Even though you dont have to pay back until a certain threshold i dont think i wpuld have gone to university if fees were 3k let alone 9k. I think the biggest scandal is the selling off of student loan debt so that actually the cost of one is above inflation
While it was the coalition that increased fees in 2010, a friend of mine worked for the Labour Party at that time and told me there was very little difference between what the coalition did and what Labour were proposing (was it called a graduate tax?).
Graduate tax was a proposal from a report, but the government bottled it and introduced tuition fees. A graduate tax would have simply meant that all graduates would have paid a slightly higher rate of tax beyond a threshold. Note the word all. If you sent your kids to Eton, the extra fees for Uni probably seemed reasonable. Kids from less privileged backgrounds picked up debt.
Oh I think you should read,often it's hilarious,and I'll wager you'll get plenty of responses from those you've identified in your earlier post they just can't help themselves.
I went to Wales to do a degree in Chemical Engineering. When I finished in 1982 I didn't owe a money (although my dad had to pay 60 pounds a month towards the fees). When my daughter finished Vets school 3 years ago she owed 70,000 pounds! OK she chose a degree / profession that will enable her to pay it back (if she keeps her job) but that's a lot of money / pressure for a 23 year old.
Absurd. This is no way for anyone to start out in life. It's the financial equivalent to the FA/FL docking a club 30 points and telling them to get out of that. One of my sons is a vet. Life is difficult enough anyway, and with potential losses of subsidies for farm clients looking less rosy by the day. Had he been saddled with that kind of debt it would have been crippling.
Agree 100%. My youngest daughter did a degree in music and her partner one in graphic design, but she has to work as a mortgage broker and he as an insurance underwriter just to pay their mortgage and student loan payments every month. Yes, they could get lower-paid jobs where they didn't reach the repayment threshold but then they couldn't afford anywhere to live, renting or buying. If I were their age I would be inciting a revolution.
I have a good friend and his daughter qualified as a doctor 18 months ago and recently said that's enough.. Gone to Australia for twice the money and half the hours to train as a surgeon. We couldn't get it more wrong if we tried..
I have been sending congratulatory messages to friends in France all day. I just so hope that Macron can do what he wants to do, and doesn't end up encumbered by party political hardliners like Obama did. Great message from the French. Their economy is ****, unemployment is high and yet they still know that you don't turn inwards. Let's see how we all are in 5 years time when we see the full folly of Brexit and a (hopefully) resurgent EU. Vive La Republique!
Give over! My daughter's off to Vet college next year....let me live in blissful ignorance. My response was because the statement is just not true. Tuition fees were introduced by Labour in 1998. But that doesn't fit the "everything that was ever done (or will ever be done) that was evil was done by the Tories" narrative. BTW, I speak as someone who's never voted anything but Tory in the past and who can see himself never again voting Tory, so I'm not out to defend them. I just like the truth rather than alternative facts. It's expressed in my signature, it's so important to me. And, as ever, in life as in football, life isn't black or white. The Tories did bad things, Labour did bad things. The Tories did good things, Labour did good things. I detest the idea that seems to have seeped into modern life that you have to believe that some people are inherently evil while others are inherently saintly. I think that's a large part of why we're in the middle of a wasteful and soon-to-be-awful political upheaval. If people didn't express everything in extremes debate would be much more reasonable and productive. Vin
Ian's posts show he has passion and truly believes what he says. I like reading his posts even though there are parts of them where we have vastly opposing views. We are probably closer on some things than we are to the "normal" folks on here. Maybe that horseshoe thingamy where the far right and far left (which we must be because we disagree with the narrative) are close together?
Because all we hear is people jumping up and down about Russian interference in elections and how bad that is but Obama and the EU can push propaganda "advising" people which way they should vote and that is fine, nothing wrong with that. If Putin was on the net saying he supports Le Pen there is uproar. Tusk, Juncker, Obama (never ending list) saying they back Macron and people should vote for him and that is fine nothing wrong with that. I wouldn't say I am relaxed about it. Just that I don't for a minute think it is a one way street. I would go as far to say that the "good guys" do a lot more of it than the "bad guys" but it is looked at differently and not considered "interference" because its the "good guys."
