Tuition fee vote passed

Jez mon

Gutting news for a lot of young people, the tuition fee rise has been voted through by MPs. Lots of Lib Dem MPs now looking silly too.

So, anyone of the ages where they are thinking of going to university in 2012, or anyone have kids who will be looking to go in a few years? Will the fee rise actually change how you feel about university...

I can't help but feel that this change won't really do anything. Currently the system promotes very little social mobility, and this fee rise won't really help! However, it shouldn't put off that many people so long as there are good graduate jobs to go to and payback of the loan is handled in a sensible manner!

Tom Butcher

The thing I object to most about it is that you pay (according to the guy on the radio today) a commercial rate of interest on the loan - something like inflation plus 3% - and you can't pay it off early ?

StillGoing

Don't see what the problem is myself. Everyone is facing cuts so why the students should be exempt is beyond me. What they need to realise is that it isn't the Libs or the Tories but a coalition government. Previous promises and election pledges go out the window. What was important was that Labour were removed from power as quickly as possible to avoid the country going completely down the pan.

There are students and there are "students". Wishy-washy degrees that mean nothing should be paid for out of your own pocket. Worthwhile degrees that give someone a trade qualification should be sponsored by whoever is going to employ them.

What I would have liked to have seen today was enforcement of the section 60 that would have been in force and make those idiots who were there for no other reason than to cause trouble remove their face coverings. If the students think they won any support with their antics then it just shows that the current education system isn't working. Get some of these idle oiks in a uniform so they can prove some worth to the country.

Cheshley

philthy3 wrote:

What I would have liked to have seen today was enforcement of the section 60 that would have been in force and make those idiots who were there for no other reason than to cause trouble remove their face coverings. If the students think they won any support with their antics then it just shows that the current education system isn't working. Get some of these idle oiks in a uniform so they can prove some worth to the country.

This point has just been perfectly demonstrated on BBC news. Gurning morons pulling faces at the camera in the background and when BBC correspondent Ben Brown pointed his microphone at one demonstrator and asked if he could explain why he was there, the reply was 'no'.

My Son is a long way off going to University but I would like to be able to afford him the opportunity should he want to, and I agree that higher education is a choice that should be paid for. Students should think themselves lucky that they don't live under the American system where colleges are charging up to $40,000 a year for a 4 year degree course and this doesn't include living expenses!

shockedsoshocked

StillGoing

My in-laws have just funded their son through his degree course at Northants, followed by his masters at Oxford and currently doing his Doctorate at Oxford. They aren't rolling in money and struggle to make ends meet being self-employed, but even they have never claimed a penny in assistance and don't see why anyone should.

Tom Butcher

Paying for your education wouldn't include a commercial rate of interest though would it - that's paying for your education and making someone a nice profit too.

finchy

philthy3 wrote:

Don't see what the problem is myself. Everyone is facing cuts so why the students should be exempt is beyond me.

99% of the students wouldn't even have had the right to vote when this country was flushing itself down the toilet. Why should they pay for other people's mistakes?

philthy3 wrote:

There are students and there are "students". Wishy-washy degrees that mean nothing should be paid for out of your own pocket. Worthwhile degrees that give someone a trade qualification should be sponsored by whoever is going to employ them.

I agree that only "proper" degrees should be funded, but how do you define what is worthwhile and what isn't?

guinea

johnfinch wrote:

I agree that only "proper" degrees should be funded, but how do you define what is worthwhile and what isn't?

All degrees are worthwhile.

shockedsoshocked

philthy3 wrote:

My in-laws have just funded their son through his degree course at Northants, followed by his masters at Oxford and currently doing his Doctorate at Oxford. They aren't rolling in money and struggle to make ends meet being self-employed, but even they have never claimed a penny in assistance and don't see why anyone should.

A fine attitude.

A friend of mine recently graduated with a first in theoretical physics. Could he have done it without support? No, of course not.

But, you know, f*ck him and his low income family eh?

verylonglegs

philthy3 wrote:

My in-laws have just funded their son through his degree course at Northants, followed by his masters at Oxford and currently doing his Doctorate at Oxford. They aren't rolling in money and struggle to make ends meet being self-employed, but even they have never claimed a penny in assistance and don't see why anyone should.

So you think we should deny talent the chance to achieve its maximum because they were born to a poor family? That would be terrible imo.

