Rich to buy University Places
Comments
-
Dyslexiadhope wrote:CiB wrote:
I wasn't bothering with this thread any more as it's veered off into whether student fees are valid or not, but this one requires a response.Sketchley wrote:CiB wrote:I have to say that the number of people on here who purport to have been through uni but then make basic grammar errors (did I read mums & dad's somewhere? Come on - one or the other; you can't just guess), mixing fewer with less and so on, these examples really do nothing but support my argument that university might not be for everyone, and that some may not have the potential to make a university education worth a £27000 debt. Just saying like.
Say what you like about grammar nazis ( I are one*) but when spouting the benefits of further education, at least make it look as though you had one.
*yes it is.
Considering that no part of my degree course included grammar you sir are talking b0ll0cks.
To be clear, we're now in the position that someone is entitled to call themselves 'Educated to Degree Level' yet not have been taught the basics of our language? I think this speaks volumes. Thanks for clarifying that for me.
Says far more about schooling below degree level, and possibly parenting, or peer pressure. A number of things actually, but don't think it says anything about the quality of any one degree course.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyslexia
http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/physical_he ... xia2.shtml
http://www.dyslexiaaction.org.uk/
http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/
http://www.dyslexia-college.com/
I mean these people should get a chance to go to Uni right?Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
when i did my IT degree (finished last year) i wasnt even asked what grades i'd attained at any point of my education an i mean that litrally.
all they really asked about was "how are you paying"
and to be honest i thought the whole experience was an exspensive waste of money. i didnt really learn anything but spent a fortune (my employer contributed to the costs though)
i dont know if its different because i did my degree part time?Keeping it classy since '830 -
Or it's an internet Forum and people type at a speed that affects their typing accuracy and can't be bothered to proof read.UndercoverElephant wrote:CiB wrote:
I wasn't bothering with this thread any more as it's veered off into whether student fees are valid or not, but this one requires a response.Sketchley wrote:CiB wrote:I have to say that the number of people on here who purport to have been through uni but then make basic grammar errors (did I read mums & dad's somewhere? Come on - one or the other; you can't just guess), mixing fewer with less and so on, these examples really do nothing but support my argument that university might not be for everyone, and that some may not have the potential to make a university education worth a £27000 debt. Just saying like.
Say what you like about grammar nazis ( I are one*) but when spouting the benefits of further education, at least make it look as though you had one.
*yes it is.
Considering that no part of my degree course included grammar you sir are talking b0ll0cks.
To be clear, we're now in the position that someone is entitled to call themselves 'Educated to Degree Level' yet not have been taught the basics of our language? I think this speaks volumes. Thanks for clarifying that for me.
In actual fact, grammar wasn't even taught above a very basic level when I went to school; If you went to school in the 80s or 90s, the chances are that it wasn't. The telephone had so revolutionised the way we communicated that the written word was no longer seen as being required for most, certainly if you went to state school.
It has come full-circle now, of course. We spend so much time posting tripe on internet fora, and communicate so much via email, that a high level of proficiency in the written word is again required to express intelligence. Hence we get people like you, who, through either good timing or fortunate schooling, feel that they are superior to those who can't correctly place a comma.
I realise the irony that my post is better punctuated than yours.
I mean I struggle with grammar, always have. If this was a work report, piece or coursework or dissertation I would type slower, proof read, spell check and maybe have a second pair of eyes look over what I've written for the more serious documents.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
rhext wrote:
Ah, there's always one.
I think I'm fully aware of what has and is being proposed.
Could it be that you are too inept to participate in a discussion?
Furthermore, my question [see below] that you replied toSo assuming the graduate earns £30k how long will it take to pay back and how much will the instalments be? The question stands.
was in the context of the discussion and not about what was being proposed. Perhaps you are too ignorant to comprehend the simplicity of that.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
Does anyone know if these proposals will result in a net increase in university places or will they come at the expense of overseas student spots?0
-
DonDaddyD wrote:
Or it's an internet Forum and people type at a speed that affects their typing accuracy and can't be bothered to proof read.UndercoverElephant wrote:CiB wrote:
I wasn't bothering with this thread any more as it's veered off into whether student fees are valid or not, but this one requires a response.Sketchley wrote:CiB wrote:I have to say that the number of people on here who purport to have been through uni but then make basic grammar errors (did I read mums & dad's somewhere? Come on - one or the other; you can't just guess), mixing fewer with less and so on, these examples really do nothing but support my argument that university might not be for everyone, and that some may not have the potential to make a university education worth a £27000 debt. Just saying like.
Say what you like about grammar nazis ( I are one*) but when spouting the benefits of further education, at least make it look as though you had one.
*yes it is.
Considering that no part of my degree course included grammar you sir are talking b0ll0cks.
