University fees have increased

[homeforsummer]

I think my main objection to the increase in fees is that it's typical of modern society.

Whilst I'm in agreement that with a university education you should be able to gain better employment and make extra money over the course of a career and that for this reason students can theoretically pay for these huge increases, it's typical in that they're now expected to go into even greater debt in the short term in the pursuit of long-term goals.

I don't think that's right (as in, fair, just etc). We live in a society where many people already live far beyond their means and come unstuck through rapidly accruing debt. And now we're asking students, many of whom might be important people in our society several years down the line, to join the ranks of people who are being asked to borrow very high sums of money in the short term in order that they contribute it back to society in the long term.

There's definitely a flaw in the system.

Put it this way. You could call me intelligent, in an academic manner. I even have a fair chunk of common sense. However, I'm no entrepreneur, and I'm uninterested in a career in manual labour, so university is the most logical route for me to take to bigger and better things.

I feel priveleged (and bloody lucky) to have survived through two good degrees without having to pay through the nose for it (relatively - I'm about 10k in debt with the student loans company, and I had to work full-time as well as doing my masters to pay the 4k fees for that). If I'd had to pay the full whack, I simply couldn't have afforded it, and on the grounds of the debt I'd have to go into to do so, I probably wouldn't have gone to uni in the first place. Which would scupper my career choices no end.

I'll only borrow what I feel I can afford to pay back. If I thought I could afford to pay back 20-30k, I'd have a 20-30k car sitting outside right now.

 

[Neenor]

Excuse me students, why should I as a taxpayer pay for your free education? What the government is asking you to do is 100% fair. Basically, all you need to do is pay it back when you can afford it.

Stop moaning, your getting an education on credit.

 

[homeforsummer]

Excuse me students, why should I as a taxpayer pay for your free education? What the government is asking you to do is 100% fair. Basically, all you need to do is pay it back when you can afford it.

Stop moaning, your getting an education on credit.

Excuse me smart-alec (for want of a better term), but I've taken jobs before, after and during both my degree courses (so I've been a taxpayer for about nine years now) in order that I afford them, as well as taking out a loan, so forgive me if I think your comment is a bit ignorant in assuming that we're all layabouts getting everything for free.

And I still think it's a bit daft expecting tens of thousands of young people to go into massive debt when there's already such a problem with personal debt in this country.

 

[Jondot]

Stop moaning, your getting an education on credit.

Well then it's practically free! That's how credit works, isn't it?

 

[MatskiMonk]

The new teenage revolution. Music to my ears. 👍

Where have you been for the last 15 years?

So it begins...

Students used to protest against war and nuclear weapons.. now they protest about having to pay their way...

 

[Sphinx]

Students used to protest against war and nuclear weapons.. now they protest about having to pay their way...

Students used to protest against many things. It's not what they are protesting about, it's the fact they are actually protesting.

 

[YSSMAN]

I'm just glad that the students are out there giving a damn, unlike 88.7% of us here in the US who just take it, and then ask for more. Whatever happened to students giving a damn, you know, just in general?

 

[Omnis]

Too busy studying to give a damn.

 

[xXSilencerXx]

Excuse me smart-alec (for want of a better term), but I've taken jobs before, after and during both my degree courses (so I've been a taxpayer for about nine years now) in order that I afford them, as well as taking out a loan, so forgive me if I think your comment is a bit ignorant in assuming that we're all layabouts getting everything for free.

And I still think it's a bit daft expecting tens of thousands of young people to go into massive debt when there's already such a problem with personal debt in this country.

Sorry dude he's right, it's daft to think the government owes you an education.

People need to take control of their own lives and stop expecting the government to hand everything to them. I for one know I am tired of the all the minorities getting tons of financial aid only for the majority of them to fail every class they take, meanwhile myself being a white male am looked down upon in school because apparently white people "make too much money".

 

[homeforsummer]

Sorry dude he's right, it's daft to think the government owes you an education.

People need to take control of their own lives and stop expecting the government to hand everything to them. I for one know I am tired of the all the minorities getting tons of financial aid only for the majority of them to fail every class they take, meanwhile myself being a white male am looked down upon in school because apparently white people "make too much money".

Did you even read what I wrote?