Cheshley

after reading the debt projections on the BBC website, I have worked out that if I want to pay up front for my Son to go to Uni, even at the proposed fee of £6000 a year plus associated living expenses, I need to start putting £150 a month away now and do so for the next 17 years.....

desweller

verylonglegs wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

My in-laws have just funded their son through his degree course at Northants, followed by his masters at Oxford and currently doing his Doctorate at Oxford. They aren't rolling in money and struggle to make ends meet being self-employed, but even they have never claimed a penny in assistance and don't see why anyone should.

So you think we should deny talent the chance to achieve its maximum because they were born to a poor family? That would be terrible imo.

+1

Access to higher education should be equally accessible to all who wish to pursue it, irrespective of your family's financial situation IMO.

MattC59

verylonglegs wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

My in-laws have just funded their son through his degree course at Northants, followed by his masters at Oxford and currently doing his Doctorate at Oxford. They aren't rolling in money and struggle to make ends meet being self-employed, but even they have never claimed a penny in assistance and don't see why anyone should.

So you think we should deny talent the chance to achieve its maximum because they were born to a poor family? That would be terrible imo.

A poor family has the same opportunity as an average family. The student can take out the loans, and once graduated, pay back 9% of their annual earnings above the £21k threshold. Neither graduate pays the loan back until they are earning over £21k, and there is a 30year cut off. So if, fo some reason, a graduate doesn't manage to elevate their earnings to above the threshold, with in the 30 years, they don't pay it back.

Both students have the same opportunity.

Students are saying that they shouldn't have to pay............ who should then ?
Education is a right, but a university education isn't.

There's a lot of info here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11483638

EKIMIKE

I'm a student.

Fact is too many are going to university now. A lot of people shouldn't be. It simply doesn't suit them. They don't like studying and quite frankly they're only at uni to go out and get pissed. To them, the degree is a secondary concern in their list of priorities.

The way this government is managing this problem is pretty poor. It's not the best solution, it's probably not even the second or third best solution. It is however probably the most easily implementable solution. The Tories know more than anyone that the poor are easy to keep quiet - in the long run.

Get rid of the "crap" degree's. Too many degree's don't provide skills which bear comparison to the sheer cost of undertaking a degree.

Equally, protect and promote those studies which are of true value, economically and socially.

There's nothing more annoying than a financially 'comfortable' person dishing out generalised scorn on people my age when they're the ones that got it all for free. Bastards.

And by comfortable i mean if you've got a job and a place to live and a car. That's a rich life to me. Most people my age can't even get a 'decent' job without 20k + of debt hanging round their necks.

There should be tuition fee's. And i agree with the poster above that University education isn't so much a 'right'. It should however be reasonably accessible.

finchy

guinea wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

I agree that only "proper" degrees should be funded, but how do you define what is worthwhile and what isn't?

All degrees are worthwhile.

My cousin works in media recruitment and she says that even the vast majority of newspapers, magazines and broadcasting organisations wouldn't touch a Media Studies graduate with a bargepole. Not because they're necessarily a waste of space, more that the courses are usually nowhere near challenging enough so a degree in the subject is no guarantee of quality.

u05harrisb

im 17 at the moment and am planning to go and do somthing along the lines of physics and nano-tech. TBH it sucks its gonne cost me more but hey ho! i want that degree and i will pay for it because in the long run im gonna be far better off, paying heavly for my degree and then earning well than no degree and working as shop assistant or a tele-sales man!

personally i dont think that the whole children form X income familys should get "extra" funding idea that many people talk about is a good idea, my parents are not well off, were not benifits but were not "rich". I am going to be paying my entire degree and expensise myself, as will i when i learn to drive and buy a car as i do now to fund my music and bike.

yes, im disapointed that i will pay more but everything is costing everybody more, why am I or anybody else any diffrent?

MattC59

EKIMIKE wrote:

I'm a student.

Fact is too many are going to university now. A lot of people shouldn't be. It simply doesn't suit them. They don't like studying and quite frankly they're only at uni to go out and get pissed. To them, the degree is a secondary concern in their list of priorities.

The way this government is managing this problem is pretty poor. It's not the best solution, it's probably not even the second or third best solution. It is however probably the most easily implementable solution. The Tories know more than anyone that the poor are easy to keep quiet - in the long run.

Get rid of the "crap" degree's. Too many degree's don't provide skills which bear comparison to the sheer cost of undertaking a degree.

