|
Post by ProfessorPatPending on Jan 27, 2004 20:20:37 GMT 1
The government have won by a margin of 5 votes
|
|
|
Post by skipwithrob on Jan 27, 2004 20:22:50 GMT 1
you're s**tting me? ! ****ing gutted. 5 measley votes. I wonder what new concessions Clarke and Blair have made?
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Jan 27, 2004 20:26:22 GMT 1
They today agreed to hold a review next year into the impact of tuition fees on students from middle income families. That was enough to get a few to change their vote today.
A sad day for university education in this country in my opinion. But I know opinion on the issue is divided from the last time it came up on this board.
Still, it is a major rebellion when a goverment with a majority of more than 200 wins by just five votes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2004 20:28:38 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by kickinpretty on Jan 27, 2004 20:45:41 GMT 1
Well done Tory Blair - You will also get my vote
|
|
|
Post by skipwithrob on Jan 27, 2004 20:50:48 GMT 1
LOL will you still be saying that Paul when you are reliant upon state handouts to pay for your care when/if you get to 70odd?
I don't understand why they didnt just raise the tax levy to 50% on all those earning £100,000 up?
Surely that would have raised the required amount of money for universities, whilst not penalising the already stretched middleclasses.
I blame Blair in the first place. The defense budget is running £3billion over budget. we are buying obsoleate machines (Euro fighter) and wasting time effort and money.
That £3bill would have been more than enough to give higher education the cash boost it needed, while still leaving money spare.
Nevermind with the economy doing so well the Government can afford to waste money here there and everywhere, after all its not exactly theres!
|
|
|
Post by welshshrew5 on Jan 27, 2004 21:11:47 GMT 1
They today agreed to hold a review next year into the impact of tuition fees on students from middle income families. That was enough to get a few to change their vote today. A sad day for university education in this country in my opinion. Yep, agreed Chris. A few gutless spineless MPs offered a way out by the whips. Review my arse. Politics sucks.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Jan 27, 2004 21:19:04 GMT 1
these students must be getting too much money Ant borrowed a tenner on saturday and paid me back the same day
|
|
|
Post by duncowshrew on Jan 27, 2004 21:26:38 GMT 1
I've got 3 kids and the last thing I want is for them is to find themselves in debt to the tune of approx 15K for having the timerity to try and get themselves an education.
My advice to them, when aged about 16 is to get the f*ck out of this country. It's going down the toilet.
As far as I am aware, Mr Blair didn't have to pay for his own education so why should anyone else. He's nowt but a frigging hypocrite of the worst order. Vote UKIP.
|
|
|
Post by kickinpretty on Jan 27, 2004 21:32:38 GMT 1
Skip - why is it wrong to expect students to fund their own education?
Why should they have a free ride and why should the majority of lower to lower-middle classes have to pay for the middle classes to get ahead in life and earn on average 1-1.5 times there own incomes?
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Jan 27, 2004 21:38:32 GMT 1
You are twisting the facts kickinpretty. You make it sound like only middle class families go to uni and that is not true at all. You make it sound like the burden to fund it falls on the less well off but it is shared by all.
Education in this country has traditionally been state funded as far as possible on the grounds that we should help people to maximise their potential. That is a good principle in my eyes and it is one that is being eroded by this plan.
Do you agree with paul who refers to students as scroungers then? That is not a fair reflection at all and cheapens the debate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2004 21:44:39 GMT 1
Correct me if I'm wrong but do not these proposals outline that students repay fees (along with loans as with the current practise) once they've got a job.
And they only begin to pay them back once their salary is a certain level.
It seems fair enough to me.
You go to university and the chances are you will earn more later in life than if you don't.
I would be working now on educating potential university candidates now that if they are prudent with their money and work hard during their summer vacation then there is no need to be worried about such fees.
|
|
|
Post by duncowshrew on Jan 27, 2004 21:45:55 GMT 1
When I was a lad (god, i sound old ), nobody in this country had to pay for their further education. They even gave you free grants so that you could go. Mind you ,in those days, students studied for "proper" degrees. Nowadays you get idiots going to uni to study bendy bananas, Becks hairstyle and why we have to pump so much silicone into Jordans chest. Real important subjects.
If you cut out the crap degrees and reduce the number of numpties that go to uni,then those that may have something to contribute to society on graduating can have it for free.
Weare,afterall, a rich country. That's why we fight so many wars.
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Jan 27, 2004 21:51:40 GMT 1
When I was a lad (god, i sound old ), nobody in this country had to pay for their further education. They even gave you free grants so that you could go. Mind you ,in those days, students studied for "proper" degrees. Nowadays you get idiots going to uni to study bendy bananas, Becks hairstyle and why we have to pump so much silicone into Jordans chest. Real important subjects. If you cut out the crap degrees and reduce the number of numpties that go to uni,then those that may have something to contribute to society on graduating can have it for free. Agreed. I made a similar post when this was debated before. There's not many more graduate jobs now than there were 20 years ago but this government has a target to get 50 per cent of 18 year olds going to uni. That makes no sense to me. Less courses, less students, funded properly and accompanied by more vocational training for those for whom uni is not the best option (the New Deal was a good initiative by Labour in that regards). That makes good sense for he future of the country's economy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2004 21:57:30 GMT 1
duncow, why should i as a taxpayer pay for your 3 kids to go to higher education?? i cannot afford it for my own, but if thats what they choose to do i will expect to fork out so he does not have that debt, same as you should for your kids, not be reliant upon the taxpayer to foot the bill for the average students 3 year drinking binge and 3 lessons a week, and 12 weeks holiday.
|
|
|
Post by welshshrew5 on Jan 27, 2004 22:06:58 GMT 1
Ant, why shouldn't be people be worried about handing over an extra £9k at 10% a month of their salary.