I've been paying taxes for nine years. I've probably paid enough to cover quite a chunk of my education in that time, so I'm damned if I should be expected to pay for it again. Luckily for me, I'm personally not going to have to, but tens of thousands will.

Like I said - not all students are layabouts. I've worked my ass off ever since I've been old enough to get a job so I can afford to go to uni, and given that these people coming out of further education are then going to presumably go into nicely paid jobs and pay between 20% and 40% income tax for the rest of their lives, I'm not sure why they should all be expected to pay for their education twice?

 

[MatskiMonk]

I'm not sure why they should all be expected to pay for their education twice?

Exactley, cut the burden to the tax payer by making students pay for the own education!

 

[Ardius]

I'm a little sick of hearing some students demanding tuition fees to be abolished and/or free education. This is unrealistic. (I'm also sick of the BBC and others interviewing students who can't string a sentence together and then using it as a solid stereotypical opinion.)
I think in principal tuition fees are fine and having just finished my degree, I feel that £3000+/- is ok though its still too much considering the quality of some universities and lecturers.

I'm a little open-minded in the sense of wondering where the money is going to go instead and if this is better for the country as a whole. But at this point in time I don't feel its the right thing to do.

 

[Sureboss]

Except these tuition fee increases at best cover the cuts from direct government funding but are more likely to lead to a general drop in funding.

Or bailing out one of Ireland, Portugal or Greece...

Slightly off-topic, but in a similar vane with regards to politics in the UK. Did anyone see the plans for the Localism Bill?

* Local people and organisations will have the right to buy significant public buildings. If a council decides to sell a property community organisations will get extra time to develop their bid.
* Communities can question how services - such as children's centres, care homes and transport - are being run and potentially take them over.
* More power for local people to overrule planning decisions, decide where new homes should go and protect green spaces.

This is all a part of the Tories idea of a "Big Society", in reality that of course means they just don't want to pay people for the job they should be doing. The last pointer in particular worries me, planning decisions of local authorities aren't exactly quick anyway. A friend is a local authority lawyer (in Leeds) and he's 🤬 himself over it, if they weren't ridiculously overworked as it is.

Mind you, there'll be plenty of volunteers when the public sector cuts take full affect, what with the 3.5-4 million expected to be unemployed.

To get back on topic, the whole system needs overhauling. Personally, I favour a free education system, to me people should be encouraged to improve their knowledge and understanding, the benefits of doing so are obvious to the economy. However, that can only work with a system of education that actually benefits people, the difference between courses and uni's is horrific, there's almost a lack of standard. Of course you'd expect some difference, but not at the level there is. There should be greater guidance in helping people to decide what is best for them, maybe have some kind of system whereby people need references to do a degree from an independent course counsellor who realises that this person actually does want to know more about x subject.

Though none of that will happen, it will get more lax if anything over the next several years, so everyone loses.

 

[MatskiMonk]

I'm just sick and tired of people expecting things they haven't earned.

 

[homeforsummer]

Exactley, cut the burden to the tax payer by making students pay for the own education!

Don't get me wrong, if the government decided to cut taxes I'd be quite happy to pay extra for my education. I just dislike the idea of having to pay for my education twice, no more than I enjoy paying fuel duty and road tax, which is essentially paying for fuel twice.

 

[Sureboss]

There's more to someone getting a good education than for personal desires, or at least, that should be the main objective in my ideal world, whether that's realistic or not is another matter.

Ant - Don't forget paying the banks twice with the bailout.

 

[homeforsummer]

Well, quite. If I was paying about 10% income tax rather than 20% I'd be getting much better value for money.

 

[Sureboss]

Speaking of which, which dimwit thought having the tax threshold to be several thousands below a full-time job on minimum wage was a good idea? That's always irked me.

"This is the minimum wage we think you can live off, now we're going to tax you 20% on ~£4k of it."

 

[Owen.C93]

It only costs that much if you choose a highly paid job, it's free if you choose not to.

21K isn't a highly paid job for a uni graduate after a few years IMO. Not really now, and definitely not by time I have to pay for my uni fees.

And it does matter to those over 17, i'm over 30 and haven't done a degree yet but i still plan to. I would do a full time 3 year degree. And i wouldn't have to pay for it.

The vast majority of those protesters will be at uni already. So they will still have the 3k fees.


