benefit means testing for savings

greatbritishdepression

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I think you're missing the point I was making. If you visited the Students Board you would see that quite a number of people take out a Student Loan without actually needing it and invest it to get a higher rate of interest. This really doesn't come under the heading of "they are something that you have been lumbered with against your will and better judgement ". In fact Martin, and others, have recommended people to do this. However, if you do this and are unemployed when you finish university you won't get means tested benefits as you have savings.

I have to reiterate that having savings as well as loans is a comparatively recent phenomenon which have occurred because of low interest Student Loans and 0% credit cards. In normal times, interest rates would always be higher for borrowing rather than saving so this situation wouldn't occur. I can think of no time in the past when people would have borrowed money to put it into savings; it would have been considered absolute madness!

I was being rather careful NOT to get to deeply into the student loan situation but I'm afraid you've gone and done it now. I was amongst the first years to have to pay tuition fees in addition to borrowing for living expenses. Its funny how a job seeker is not expected to borrow to fund living expenses but a student is expected to also fund tuition fees as well. I can also assure you that it would be very difficult (I won't say impossible because I'm sure a small number of people have managed) to do well at university without either a substantial student loan or significant additional funding from parents (which is NOT normally given). It really is shocking when those paying taxes at the time of the abolition of grants have already benefited from them (or at least had the opportunity to). Graduates today not only have no hope of a job but they have a £15k student loan before they even start work and will also now be saddled with a national debt the size of the country's GDP. And thats not even the worst of it. You can be sure that at some point in the future when reason prevails the grants will come back and we'll end up paying all over again for the next generation. It really is a disgrace and the cost of it will come when the younger population decides it has better things to do than support a selfish older population and flees for greener pastures.

Having said that, I appreciate your point that students need to be warned of the potential risks (under the absurd current rules) of taking out a student loan they do not need. Not that anyone is likely to since interest rates are low and inflation is primed to go moon-bound.

Oldernotwiser

greatbritishdepression wrote: »

I was being rather careful NOT to get to deeply into the student loan situation but I'm afraid you've gone and done it now. I was amongst the first years to have to pay tuition fees in addition to borrowing for living expenses. Its funny how a job seeker is not expected to borrow to fund living expenses but a student is expected to also fund tuition fees as well..

I have a student loan myself and have been an adviser in this area for years. Please don't pontificate on here, it's not the place for it and people have more important things to do than read your diatribes; I'm sorry I was sucked into it at first.

greatbritishdepression

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I have a student loan myself and have been an adviser in this area for years. Please don't pontificate on here, it's not the place for it and people have more important things to do than read your diatribes; I'm sorry I was sucked into it at first.

Criticism accepted (on the subject of student loans) but I would like to remind you that besides saying "this is the way it is so get used to it" you haven't actually addressed any of my points on the unfairness of the means assessment. I just think you are being overly pragmatic. However, as you say, we both have better things to do than continue this debate.