For someone who leaves Uni on about 15K, they will be paying £50 a month - at 20k they will be paying about £70-80 a month for tens of years.
How on earth people won't worry is beyond me.
I was damn lucky having my parents save to put me through college. But I'd feel sick at the thought of this £9K if I was going now.
'Education is expensive. What price ignorance?'
|
|
|
Post by welshshrew5 on Jan 27, 2004 22:10:33 GMT 1
Paul, having taken the highly offensive line placing students as 'wasters', I wonder if you believe that university graduates add anything to this country?
Surely we could fund higher education by slashing our defence budget?
Why should I be funding the salaries of a load of soldiers fighting wars I don't want?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2004 22:14:20 GMT 1
welshrew, use your democratic right and vote, then make me redundant and a huge payout ;D
|
|
|
Post by CuyahogaBlue on Jan 27, 2004 22:14:29 GMT 1
Back when.......I always assumed that an educated workforce was a community good, good for society in general. No tuition payments and grants basically means tested. It worked then, but society has changed.
I now work at a private university - undergraduate tuition is roughly $20,000 a year, for four years. Add on living expenses and a student can easily graduate with a huge debt. Add in graduate school for a couple of years, even med school, and debt can easily reach 1/4m. There are grants, scholarships, fellowships etc but private education is expensive. State education is cheaper. But the number of students graduating with crippling debt is worrying.
|
|
|
Post by welshshrew5 on Jan 27, 2004 22:16:35 GMT 1
I've voted every opportunity Paul, but now feel relegated to just registering to vote, turning up at the poll station and abstaining.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2004 22:27:39 GMT 1
but i use my vote, its my little bit in saying how the country goes, you waste your vote, not my problem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2004 22:38:38 GMT 1
I've got one year to go at uni after this year.
I wouldn't be studying at uni if I didn't think it was going to help me be a success in later life and I think paying for the privilege of this is fair.
I'll be £20K is debt when I leave Uni but realise that I will only have to pay that back at a rate I can afford for what I earn.
The reason higher education used to be funded so highly was that there were far less students going to univesity in the years gone by. The Government need to stop their drive at getting 50% of people to university and concentrate their efforts on other projects such as modern apprentiships etc...
Paul - at the end of the day graduates do some much for this country, Britain as a whole benefits from the higher education system.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2004 22:45:02 GMT 1
|
|
charlese
Midland League Division Two
Posts: 162
|
Post by charlese on Jan 27, 2004 23:18:05 GMT 1
[loyalshrew says" I wouldn't be studying at uni if I didn't think it was going to help me be a success in later life and I think paying for the privilege of this is fair."
But surely loyalshrew if you get paid more you will pay more tax anyway? The other point is that this is a broken manifesto pledge No wonder we feel cynical about politics both national and local!
|
|
|
Post by Salop on Jan 27, 2004 23:22:07 GMT 1
Paul, I can understand your belief that students are wasters, but do you think this is really a forward step for education and the country at large? More and more people that aren’t good enough but can afford it, or cant be arsed to do anything else will go to university, sit around for 4 years and get a degree. Unless they are really rich they will come out saddled with some kind of debt, and they won’t be able to get a job because there are too many graduates and too few jobs. So what will they do? They’ll either sit around on benefit, get a poorly paid job that won’t relieve their debt or contribute to the country or leave this country and go pay someone else’s taxes. There isn’t a market for graduates so why do we need more of them. The more that go, and are educated at what are really supped up poly’s, the less quality we'll get out. Is that really good for the country? a bunch of grads with degraded degrees and debt? NO. I too am sick of these ridiculous waster courses and I’m sick of people getting to university on substandard grades. I always thought Uni was for the best, the top 5-10% of pupils whatever their finance, well not anymore I graduate next year, but unlike Ant I don’t feel the same security in the career I’ve chosen. There are very few jobs in design and manufacture because this country has become a service based state, whether this is sustainable is debatable, but if I am to find my dream job I’ll have to move abroad and therefore avoid contributing to this country. Oh well, at least I wont have to pay for any operations you have
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2004 23:23:35 GMT 1
Yes I'd expect to be paying more tax if I had a decent job.
However there are plenty of people in this country who are in the top tax bracket but didn't go to university. I don't see why they should have to fund the whole of my education.
On the manefeto point - Balir et al are saying that this won't come in until after the next election and that's if they're still in power - hence not breaking the current manefesto. However I can understand why the voting public are annoied
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2004 23:24:55 GMT 1
I'd rather be earning more and paying more tax than earning less and being in a lower tax band.
If you go to university you are likely to earn more than the average non-university graduate and as a result I think there shouldn't be a problem in paying for it.
|
|
|
Post by RuytonShrew on Jan 27, 2004 23:25:40 GMT 1
But surely loyalshrew if you get paid more you will pay more tax anyway? The other point is that this is a broken manifesto pledge No wonder we feel cynical about politics both national and local! Hear hear!!! Equally, the figures Welshshrew quotes are very accurate. Until quite recently I was only on around £15K and I can tell you losing £70 or £80 a month to pay back my student loan is hard enough, having to pay the same again to meet tuition fee repayments would be crippling. Paul, why the irrational vendetta against students? I am yet to meet one who has only three hours of lectures a week by the way. All I have heard from you on this thread are a load of old and silly cliches.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2004 23:30:04 GMT 1
Paul is taking the píss. If I were him though I'd be thinking up excuses already for missing open goals in upcoming b&a matches ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2004 23:30:47 GMT 1
I've met quite a few people who only have 3-4 hours a week, some of them I used to go to college with.
I know there was a lad who goes to the same uni as ant and had a full time job whilst he was at uni in his first year
|
|