Equally, protect and promote those studies which are of true value, economically and socially.

There's nothing more annoying than a financially 'comfortable' person dishing out generalised scorn on people my age when they're the ones that got it all for free. Bastards.

And by comfortable i mean if you've got a job and a place to live and a car. That's a rich life to me. Most people my age can't even get a 'decent' job without 20k + of debt hanging round their necks.

There should be tuition fee's. And i agree with the poster above that University education isn't so much a 'right'. It should however be reasonably accessible.

Well put !!

Except for this bit:

EKIMIKE wrote:

Most people my age can't even get a 'decent' job without 20k + of debt hanging round their necks.

My point is that if you can't get a 'decent job' and aren't earning over £21k, then you don't pay it back until you are. The debt doesn't effect your credit rating, so it's hardly hanging around your neck.

RichN95.

Tom Butcher wrote:

The thing I object to most about it is that you pay (according to the guy on the radio today) a commercial rate of interest on the loan - something like inflation plus 3% - and you can't pay it off early ?

Yeah, I heard that (Martin Lewis of Money Saving Expert). He was right, saying they're protesting about the parts which are a good deal and ignoring the bits which aren't.


Personally, I'd like the tuition fees to be partially paid according to academic ability. Get three As at A level, you pay less. Get a C and two Ds, then it's the full price for you (but still under the current loan system).

Smokin Joe

I don't see what they have to complain about. As stated in some of the posts above it will not bar anyone from going to university no matter how poor they are.

I know quite a few people who went or are going to uni and quite frankly more than a few are a bit on the thick side. Aiming to get 50% of school levers to go on to university and often waste their time (how many drop out?) is ridiculous when we are having to bring in immigrants because we do not have enough trades people of out own. College and a course in plumbing or hairdressing would do many of them more good.

finchy

Smokin Joe wrote:

I don't see what they have to complain about. As stated in some of the posts above it will not bar anyone from going to university no matter how poor they are.

I know quite a few people who went or are going to uni and quite frankly more than a few are a bit on the thick side. Aiming to get 50% of school levers to go on to university and often waste their time (how many drop out?) is ridiculous when we are having to bring in immigrants because we do not have enough trades people of out own. College and a course in plumbing or hairdressing would do many of them more good.

You make it sound like there are only two options - charge higher tuition fees or carry on at the current level.

What about the suggestion of fewer people going to university and convert all of the new ones back to polytechnics teaching useful skills - go back to a pre-1980s arrangement? That's what I'm in favour of.

Smokin Joe

johnfinch wrote:

Smokin Joe wrote:

I don't see what they have to complain about. As stated in some of the posts above it will not bar anyone from going to university no matter how poor they are.

I know quite a few people who went or are going to uni and quite frankly more than a few are a bit on the thick side. Aiming to get 50% of school levers to go on to university and often waste their time (how many drop out?) is ridiculous when we are having to bring in immigrants because we do not have enough trades people of out own. College and a course in plumbing or hairdressing would do many of them more good.

You make it sound like there are only two options - charge higher tuition fees or carry on at the current level.

What about the suggestion of fewer people going to university and convert all of the new ones back to polytechnics teaching useful skills - go back to a pre-1980s arrangement? That's what I'm in favour of.

+1.

finchy

Smokin Joe wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Smokin Joe wrote:

I don't see what they have to complain about. As stated in some of the posts above it will not bar anyone from going to university no matter how poor they are.

I know quite a few people who went or are going to uni and quite frankly more than a few are a bit on the thick side. Aiming to get 50% of school levers to go on to university and often waste their time (how many drop out?) is ridiculous when we are having to bring in immigrants because we do not have enough trades people of out own. College and a course in plumbing or hairdressing would do many of them more good.

You make it sound like there are only two options - charge higher tuition fees or carry on at the current level.

What about the suggestion of fewer people going to university and convert all of the new ones back to polytechnics teaching useful skills - go back to a pre-1980s arrangement? That's what I'm in favour of.

+1.

Well, glad we got that one sorted out. What's the next policy area we need to fix?

EKIMIKE

MattC59 wrote:

My point is that if you can't get a 'decent job' and aren't earning over £21k, then you don't pay it back until you are. The debt doesn't effect your credit rating, so it's hardly hanging around your neck.

