Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2010 16:19:52 GMT 1
What a difference a couple of months can make. Back in April, whilst playing to the deluded throngs of would be voters, clegg said: "Labour and the Conservatives have been trying to keep tuition fees out of this election campaign.
"It's because they don't want to come clean with you about what they're planning.
" despite the huge financial strain fees already place on Britain's young people, it is clear both Labour and the Conservatives want to lift the cap on fees.
"If fees rise to £7,000 a year, as many rumours suggest they would, within five years some students will be leaving university up to £44,000 in debt.
"That would be a disaster. If we have learnt one thing from the economic crisis, it is that you can't build a future on debt.
"The Liberal Democrats are different. Not only will we oppose any raising of the cap, we will scr@p tuition fees for good, including for part-time students.
"We can't do it overnight, but we can start straight away with students in their first year - that way means anyone at university this autumn will have their debt cut by at least £3,000.
"Students can make the difference in countless seats in this election.Today of coarse, now they are tory puppy dogs sniffing the crotch of their master, cameron, the policy has changed a little. www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-10649459i wonder, if i was a student who voted for them because of their big words and tough stance on student fees, would i feel betrayed now they have rolled over and adopted tory policy?
|
|
|
Post by Feedo Gnasher on Jul 15, 2010 16:23:09 GMT 1
What exactly are the Liberal Democrats providing in this coalition?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2010 16:23:35 GMT 1
Pab, I must be missing something here - aren't the points made above all about reducing the level of debt students who wish to go to University face and isn't the news today that Cable and his team are aiming to reduce the level of debt faced by students by replacing loans to go to uni with a tax on higher earners after it?
|
|
|
Post by monkee on Jul 15, 2010 16:30:38 GMT 1
I suppose it depends on what they consider a high earner is. dont like the idea of "allowing institutions to fail" though, sounds like a waste of money and resources to me.
|
|
|
Post by shrewroo on Jul 15, 2010 17:01:21 GMT 1
Maybe you are missing the fact that the Lib Dem's didn't get voted into power - they actually came third. As a result, you should probably anticipate their policies having little impact now that they are sharing power. If their policies were any good, they'd have done better than they did tbf.
|
|
|
Post by RBA on Jul 15, 2010 18:06:31 GMT 1
Politicians of all parties dont look great at the moment but these are hard times and the election was pretty well policy free -Have a read of Mandelsons memoirs if you think Labour are different I am against a graduate tax mainly because it would encourage some very bright people to emigrate to avoid paying it so a bad idea However it is in my uinderstanding a progressive rather than regressive tax and would redistribute wealth which is the kind of thing Labour say they want to do
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2010 18:34:57 GMT 1
Well it is because of the labour wish of wanting all to have the chance to go to uni that we now have many people with useless degrees, and tto many university educated people struggling.
Would be intersting to see how many people with a degree follow that through to a credible career!!
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Jul 15, 2010 19:03:44 GMT 1
Would be intersting to see how many people with a degree follow that through to a credible career!! Not many. Most of them join the military.
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Jul 15, 2010 19:15:32 GMT 1
Another area to hit me in the pocket.
I help two through Uni so they can leave with as little debt as possible.
Pab, question what should Labour have done ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2010 19:46:37 GMT 1
Pab, I must be missing something here - aren't the points made above all about reducing the level of debt students who wish to go to University face and isn't the news today that Cable and his team are aiming to reduce the level of debt faced by students by replacing loans to go to uni with a tax on higher earners after it? Ant, you seemed to have missed the point. Before the election, the libdems gave it large about how they would oppose any lifting of the cap on tuition fees. Now they are in power vince cable is proposing to lift the cap to £7K. that will help student debt. also, the tax i believe will be paid for a period of 20 to 25 years. i dont believe the rate of that tax has yet been announced? Well it is because of the labour wish of wanting all to have the chance to go to uni that we now have many people with useless degrees, and tto many university educated people struggling. !! imagine that eh, a political party wanting everyone to have the chance of the best education, not just the wealthy priviledged few. Pab, question what should Labour have done ? Labour should have stuck to what they said they would do in their election manifesto, if they had got into power . we could argue about policy all day (and longer ) but surely the point here is the shocking way the libdems seem to, bit by bit, be morphing into tories, dropping a policy and a principle per day just to appease their new masters. personally i find it sickening.
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Jul 15, 2010 19:52:06 GMT 1
It won't last mate, the Lib Dems are a tool for the Tories and Labour to abuse.
I think they will come out of this worse off.
