about it.

Well I think higher education is a little different than the choice of mortgage you choose to take out. If it is to be a progressive scheme then the rich should pay more, not less - as they would if it was a grad tax.

wgwarburton

gtvlusso wrote:

...Epic FAIL:

Went to State School - in Worcestershire

Accepted to Cambridge - failed (expelled)
Accepted to Reading - failed (walked off)
Accepted to Rutgers - failed (suspended pending investigation - walked off)

You all payed for me to get drunk and do allot of illegal stuff. How do you feel about that? I had no idea what I wanted to do and as a result I got binned.

Personally, I'm pretty comfortable with it. You had the opportunity to go, and took it. I expect you learned quite a bit during this phase of your life, but even if you didn't someone else in your shoes probably would have done. Regardless of whether it was good value for you to go, the fact that you are bright means you should have had the opportunity. I daresay you're earning enough to "pay for your education", anyway...but again, even if you arn't and end up being such a complete waster that you never pay enough tax to cover the cost of sending you to university, that doesn't mean you should have been excluded (or even strongly discouraged) as a teenager with no idea what to do.

I think the fees will make prospective students think about the decision they are making and if it is right for them and what they want to do and where they want to go. Bring back the Poly Technics for more hands on education and stop this rubbish about Uni being for everyone - for some people it does not work and does not lead where they want to go.

+1: bring back Polytechnics (Colleges, in Scotland), and clarify the distinctions between teaching and research focussed institutions.

Cheers,
W.

Agent57

Sewinman wrote:

Well I think higher education is a little different than the choice of mortgage you choose to take out

Different, yes, but I'm sure a mortgage is much more of a financial burden, and something that affects many more people than student loan repayments.

I'm not disputing the idea that the richer should pay more, but artificially locking them into repayments on a loan seems ridiculous to me. I think your graduate tax makes more sense.

rick_chasey

lost_in_thought wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

When people are talking about the actual debt they have to pay off early, they're forgetting the elephant in the room - Student Loans Company.

Even the Wiki article mentions their incompetance.

No words can describe the rage that their kafka-esq incompetance brings out in me.

I've heard many a horror story, but they were absolutely great with me!

Uni was probably cheaper for you that the Leys wasn't it? Surprised you needed a loan. :twisted:

lost_in_thought

DonDaddyD wrote:

I stand by everything I've said. It's not your background I take an issue with or what life has afforded you.

But, that you take that perspective and seemingly apply it to everyone without ever considering that the constraints on their life are different to your own. It's that very same one-people/one-nation view that only serves to minimalise or overlook the minority.

I question how much you really do try to relate or understand the lives that are different to your's or mine as you make sweeping statements after sweeping social statement. The schools that don't offer swimming and not being able to believe this for example.

Take for example your statement "You don't need to go to Uni, I didn't and I turend out all right". Well you did but that won't be the same for everyone. For various reasons.

This isn't a attack on your background but on your seemingly unwillingness to accept that there are those with lives and constraints different to your own.

For starters, if you're going to be personal at least get your facts straight. Quotes are good. Furthermore, I couldn't believe any parent would choose not to have their child learn to swim.

I don't think for a second that your inference of my earlier statement about university was what I implied, TWH hit the nail on the head.

The vast majority of the time, you seem to infer things I don't imply. For example, I am not saying that nobody needs a degree and everyone will be fine and dandy without, more that it's an option that should be considered and I'm an example of how it can work.

But hey, you've clearly got a bee in your bonnet about me. Carry on.

lost_in_thought

Rick Chasey wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

When people are talking about the actual debt they have to pay off early, they're forgetting the elephant in the room - Student Loans Company.

Even the Wiki article mentions their incompetance.

No words can describe the rage that their kafka-esq incompetance brings out in me.

I've heard many a horror story, but they were absolutely great with me!

Uni was probably cheaper for you that the Leys wasn't it? Surprised you needed a loan. :twisted:

Fortunately, I didn't pay for my schooling!