As for the whole matter, it really depends on how much the government helps out poorer students. For me it's practically free to go. Which IMO is probably a little too far. But I can't imagine the government will stoop up those grants again anytime soon.

 

[Famine]

21K isn't a highly paid job for a uni graduate after a few years IMO. Not really now, and definitely not by time I have to pay for my uni fees.

9% on earnings above £21k isn't a lot to pay for choosing to get a better education than that which is mandatory. If you earn £22k, you'll pay £90 a year, as a consequence of your choice to get a better education than the minimum standard.

It's a low-interest loan that is only payable when you have the means to pay it. It's not like it's cripplingly expensive, applicable to everyone or, indeed, requiring you to pay for your optional extra education up front. I went to a private school - I'm not paying for it out of my earnings today... money was paid before each term started for optional extra education.

 

[ExigeEvan]

Excuse me students, why should I as a taxpayer pay for your free education? What the government is asking you to do is 100% fair. Basically, all you need to do is pay it back when you can afford it.

Stop moaning, your getting an education on credit.

Why should I an active healthy non-smoker pay for obese people and smokers health care? It's the shape of British society, it's just how we do things here.

Students used to protest against war and nuclear weapons.. now they protest about having to pay their way...

My Student Union has voted to protest against the University holding shares in BAe and Rolls Royce because they are arms dealers. Modern Language students pushed it through, ignoring all the engineers who pointed out they are 2 of the biggest employers in our field.

I'm a little sick of hearing some students demanding tuition fees to be abolished and/or free education. This is unrealistic. (I'm also sick of the BBC and others interviewing students who can't string a sentence together and then using it as a solid stereotypical opinion.)
I think in principal tuition fees are fine and having just finished my degree, I feel that £3000+/- is ok though its still too much considering the quality of some universities and lecturers.

If it was so unrealistic why did the Lib Dems get away for 5 mins, let alone a whole election campaign, saying they could and would do it.

I'm just sick and tired of people expecting things they haven't earned.

How can anyone under the age of 20 possibly amassed enough earnings to pay for anything from higher education to complex surgery?

9% on earnings above £21k isn't a lot to pay for choosing to get a better education than that which is mandatory. If you earn £22k, you'll pay £90 a year, as a consequence of your choice to get a better education than the minimum standard.

It's a low-interest loan that is only payable when you have the means to pay it. It's not like it's cripplingly expensive, applicable to everyone or, indeed, requiring you to pay for your optional extra education up front. I went to a private school - I'm not paying for it out of my earnings today... money was paid before each term started for optional extra education.

Which is why I was infuriated at the possibility of a graduate tax. What is in place now is a graduate tax with a finite limit and it's fair in that respect. To call it a debt and compare it to loans or credit cards is unfair because it isn't taken into account by any credit raters and isn't secured on any possessions.

 

[Ardius]

If it was so unrealistic why did the Lib Dems get away for 5 mins, let alone a whole election campaign, saying they could and would do it.

Its one thing to claim you will do something, its quite another to actually implement it as far as politics go.
I don't see how we can get around paying for university, especially with the economy the way it is now. I also don't think the taxpayers should solely foot the bills for the quality of some of the colleges and universities. Univerisities need to be producing a higher standard than they are currently before we start thinking about it being free for all, this is a bigger issue to me than the cost.

 

[ExigeEvan]

Its one thing to claim you will do something, its quite another to actually implement it as far as politics go.

Very true, and if it was a passing comment they made on it then I'd accept that. But this was a fundamental part of their campaign, I would almost go as far to say as the reason they got voted into their current position by students. Not only are they not implementing it, they are doing the exact opposite.

I don't see how we can get around paying for university, especially with the economy the way it is now. I also don't think the taxpayers should solely foot the bills for the quality of some of the colleges and universities. Univerisities need to be producing a higher standard than they are currently before we start thinking about it being free for all, this is a bigger issue to me than the cost.

Which is again where the conflict lies because these measures will probably lead to a reduction in funding and quality on many courses.



Just to clarify my position, my gripe isn't with the fees. The debt incurred from student loans is not like any other debt you'll incur. There are no bailiffs, there are no extortionate interest rates and the payback rate is tiny.

My problem is how these changes will reduce University funding while also increasing the burden on students and also how the Lib Dems have not only abandoned a huge election promise but done a complete turnaround on it.

