Lowest Earning 23% Of Graduates Will Be Better Off

[LJAR]

BBC video Link

A modicum of sense and statistics injected into the debate.

My favourite bit:

Journo - "Will it be progressive?"

IFS guy - "Yes that is true"

So those who get the most out of their university education will end up paying the most, and on average everyone will pay more than they do now.

[LuckyOne]

BBC video Link

A modicum of sense and statistics injected into the debate.

My favourite bit:

Journo - "Will it be progressive?"

IFS guy - "Yes that is true"

So those who get the most out of their university education will end up paying the most, and on average everyone will pay more than they do now.

We came at this from a completely different perspective in a family discussion this evening but came to the same conclusion as the IFS guy .....

http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/forum/index.php?showtopic=155904

[LJAR]

depending on the penalties for paying back early, it might end up being worth getting a loan to pay up front instead.

wierd

[Hyperduck Quack Quack]

To quote:

Bring down the government ( Alan Hull ) from: Dingly Dell, 1972

Bring down the government, bring it to its heel

sure it a hoot when they prosecute you for doing what you feel.

Bring down the government, bring it to its knees,

if you want your rights you're gonna have to fight,

so bring down the government please.

Bring down the government, bring it down for fun

God only knows they've had their time, it's about time it was done.

So bring down the government, get them on the run,

we'll bake their heads to ginger bread,

and eat them one by one.

Bring down the government, do it now for love,

do it for your mother and sister too and do for God above.

So roll on my brothers we can find out how,

to walk hand in hand to the promised land,

if we bring down the government now.

Bring down the government now

As a recent Liberal Democrat deserter to Labour, I think the coalition will collapse very soon, and good riddance.

Edited December 9, 2010 by Hyperduck Quack Quack

[guitarman001]

Anybody catch him a couple of hours ago on BBS News saying that this was all very fair? I'll get to the real point in a minute... Anyway, it's ridiculous, as many have pointed out already. The total loan will be MUCH higher than years past and paying off less over a longer period of time is WORSE!! How can anybody buy this bullsh!t?

ANYWAY, the main point.... he was saying that he could almost understand the protests when you take into account living costs and GETTING ONTO THE HOUSING LADDER. He then proceeded mentioning getting a place a few times after, saying that the *small* amount graduates would pay back on their loans would allow them to save up more for things like getting a FTB property. Maybe I'm just making a meal & a big deal of this.... but what I got from it was how ingrained this now seems to be - it's the first thing on many peoples' minds. Housing ladder, housing ladder, housing ladder...

[aussieboy]

What this government doesn't understand is that the rich have a much lower cost of capital than the poor.

If the ons assume that all students will access the govt funding program, as opposed the better off using much cheaper sources of funds, then their analysis is flawed.

The last govt seemed to overlook this too, but at least they provided subsidized loans rather than almost market.

This plus the trebling of the total amount payable for the best courses in the best places is why this change is anything but progressive, whatever that ******** term means.

[LJAR]

Link of information

[guitarman001]

Damn, sorry - got excited. Mods can merge if they like.

[LJAR]

What this government doesn't understand is that the rich have a much lower cost of capital than the poor.

If the ons assume that all students will access the govt funding program, as opposed the better off using much cheaper sources of funds, then their analysis is flawed.

The last govt seemed to overlook this too, but at least they provided subsidized loans rather than almost market.

This plus the trebling of the total amount payable for the best courses in the best places is why this change is anything but progressive, whatever that ******** term means.

Show me your numbers - otherwise this looks like an uninformed rant to me.

I don't know of any cheaper source of funds other than student loans, (interest rate 1.5% this year) and they are still going to be around. (admittedly there is cash, but only a small number of people can pay £9k per year up front, and after all it is their money isn't it?)

The whole point of the new funding policies are that graduates will pay more overall, we can't afford to subsidise it like we used to. But crucially those who earn the most will pay the most after uni.

[Hyperduck Quack Quack]

When I was a student, people protested against snotty 'square' Tory fuddy-duddies like Sir Keith Joseph and Sir Rhodes Boyson.

Today I found myself feeling the same antipathy towards David Willetts - although he's actually slightly younger than me!!!! He looks like a 1950's assistant bank manager.