To be clear, we're now in the position that someone is entitled to call themselves 'Educated to Degree Level' yet not have been taught the basics of our language? I think this speaks volumes. Thanks for clarifying that for me.
In actual fact, grammar wasn't even taught above a very basic level when I went to school; If you went to school in the 80s or 90s, the chances are that it wasn't. The telephone had so revolutionised the way we communicated that the written word was no longer seen as being required for most, certainly if you went to state school.
It has come full-circle now, of course. We spend so much time posting tripe on internet fora, and communicate so much via email, that a high level of proficiency in the written word is again required to express intelligence. Hence we get people like you, who, through either good timing or fortunate schooling, feel that they are superior to those who can't correctly place a comma.
I realise the irony that my post is better punctuated than yours.
I mean I struggle with grammar, always have. If this was a work report, piece or coursework or dissertation I would type slower, proof read, spell check and maybe have a second pair of eyes look over what I've written for the more serious documents.
+1 on this. There are no acceptable use terms on this website stating all posts must have correct grammar. Work reports and presentations are different, I have a colleague here who I have worked with for 10 years, proof reads all my stuff and knows my mistakes very well. Problem I have is that the voice in my head dictating to me is faster than I type so I make mistakes. it's much much worse when I use pen and paper. Then when I read it back the dyslexia kicks in and I don't see the mistakes as the inner dictation did not make them. I can work around it, but for an internet forum it's too much work.--
Chris
Genesis Equilibrium - FCN 3/4/50 -
-
DonDaddyD wrote:I mean I struggle with grammar, always have.
Me too, like I said, it was never taught. As long as you put a full-stop at the end of a sentence and started the new one with a capital letter, that was enough at my school. I have since taught myself, as it seems as though it is necessary for future progression at work. As such, the only people's grammar that I nit-pick are the 'Grammar Nazis'.0 -
-
Rick Chasey wrote:If you struggle with grammer, read eats shoots and leaves.
Are yes that book. I suppose if I put the bible on your head it will cure you of all the World's ills? :roll:
Like reading "One minute manager" automatically makes people good managers.
Lets not consider that dyslexia is an overarching term by which individuals are affected differently and to varying degrees.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:If you struggle with grammer, read eats shoots and leaves.
Are yes that book. I suppose if I put the bible on your head it will cure you of all the World's ills? :roll:
Like reading "One minute manager" automatically makes people good managers.
Lets not consider that dyslexia is an overarching term by which individuals are affected differently and to varying degrees.
I never said anything of the sort.
All I did was suggest reading it.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:If you struggle with grammer, read eats shoots and leaves.
I have.
Having read it I then tried to remember all the rules, even the one's that contradict and do not make sense, this I found very difficult. For me I need to understand the logical structure of the rules in order to paint a picture in my head of how it all fits together and why. For this to work it the rules need to be designed in a logical way. The upshot of this is that I cannot do this with grammar and spelling rules as cannot get the memory triggers to make sense. I can however do this in Fortran, Cobol, Basic, C++, C#, VB, VB.net, Pascal and Delphi as they all have structured rules that make sense.--
Chris
Genesis Equilibrium - FCN 3/4/50 -
I have. It was just an angry woman shouting at me because I didn't immediately see a problem with less and fewer.
I've also read one minute manager - good book.
This is an internet forum, to be honest my mind goes numb and I type nearly as fast as I think about the response. I could be phlucked to go through and check my basic grammar.
Of course at work I refuse to embarrass myself so what i write there gets more time and attention.
No one and I mean no should ever have the right to say that a person shouldn't be allowed to go to University because they struggle with grammar. That's just arrogant. Such a sweepingly blind and blinkered statement doesn't take into consideration a whole number of issues and smacks rich of the same self-serving arrogance Tories have always had where they group people into one bowl and pour the rich on top.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
For once I agree completely with DDD.
--
Chris
Genesis Equilibrium - FCN 3/4/50 -
DonDaddyD wrote:I have. It was just an angry woman shouting at me because I didn't immediately see a problem with less and fewer.
I've also read one minute manager - good book.
This is an internet forum, to be honest my mind goes numb and I type nearly as fast as I think about the response. I could be phlucked to go through and check my basic grammar.
Of course at work I refuse to embarrass myself so what i write there gets more time and attention.
No one and I mean no should ever have the right to say that a person shouldn't be allowed to go to University because they struggle with grammar. That's just arrogant. Such a sweepingly blind and blinkered statement doesn't take into consideration a whole number of issues and smacks rich of the same self-serving arrogance Tories have always had where they group people into one bowl and pour the rich on top.
The only one saying that is Greg, and he's an unbalanced wind-up merchant anyway...0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:rhext wrote:
Ah, there's always one.
I think I'm fully aware of what has and is being proposed.
Could it be that you are too inept to participate in a discussion?