 

[Jondot]

If it was so unrealistic why did the Lib Dems get away for 5 mins, let alone a whole election campaign, saying they could and would do it.

They didn't really though, did they? I didn't vote for them on the principle that I thought they'd manage to eradicate them, I did it because in doing so they at least brought up the cost of my education as a priority. The goal might have been unachievable, but it at least displayed where their loyalties were supposedly placed. Maybe they still would have been if it weren't for Cameron pushing forward with his plans to lop everything off the budget.

 

[ExigeEvan]

They didn't really though, did they? I didn't vote for them on the principle that I thought they'd manage to eradicate them, I did it because in doing so they at least brought up the cost of my education as a priority. The goal might have been unachievable, but it at least displayed where their loyalties were supposedly placed. Maybe they still would have been if it weren't for Cameron pushing forward with his plans to lop everything off the budget.

Except they did. Constantly faced criticism from the other parties for it but produced documents to show how they planned to.

But I agree with everything else you've said entirely. I'm not naive enough to expect politicians to do exactly as they say, but Lib Dems could have blocked this, but they didn't.

 

[Owen.C93]

9% on earnings above £21k isn't a lot to pay for choosing to get a better education than that which is mandatory. If you earn £22k, you'll pay £90 a year, as a consequence of your choice to get a better education than the minimum standard.

It's a low-interest loan that is only payable when you have the means to pay it. It's not like it's cripplingly expensive, applicable to everyone or, indeed, requiring you to pay for your optional extra education up front. I went to a private school - I'm not paying for it out of my earnings today... money was paid before each term started for optional extra education.

I know it's not alot to pay back each year. But it's still 3 times as much as before, and you still get the same if not less of a quality education as a year earlier.

Suddenly it seems far out of reach to go to uni for many students. Which is not a good thing for the country in the future. I think the cuts went too far on education.

 

[PeterJB]

The problem with this is that the government said they would try and get all students a university education. But with these increased fees universities will once again become and elitist institution that only the wealthiest will be able to go to, not necessarily the most skilled.

 

[ExigeEvan]

The problem with this is that the government said they would try and get all students a university education. But with these increased fees universities will once again become and elitist institution that only the wealthiest will be able to go to, not necessarily the most skilled.

NO.

No they won't. People, please stop saying this rubbish.

Student loans are still available, you won't pay a penny before going to uni and you won't even notice the repayments leaving your pay package after.

Stop believing the cost will stop poor people going. It may discourage them, but there is nothing financially stopping them going.

 

[Famine]

I know it's not alot to pay back each year. But it's still 3 times as much as before, and you still get the same if not less of a quality education as a year earlier.

Suddenly it seems far out of reach to go to uni for many students. Which is not a good thing for the country in the future. I think the cuts went too far on education.

The key word there is "seems".

It doesn't actually cost you anything to be at university (and yes, I'd prefer that it did). It was the same last week. If you graduate and don't get a job earning over £21,000 a year, it doesn't actually cost you anything to have gone to university. It was the same last week.


I can't say that my student loan makes me want to descrate a war memorial and attempt to murder policemen by dropping fire extinguishers on them. And that would cost me five times as much each month to pay back as the new tuition fee levels (though at a higher threshold).

The problem with this is that the government said they would try and get all students a university education.

Why on Earth is that a reasonable proposition? Give everyone in the country a BSc./BA/BEng.? What do you think that'll do to the value of those of us that already have one?

GCSEs and A-Levels are already almost at the point where you can't fail them. Why do we need to diminish the degree too?

 

[Owen.C93]

The key word there is "seems".

It doesn't actually cost you anything to be at university (and yes, I'd prefer that it did). It was the same last week. If you graduate and don't get a job earning over £21,000 a year, it doesn't actually cost you anything to have gone to university. It was the same last week.

Exactly, I the government need to make it very clear how easy it is to go to university. Right now it seems impossible. Teenagers are lazy, and I only found out how ridiculously easy it is to go to university about 6 months ago.

I don't have a problem with the fees as such, just rather how they have been changed so dramatically and how they released their plans (by that I mean they said they would triple the fee, then a few months later they said they would help out poorer students).

Cuts on education is a really difficult thing to do and I would of thought it would have been a last resort.