As for Students Pab answer the question please.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2010 22:37:59 GMT 1
Pab, I must be missing something here - aren't the points made above all about reducing the level of debt students who wish to go to University face and isn't the news today that Cable and his team are aiming to reduce the level of debt faced by students by replacing loans to go to uni with a tax on higher earners after it? Ant, you seemed to have missed the point. Before the election, the libdems gave it large about how they would oppose any lifting of the cap on tuition fees. Now they are in power [img src="http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/9825/ img14.imageshack.us/img14/9825/getaway.gif"].gif [/img] vince cable is proposing to lift the cap to £7K. [/quote] Yep, I have missed the point, and still not sure I get it to be honest! Will the policy outlined today not lessen the debt levels required for those wanting to go to uni and the cost needed immediately and therefore open it up to those from less priveledged families - isn't that a policy as a Labour traditionalist you'd support?
|
|
|
Post by The Shropshire Tenor on Jul 15, 2010 22:51:40 GMT 1
I wonder about the practicalities, will a PPE from Oxbridge be taxed at the same rate as a media studies degree from a former Polytechnic or will someone decide that some degrees are more taxable than others?
How will the tax be collected, governments are not much good at that sort of thing, just think of the CSA for example.
When I was a departmental head I was the only non graduate. How fair would my colleagues have felt the system to be in a situation where we were all on the same pay grade but they would be paying more tax than me?
And what has happened to the argument that graduates get paid more so they contribute more tax anyway?
|
|
|
Post by rob5251 on Jul 16, 2010 8:08:48 GMT 1
Well it is because of the labour wish of wanting all to have the chance to go to uni that we now have many people with useless degrees, and tto many university educated people struggling. Would be intersting to see how many people with a degree follow that through to a credible career!! My son's just got his degree in Business studies and has got a job with a good chance of progressing using the skills he has learned. So have two of his friends. one of his other friends who's parents paid for everything didn't want a job until after the world cup had finished and now can't be bothered to find a job. If My son hadn't have had the help the last government had given him he would never of had the chance to go to uni and better himself, as my wife and i could not afford to pay for him to go to uni he funded his self and worked part time the whole time he was there and back in Shrewsbury every holiday. What Labour provided was the chance for people like my son to go to uni and use their degree for a career, unlike the more well off just going to uni because that's what Mummy and Daddy did and having a jolly up, those are the one's with the "useless degree's".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2010 9:43:03 GMT 1
[ Yep, I have missed the point, and still not sure I get it to be honest! Will the policy outlined today not lessen the debt levels required for those wanting to go to uni and the cost needed immediately and therefore open it up to those from less priveledged families - isn't that a policy as a Labour traditionalist you'd support? The point ant is that both clegg and cable both signed pre election promises opposing any increase in tuition fees. the means of repayment will not make much difference, infact cable has said that the present system is already a form of graduate tax. what will make a difference is if the amount you need to pay back is raised from £3K to £7K, and that is what they are proposing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2010 22:15:16 GMT 1
Yes, fair point on the increase in fees. What are your thoughts on my suggestion that a policy to allow more students the chance to afford uni is in line with Labour thinking?
|
|
|
Post by MartinB on Jul 17, 2010 8:29:16 GMT 1
[ Yep, I have missed the point, and still not sure I get it to be honest! Will the policy outlined today not lessen the debt levels required for those wanting to go to uni and the cost needed immediately and therefore open it up to those from less priveledged families - isn't that a policy as a Labour traditionalist you'd support? The point ant is that both clegg and cable both signed pre election promises opposing any increase in tuition fees. the means of repayment will not make much difference, infact cable has said that the present system is already a form of graduate tax. what will make a difference is if the amount you need to pay back is raised from £3K to £7K, and that is what they are proposing. Matron, think you are missing the point slightly. We have a coalition Government that means both parties have to change policies with the Junior Partner having to change most. If Labour had joined forces with someone else some of their policies would have had to change.
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Jul 17, 2010 9:21:31 GMT 1
The graduate tax is a good idea because it links financial cost to financial benefit. There should be a movement to this for UK students. The immediate problem is the dislocation to income flows for university. So, perhaps a hybrid system should be put in place. Of course that would be inefficient - the inefficiency of discouraging low childrn from low income families from going to universities being hidden and therefore ignored.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2010 9:38:42 GMT 1
Yes, fair point on the increase in fees. What are your thoughts on my suggestion that a policy to allow more students the chance to afford uni is in line with Labour thinking? think this probably sums it up ant www.bbc.co.uk/news/10355042[ Matron, think you are missing the point slightly. We have a coalition Government that means both parties have to change policies with the Junior Partner having to change most. . sorry Martin, i think its you that has missed the point. both these people, both clegg and cable, in a big splash of publicity, a grand show stopping, headline grabbing (watch our opinion poll rating rise after this one) act, signed a pledge promising not to raise tuition fees. take a look at the manifesto www.libdems.org.uk/education.aspxLiberal Democrats are the only party which believes university education should be free and everyone who has the ability should be able to go to university and not be put off by the cost.from the telegraph. Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg pledged to oppose any attempt to remove the cap on tuition fees, warning of a " disaster" if student debt levels were allowed to rise further. now you tell me, and none of this bollox about coalition this and that, have the lib dems betrayed many of their young voters, forsaken their principles and sold their souls to the highest bidder purely and simply to get into bed with the tories. and yes, Labour let a lot of people down, didnt fulfill all of their pledges. we have debated it umteen times. now tell me that the condems "nu politics" is really very "nu" at all. its the same old tory politics being supported and assisted by their libdem Whores.
|
|
tez
Shropshire County League
Posts: 35
|
Post by tez on Jul 18, 2010 0:10:23 GMT 1
lol.dad u are funny sometimes,
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2010 10:01:19 GMT 1
lol.dad u are funny sometimes, shut up son or the video i made of you "chair dancing" last night goes up on you tube!!!!