Furthermore, my question [see below] that you replied toSo assuming the graduate earns £30k how long will it take to pay back and how much will the instalments be? The question stands.
was in the context of the discussion and not about what was being proposed. Perhaps you are too ignorant to comprehend the simplicity of that.
Ah, so it was a rhetorical question. Just as a matter of interest, what was the rhetorical answer then? Were the annual repayments higher or lower than they are under the existing scheme? And how does the answer support your assertion that access to University education for the less well off has somehow been reduced?0 -
Sigh....Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:...... the usual rant.
OK, so since you clearly can't or won't work it out for yourself.
Assuming £3K per annum tuition and (say) about £3K per annum subsistence, under the current scheme you'd be £18K in debt. On £30K, you'd pay 9% on everything over £15K until the debt was cleared. Approximately £112 per month. Compound interest means I can't be bothered to work out the repayment period, but call it about 15 years.
On the new scheme, you'd be about £36K in debt, but on your £30K you'd only be paying 9% on everything over £21K. Your monthly repayment would be about £68 per month. It would therefore take a lot longer to clear the debt: but that's not so bad because the balance is written off after 30 years.
So, £112 per month (current scheme) vs £68 per month (new scheme) for someone on £30K! Now, apart from the usual scaremongering on the headline numbers, perhaps you can help me understand how this reduces access for the less well off....0 -
Because they'll read £9K tuition fee and think £27,000K after 3 years, which will need to be paid off and that'll put them off.
They'll think for 30years I won't see a full pay cheque. And that'll put them off.
They'll think about the money they'll need to earn to pay the debts and understand there is no guarantee that they'll get a job, what with graduate unemployement and that'll put them off.
Lastly and I keep making this point:
It's £9K tuition fees. No one has confirmed yet that the student loan company will be leading the total amount to cover the costs of tuition fees. Then you have to factor accomodation costs, living costs, any student overdrafts, credit cards etc.
£3,5k was manageable and I saw people opt not to go to Uni as they didn't want to be lumbered with a (upto) £15k student loan debt.
Others didn't go because the money from the student loan company didn't cover tuition fees and they couldn't afford the other additional costs.
It's £9k tuitionfees. Not borrowing £9k, but assuming you can I still maintain there will be an increasing number of those that don't want to be lumbered with a £27k debt. What Uni's charge more and suddenly more people who couldn't afford it when the it was £3.5k will want to go now? - That's rhetorical, I don't need an answer for that.
Sigh...Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
So should those that do understand the new system be re-inforcing the message that repayments will actually be lower under the new system than the old, especially during the critical period when you're trying to set yourself up in life, rather than forever banging on about the headline?0
-
It's lower for a longer period. It's still £27k and there will be a point where the comparision holds no value.
I didn't go to Uni and think well my tuition fees are more/less than the last system. I wait partly on the basis that I could afford it.Food Chain number = 4
A true scalp is not only overtaking someone but leaving them stopped at a set of lights. As you, who have clearly beaten the lights, pummels nothing but the open air ahead. ~ 'DondaddyD'. Player of the Unspoken Game0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:It's lower for a longer period. It's still £27k and there will be a point where the comparision holds no value.
I didn't go to Uni and think well my tuition fees are more/less than the last system. I wait partly on the basis that I could afford it.
But the mistake is to look at the headline number and think 'that's not affordable'. In practice, affordability is about how much you lose from your pay packet each month.
I'm not a fan of tuition fees in the first place, but it seems to me that for most people the new system is more affordable than the old one - unless you earn a lot, of course. Someone on £30K will pay less for longer until the debt is written off after 30 years. Someone on £100K, however, will pay off the whole £36K and the new system will cost them twice as much as the old.....surprised the Tories went for it in that respect!0 -
So what DDD's basically saying is that 'the less well off' are too stupid to work out the repayments?
I must admit that's a departure from his usual 'help help I'm being oppressed' stance.
/runs off giggling0 -
DonDaddyD wrote:
Now those wonderful I'm alright jack Tories have come up with this brilliant masterstroke. Extra Uni places for those that can afford them.
Discuss.
So :!:
I have three sons and if I were able to afford the places I would, and if anyone else had the money so would they, the only reason people complain about the "well off" doing it is because they are not well off
It is the same as the moaning poor complaining they can not afford to feed their children then they light another cigarette!!!!!!!!Peds with ipods, natures little speed humps
Banish unwanted fur - immac a squirrel
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... heads.html0 -
there is still interest added too I imagine, paying off 27,000 over umpteen years will actually cost up to how much?
If you get a 100K job and pay it off quick, interest is less and you are free from it, that's how it got by the Tories.FCN 120 -
did some quick hopefully right math, if you get a job at 20K, average 4% a year raise, interest continues at 1.5%. it could take 22 years to pay and cost you 6K in interest.
providing 9% of earnings over 15K remains the threshold
100k job, 3 1/2 years, 500 quid interest.FCN 120