I guess that was a bit misguided but still, the prospect of paying back a debt of 20 - 25k (on todays rates) or 39k (with cuts) plus interest is a daunting prospect even earning 21k p/a.

For me, as it stands today, 20-25k is on the outer limits of a reasonable debt for a university education. 40k is painful to even think about. Contextualised with other issues that young people are faced with, such as getting onto the property 'ladder' and the crazy prices of car insurance (as an example), the government should really think twice before turning the thumb-screws. Shame they didn't.

Ben6899

ShockedSoShocked wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

My in-laws have just funded their son through his degree course at Northants, followed by his masters at Oxford and currently doing his Doctorate at Oxford. They aren't rolling in money and struggle to make ends meet being self-employed, but even they have never claimed a penny in assistance and don't see why anyone should.

A fine attitude.

A friend of mine recently graduated with a first in theoretical physics. Could he have done it without support? No, of course not.

But, you know, f*ck him and his low income family eh?

Plus f***ing one, my friend.

EKIMIKE

As for the violence - yes this is the reality. Ignorant, idiotic, self righteous little pricks do go to university these days - anyone can. It goes right to the heart of what's wrong with our education system.

MattC59

Here's a question that never seems to get raised whenever I've seen this topic being discucussed. In the current economic climate, if the fees weren't increased, where does the money come from ? Should other cuts be made, if so where, or should taxes be increased ?

Smokin Joe

MattC59 wrote:

Here's a question that never seems to get raised whenever I've seen this topic being discucussed. In the current economic climate, if the fees weren't increased, where does the money come from ? Should other cuts be made, if so where, or should taxes be increased ?

None of those.

The squealing lefties want everything to be free and no cuts to be made anywhere. They were in favour of the better off paying for it all, but when Child benefit for high rate tax payers affected many of them they suddenly realised who the better off were and went a bit quiet.

They tend to live in a little fantasy world where the government can magic money out of nowhere.

MattC59

Smokin Joe wrote:

MattC59 wrote:

Here's a question that never seems to get raised whenever I've seen this topic being discucussed. In the current economic climate, if the fees weren't increased, where does the money come from ? Should other cuts be made, if so where, or should taxes be increased ?

None of those.

The squealing lefties want everything to be free and no cuts to be made anywhere. They were in favour of the better off paying for it all, but when Child benefit for high rate tax payers affected many of them they suddenly realised who the better off were and went a bit quiet.

They tend to live in a little fantasy world where the government can magic money out of nowhere.

zanes

EKIMIKE wrote:

I'm a student.

Fact is too many are going to university now. A lot of people shouldn't be. It simply doesn't suit them. They don't like studying and quite frankly they're only at uni to go out and get pissed. To them, the degree is a secondary concern in their list of priorities.

The way this government is managing this problem is pretty poor. It's not the best solution, it's probably not even the second or third best solution. It is however probably the most easily implementable solution. The Tories know more than anyone that the poor are easy to keep quiet - in the long run.

Get rid of the "crap" degree's. Too many degree's don't provide skills which bear comparison to the sheer cost of undertaking a degree.

Equally, protect and promote those studies which are of true value, economically and socially.

There's nothing more annoying than a financially 'comfortable' person dishing out generalised scorn on people my age when they're the ones that got it all for free. Bastards.

And by comfortable i mean if you've got a job and a place to live and a car. That's a rich life to me. Most people my age can't even get a 'decent' job without 20k + of debt hanging round their necks.

There should be tuition fee's. And i agree with the poster above that University education isn't so much a 'right'. It should however be reasonably accessible.

Aside from the bit re "decent" jobs, +1.

RichN95.

Smokin Joe wrote:

None of those.

The squealing lefties want everything to be free and no cuts to be made anywhere. They were in favour of the better off paying for it all, but when Child benefit for high rate tax payers affected many of them they suddenly realised who the better off were and went a bit quiet.

They tend to live in a little fantasy world where the government can magic money out of nowhere.

I think the government should pay for everything I personally need, use and want (Basic services, NHS (A&E only), bikes, cigarettes, beer, Sky TV).
Everything that I don't use (schools, armed forces, universities, The North, opera, BBC3, swimming pools, sports I don't like) should be paid for by the individual.

That's modern day socialism (according to some).

There should also only be 21 Universities - Russell group 20 plus UWIC. Everyone else can get a job and pay for my luxuries.