Edited December 9, 2010 by Hyperduck Quack Quack

[bogbrush]

Britain seems to be totally f*cked if the majority of people believe it's an outrage that people pay for their training out of higher wages they will earn in future. Instead, the noise appears to be that they have a right to be paid for by bus drivers, dinner ladies, etc.

Thankfully I'm fairly certain that most people know this is cretinous and are drowned out by noisy people and a complicit BBC.

[rented]

I don't know of any cheaper source of funds other than student loans, (interest rate 1.5% this year) and they are still going to be around. (admittedly there is cash, but only a small number of people can pay £9k per year up front, and after all it is their money isn't it?)

The new student loans interest rates are set to be measure of inflation (presumably RPI and not the lower CPI) plus 2.2%.

[richc]

Anybody catch him a couple of hours ago on BBS News saying that this was all very fair? I'll get to the real point in a minute... Anyway, it's ridiculous, as many have pointed out already. The total loan will be MUCH higher than years past and paying off less over a longer period of time is WORSE!! How can anybody buy this bullsh!t?

ANYWAY, the main point.... he was saying that he could almost understand the protests when you take into account living costs and GETTING ONTO THE HOUSING LADDER. He then proceeded mentioning getting a place a few times after, saying that the *small* amount graduates would pay back on their loans would allow them to save up more for things like getting a FTB property. Maybe I'm just making a meal & a big deal of this.... but what I got from it was how ingrained this now seems to be - it's the first thing on many peoples' minds. Housing ladder, housing ladder, housing ladder...

The protesters wouldn't know "fair" if it bit them on the backside. Making the people who gain the benefits from education bare the costs of that eduction -- yeah, so unfair. Defending subsidies for the toffs who go to Oxford and Cambridge is insane, unfair, and counter-productive. Not a single British person from a black caribbean background was admitted to Oxford last year, yet they're all paying for the students there. The sense of middle-class entitlement in the UK is just nauseating.

[Hyperduck Quack Quack]

How can you expect the poorest 50% of society to pay for the richest 50% of society to go to college to acquire the education to be better paid?

This misses the point. The point is that young people's futures are being wrecked because this government has decided to punish them for the stupidity of Gordon Brown and the recklessness of bankers. That's what makes me hopping mad.

[guitarman001]

What I'm staggered at are the costs - £9k a YEAR!? I wouldn't be paying that even for my engineering degree (my total loan was £15k over 5 years, fairly decent, still paying it off - wish wages were better as it was a solid degree and beneficial to the economy). I agree, good if it gets rid of mickey mouse degrees - but the costs are eye-watering whatever way you look at it.

Everybody benefits either directly or indirectly - parallels with the council tax here. Everybody moans about that, too, though! E.g. you need doctors, engineers etc - I believe it SHOULD be partly funded. But I do take your points on board.

[R K]

The protesters wouldn't know "fair" if it bit them on the backside. Making the people who gain the benefits from education bare the costs of that eduction -- yeah, so unfair. Defending subsidies for the toffs who go to Oxford and Cambridge is insane, unfair, and counter-productive. Not a single British person from a black caribbean background was admitted to Oxford last year, yet they're all paying for the students there. The sense of middle-class entitlement in the UK is just nauseating.

They'll reap the benefits of a future Tory cabinet in 20 years time though.

Win/win.

[Hyperduck Quack Quack]

The sense of middle-class entitlement in the UK is just nauseating.

Are you sure you're on the correct forum? This is House Price Crash

[Shroud]

Has anybody from here actually crunched the numbers?

[guitarman001]

It is staggering. But there is a saying "there is a heavy price for free". It means its not valued. It becomes abused. Price no longer helps inform economic decision making. Lack of a price is partly the reason where we are. Thousands of young people wasting their time at colege on worthless courses - all to generate income for colleges and landlords who missell on attractiveness - not real worth.

I should come clean and state I am a VI. My daughter is 16 and may be one of the first to be hit with this.

I appreciate your honesty! Here in Scotland we have gotten off lightly (devolution mind, we do mostly what we want with our budget) with fees paid and graduate edowment scrapped. I fear for my baby sister and what she will face in 15+ years' time. Or my other sister in just a few years' time. Down south, it must be an awful feeling. I'd definitely just do an apprenticeship or look abroad.