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Jul 18, 2010 11:43:56 GMT 1
The point ant is that both clegg and cable both signed pre election promises opposing any increase in tuition fees. the means of repayment will not make much difference, infact cable has said that the present system is already a form of graduate tax. what will make a difference is if the amount you need to pay back is raised from £3K to £7K, and that is what they are proposing. Matron, think you are missing the point slightly. We have a coalition Government that means both parties have to change policies with the Junior Partner having to change most. If Labour had joined forces with someone else some of their policies would have had to change. That has to be one of the worst thing about this wretched coalition. They now believe themselves to have carte blanche and feel justified in doing things that weren't in either manifesto on the grounds of 'compromise' or 'co-opertaion'. Either that or they claim that things have changed so much since people cast their votes that they've been forced to do things they promised they definitely wouldn't do eg, raise VAT.
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Jul 18, 2010 12:57:07 GMT 1
That has to be one of the worst thing about this wretched coalition. Would a Labour - Liberal coalition have been wretched ? I seem to remember the previous Primeminsiter prostrating himself rather quickly after the results were in. The thing is due to the votes cast we are stuck with a joining of parties, I would rather the ConDem one than the alternative. We may not like what has to be done, lets see where we are in 3 years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2010 13:38:47 GMT 1
Going to be an interesting vote on electoral change next May...
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Jul 18, 2010 13:46:31 GMT 1
Going to be an interesting vote on electoral change next May... Precisely Ant, first past the post was never perfect but at least we had a party in sole control. Those decrying this coalition at every opportunity (Pab) may have to get used to it if a yes vote is cast next year. Be interesting to see the early indications on which way it will go.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2010 15:43:01 GMT 1
You'd imagine that staunch Labour or Tory voters would be mad to vote for PR rather than FPTP - turkeys don't vote for Christmas and all that!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2010 17:10:53 GMT 1
I don't agree with a graduate tax. The income tax system in Britain is progressive, if you earn more, you pay more tax, independent of whether you've been to university or not.
Vince Cable is trying to remove the burden on students by offering a tax in later life rather than up-front fees so I can understand his/the Lib Dems thinking.
However I think the real issue is that too many people are going to uni. Yes the opportunity should be there for everyone, but the thought that 50% of people should go to uni/higher education is crazy imo. Uni won't suit (or benefit) all of these people whereas an apprenticeship/going straight into work etc possibly could.
It seems there is a misconception that going to uni will result in you achieving a well paid job.
If less people went to uni the funding gap wouldn't be so large, reducing the need to charge such high (any) tuition fees.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2010 19:46:07 GMT 1
You'd imagine that staunch Labour or Tory voters would be mad to vote for PR rather than FPTP - turkeys don't vote for Christmas and all that! and vice versa ant, a liberal voter would be mad not to vote for pr as its the only way they will ever obtain any kind of real power (other than of coarse ditching their beliefs and principles, and jumping into bed with the tories). do we really believe that if the rent boy democrats received as big a share of the vote as the tories or Labour, they would be so in favour of electoral reform as they are?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 18, 2010 20:09:48 GMT 1
Certainly not Matron - c. 20% of the vote for how ever many elections now and not one sniff of victory while Labour and the Tories have repeatedly been given mandates to govern with well less than 50% of the vote cast in their favour.
It would be nice if there were to be more than just one the two options (FPTP vs. PR) on the ballot next May.
|
|
|
Post by The Shropshire Tenor on Jul 18, 2010 20:53:20 GMT 1
My desire for a change to the voting system is not party political, I'd simply like my vote to count.
I became eligible to vote over 40 years ago and no one I have voted for has ever been elected. General elections are decided in a few marginal constituencies and these are where the parties concentrate their efforts.
I have never had a canvasser knock on my door, never mind an actual candidate.
The only way I could engage with the candidates at the recent election was by going to a public meeting and attempting to ask a question. I live in a very safe seat and it quickly became apparent that the candidates from the parties who knew they would lose were of a low standard. It was obvious that good candidates were not going to be wasted in a fruitless battle.
It is clearly unfair that a party getting 23% of the vote got 8% of the seats. The irony is that the Lib Dems agreement with the Tories is going to destroy their popularity to the extent they will be lucky to get half that %age vote in the next election.
|
|