how do you live off student loans if it all goes on rent

durhampoker99

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Having had a teenager leave home not that long ago, I'm quite confident in saying that my outgoings went down by nearly £60 per week; the fact that you don't realise this is obviously because you've never had ahome to run. Whether you hand this money over to your child or just not take it from them as keep comes down to exactly the same thing, less money in the parents' pockets.

Well you can't dispute that the amount bills should go down by is at LEAST a lot less than if they lived alone? You also miss the moral side of the dissuading your own children from living in their own home as against subsidising their moving out...it's a much more positive stance to give money to your children than to not charge them for staying a room they'd consider to be "theirs".

As for the point about deductions for children - I didn't know about them. But £1100 seems a very small amount to take away...especially in the light of Oldernotwiser's estimates.

I actually feel as though the point is being missed. The fundamental unfairness is that you are asking students, who are to all extents thought of as independent from their parents at the age of 18, to ask of them money on the basis of a purely arbitrary figure of earnings that they happen to meet. If it's possible for those who receive nothing from their parents to go to uni (by working etc during holidays) then why shouldn't everyone be in the same boat? It would be just like it is in the rest of life - if you have people who are in the position to give you money then you might end up better off, if not then you make your own way. Why should the situation re university funding be any different so long as everyone has the opportunity to attend.

Oldernotwiser

durhampoker99 wrote: »

to ask of them money on the basis of a purely arbitrary figure of earnings that they happen to meet..

I don't know why you consider someone's earnings to be "a purely arbitrary figure"; means tested benefits and income tax are assessed in this way and I can't see any other way of doing it.

durhampoker99

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I don't know why you consider someone's earnings to be "a purely arbitrary figure"; means tested benefits and income tax are assessed in this way and I can't see any other way of doing it.

They're arbitrary when it comes to how much it relates to how much money their children need at university. It's an entirely salient piece of information when it comes to topping up/reducing people's earnings to ensure that we meet society's goals of income distribution. The way of "doing it" is by not taking anything into account, and dividing the pie equally.

The_One_Who

Sorry, but "society's goals of income distribution"? What society is this? Not the one in the UK, surely? There is never going to be a way for income to be distributed equally, the best we can do is to help those from low-income families out a little bit.

Yes, let's divide the pie equally and give those from a family earning more than £100,000 a year exactly the same as someone who's parents earn about £14,000! My parents wouldn't even be able to afford to send me some food now and again, even if I got into trouble. I already pay my way in this house, granted to a reduced amount than if I rented privately, but my parents still struggle.

Oldernotwiser

durhampoker99 wrote: »

They're arbitrary when it comes to how much it relates to how much money their children need at university. It's an entirely salient piece of information when it comes to topping up/reducing people's earnings to ensure that we meet society's goals of income distribution. The way of "doing it" is by not taking anything into account, and dividing the pie equally.

The needs of university students are the same whether they come from high or low income families which is why it's fair to give money to students whose families have less.

Why you think that we live in a society that practises income (re?distribution is beyond me so I do hope that you're not planning on reading PPE at Oxford or you're going to be in for a few shocks!

silvercar

tufty1964 wrote: »

has anyone who's applied for this sept, 1st year students, heard whether or not they have got their student loans? my son applied ages ago and hasn't heard yet, he goes in 3 or 4 weeks?

Yes, initial confirmation in April and a letter last week confirming amounts and date of payment. Maybe you missed the original application deadlines? Definitely chase up.

silvercar

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

The needs of university students are the same whether they come from high or low income families which is why it's fair to give money to students whose families have less.

If the needs of university students are all the same and that students are independent adults, why is it fair to give money to some students and not to others?

I ould say that students are not totally independent adults and so need some suppor. If there are families that don't have income to support, then the state needs to step in.