Again I agree with your points....

[foxy]

Personally I would be even more radical. I would say study for what will provide you a return sufficient to repay your loan. If nurses can't afford to go for instance - then eventually their wages will be forced up - until the point it does make sense. And with regards to philosophy and the like, I would put in place bursaries for the very best, and let the former second rate colleges go to the wall. Lastly, I would make the universities be responsible for lending the money - the more they get back from their 'investment' in young people, the better they should prosper. This would benefit society as a whole as it would stop them just marketing Mickey Mouse courses that will go nowhere but attract lots of gullible young people.

Very well said

[dissident junk]

What I'm staggered at are the costs - £9k a YEAR!? I wouldn't be paying that even for my engineering degree (my total loan was £15k over 5 years, fairly decent, still paying it off - wish wages were better as it was a solid degree and beneficial to the economy). I agree, good if it gets rid of mickey mouse degrees - but the costs are eye-watering whatever way you look at it.

Everybody benefits either directly or indirectly - parallels with the council tax here. Everybody moans about that, too, though! E.g. you need doctors, engineers etc - I believe it SHOULD be partly funded. But I do take your points on board.

Why are you surprised? It costs £6k plus a year to school a secondary school child in the state system. It is about £4K a year for primary.

And think about the costs for that. A building, heating, lighting, books, teacher's salaries, paints, chalk etc. it all mounts up. Now think about the true cost of an engineering degree, which costs more like £14K a year in reality. Not only do you have all the above, but you need all the equipment as well, all the materials, the huge libraries, all the IT.

I talked about this on the other thread. I have no idea why people are so surprised at the real cost of education to the British taxpayer.

I mean, come on guys. Some of you are engineers, scientists, you run businesses ... think of the annual running costs of your shop or lab or firm. It is the same for HE running degrees in the stuff you do for a living.

My mother in law is a hematologist. Some of the equipment now comes in at £30K plus; it isn't any cheaper for an HE lab to purchase so their students can study biochemistry.

Edited December 9, 2010 by dissident junk

[daddybear]

There is a simple answer to this.

Make all university courses 48 weeks per year not approx 30 weeks. Thus a course could be done in two years not three and students would only be paying approx 25% extra.

i doubt the NUS would sit still for it tho, as they wouldnt get there drinking and partying

[LuckyOne]

There is a simple answer to this.

Make all university courses 48 weeks per year not approx 30 weeks. Thus a course could be done in two years not three and students would only be paying approx 25% extra.

i doubt the NUS would sit still for it tho, as they wouldnt get there drinking and partying

Both of my kids are in their second year at "proper" unis.

Their experience is enriched by playing sport at the highest level at their unis, doing useful (albeit unpaid) things over the summer and working at menial jobs during the academic year.

The real question is about whether education is a product or an experience. Perhaps we need to go back to the "olden days" where the product is the polys and the experience is the unis.

Perhaps we should aim for a 50/50 split between unis and polys rather than renaming polys as unis at much higher cost and aming for a 50% participation rate at unis.

[Redcellar]

It is an unfair system that's just been voted in. £9k x 4 year course = £36K plus living expenses. Then they start taxing you at £21K, but the average wage is supposed to be £25K and they were saying its because graduates get paid better that they should be taxed. So then start taxing them at £30K or more then.

Plus the whole debate falls down when you consider that higher paid graduates would pay higher rate tax, so they are paying more back into the system already! On top of that do the maths. Whilst a student was racking up £36K + living expenses they were also missing out on four years of employment. So that makes them an additional £60K worse off before they even graduate (based on a £15K per year starting salary). Over £100 grand worse off than not going to uni as soon as you step out of the door.

It is so messed up I don't see why any student that wasn't from a well off family would even go to University any more.

And then people moan about funding students, we don't have the money, "I didn't get it so why should they" type attitude. Well I don't have kids, please stop paying child maintenance to everyone.

That's my ten cents worth. Education is to be encouraged and cherished, apparently not in this 'modern' society.

[daddybear]

So we the tax payers should be supporting the product not paying taxes for people to have a experience

Edited December 9, 2010 by daddybear