My daughter went to the RCVS in London. I think she enjoyed it. Although after experiencing the farming work experience periods on farms in Yorkshire and Wales decided the dogs and cats type of life was for her! don't worry about the debt, after 3 years of employment she's on about 40,000 a year. (although it did take her a year to get a job) My advice would be to get your daughter a job lined up as soon as possible because Vets are not inclined to take on anyone with no experience. My little girl had to work a year as a nurse before she got a proper job.
Blair brought in tuition fees and why shouldn't the worse off children have a chance at better (more targeted) schools? There are gifted poor kids as well you know and this "bring everyone down to the same level" does not mean equality. I think you will find that the grammar school proposition is very popular with the less well off because they see it as a chance and even if you can suggest it is a small chance it is still a chance. The only people I hear arguing against grammar schools are those that are a bit better off talking on behalf of those that are less well off. I wish there were grammar schools around still when I was a kid and maybe I wouldn't have got so bored in classes waiting for the rest to catch up with the teacher devoting all of her/his time to them and leaving me sat at a desk for half of each lesson with nothing to do. And yes I would have got in a grammar school. I entered Comprehensive secondary school with the best "Richmond scores" in my year. Ignoring the fact that "globalisation" is the reason the rich are getting richer. Something the left are continually defending.
These days how it works is if you aren't Centrist and serially nod your head in agreement with the echo chamber then you are far right or far left. There is no increment anymore. You are either in or out. Lost count of the times I have been labelled far left or far right the past couple of years because I disagreed with something and dependent on the subject that is being addressed. Like on Quora earlier I was saying that I agreed with some of Corbyn's policies and maybe more than I do of May's. And then of course I was asked why I don;t vote for Corbyn. Main reason being of course that certain policies I am vehemently against and the ones I agree with would not work until the system is sorted out. Build a million homes is a great policy but you know that it will end up being big developers and friends of government/councils that will then charge an agreed figure above the going rate to build these houses as well as many more back scratching going ons. All of those chummy deals with "preferred partners" need wiping out before this sort of policy would be good and they should have gone further detailing that all these houses will be built by local firms, local builders and not by the fake local developer with his unmanned "registered office" in the locality and a board of Middle Eastern investors. And we all know that taxing anyone above £80k is a great idea however we also know that those above that will find ways to pay themselves less and thus avoid paying more tax so again the policy is good but wouldn't work until the system is changed. Throw the old tax system in the bin and write a much simplified version without the loopholes that the "trusted advisor from those who would benefit" puts in. It is no good having good policies if they will not work in the current system. The current system needs sorting out first.
Like you, I am in favour of grammer schools. Yes of course you are going to have a larger proportion of more affluent kids because you can say they are better tutored or because their parents are more involved. I would rather the smartest kids get put into the best schools so that they have the best chance to progress. From what i saw teaching is tailored to either the slowest/average of the group rather than for the brightest. Even at comprehensives which i was at you are sorted into sets for certain subjects. Why would you hinder childrens abilities based upon how rich they are in order to promote a "fairer" system. I would prefer their to be extra curricular lessons/activities for those in comprehensives to close down the disadvantage so they get "extra tuition" if they wanted to rather than shoving everyone into 1 school.
We'll probably find that me and IMP are long lost brothers, swapped at birth, I too scored 98% in the last year of the 11+. I then had to join the comprehensive school system in 1971. Didn't do me any harm, til I discovered sex, drugs and rock n roll! but no, teachers didn't concentrate on the lesser performing pupils, they used the better performing pupils to encourage the less. If you dump the less gifted into a second tier education system, that's where they know where to stay. So at 11 you are doomed! that's possibly where my left leaning politics were born.