Very interesting to see that you estimate a saving of £60 a week when they leave home. I can't see my food bill reducing by more than £20, my utility bills will hardly change and the phone is a calls inclusive charge. I may buy the odd bit of stationary, toiletries etc and sub the odd fiver but I don't reckon on £60 a week.

The_One_Who

I would make the argument that students generally are not independent adults. Parents still have their hand in a lot of things for a lot of students.

Oldernotwiser

silvercar wrote: »

I ould say that students are not totally independent adults and so need some suppor. If there are families that don't have income to support, then the state needs to step in.

Very interesting to see that you estimate a saving of £60 a week when they leave home. I can't see my food bill reducing by more than £20, my utility bills will hardly change and the phone is a calls inclusive charge. I may buy the odd bit of stationary, toiletries etc and sub the odd fiver but I don't reckon on £60 a week.

I agree with your first point but that's what happens now. It's only when families have the money but don't choose to use it to support their offspring that they run into trouble. When they DON'T have the money the state steps in.

Regarding my costs for supporting a teenager, I have to say that we didn't have an all inclusive package for telephone so a chunk did go on that. I think we spent more than £20 on food, particularly with crisps, drinks etc that one only buys when there's a teenager around! There was also more than £10 per week for school lunches.

I think that where you're underestimating is on the utilities. Our lad showered twice a day normally, with all the extra electricity and water costs that meant. He also put out an enormous amount of washing,at least as much as my husband and I combined. There was an extra room to heat (particularly when he decided the central heating had gone off too early and snuck an electric fire in with him!) The oven was on many evenings to cook additional pizzas and sometimes extra costs when he refused to eat what we were eating.

Other people may have their teenagers better trained than ours was but he'd only lived with us from the age of 6, so that's my excuse! However, our phone bill more than halved, as did our water bill. Our eletricity went down by about a third and the gas by 10/20%.It's a great mistake to think that you're using all this anyway and in addition, there's all the hungry friends who drop round and all the regular loans that are never repaid. I actually think that £60 per week was an underestimate.

silvercar

I agree with your first point but that's what happens now. It's only when families have the money but don't choose to use it to support their offspring that they run into trouble. When they DON'T have the money the state steps in.

I see that, for some families, the state assumes they have enough income to support but in reality that income is taken up with expenditure that cannot be reduced. I think our difference is that I accept that there are people who just cannot find this money and the students then suffer hardship whereas you seem convinced that everyone should be able to find this money. Apologies if I've got this wrong.

Regarding my costs for supporting a teenager, I have to say that we didn't have an all inclusive package for telephone so a chunk did go on that. I think we spent more than £20 on food, particularly with crisps, drinks etc forgot this, though his brother's needs will ensure that there is still junk food around.that one only buys when there's a teenager around! There was also more than £10 per week for school lunchesforgot his packed lunches..

I think that where you're underestimating is on the utilities. Our lad showered twice a day normally!!! I have restricted showers to once a day, unless he has done sport., with all the extra electricity agreed plus he does leave his lights on quite oftenand water no water meter here, for that reason!costs that meant. He also put out an enormous amount of washing,at least as much as my husband and I combined. There was an extra room to heat (particularly when he decided the central heating had gone off too early and snuck an electric fire in with him!) The oven was on many evenings to cook additional pizzas and sometimes extra costs when he refused to eat what we were eating.We all eat the same generally

Other people may have their teenagers better trained than ours was but he'd only lived with us from the age of 6, so that's my excuse! However, our phone bill more than halved, as did our water bill. Our eletricity went down by about a third and the gas by 10/20%.It's a great mistake to think that you're using all this anyway and in addition, there's all the hungry friends who drop round and all the regular loans that are never repaid. I actually think that £60 per week was an underestimate.

Adjusting my costs - £30 on food, nothing on water or phone, £5 week on electric (shower and lights and computer and sterio and games machine), nothing on gas (his room's radiator will be turned down a notch, but he never had the heating on for him alone. £10 a week (!!) on loans and bits and bobs. I'm now at £45 a week!