Running out of money

TeamMCS

Fire_Fox wrote: »

Why should any 18+ year old adult expect their parents to hand out their hard earned cash to fund what is essentially a lifestyle choice? In the vast majority of cases there is a perfectly serviceable bed at the family home, and a perfectly serviceable university with a perfectly serviceable range of courses on offer within easy reach. :rolleyes:

I never said they should, my belief is the goverment is giving students a "pseudo choice". As you said, at the age of 18 a person is now an adult and as such needs to be considered independent. Yes, you're right suggesting some students 'could' stay at home and again, yes, it is a life-style choice they are making - but what about the students who's parents have a stricter approach on life.

What about the remifications of staying home could be? Young adults learn a lot more by being away from home (in my opinion, and from personal experience), I wonder how eager they would be to move out once they'd completed their degree - what effect do you think that would have on taxes, govement and susequently everyone?

If you opt to go away to university then you need to be thinking well ahead of time how you are going to fund it. If you parents are unwilling or unable to help out financially then you have plenty of options. Take a year out and work until you have built up a little nest egg, do you degree part-time or via the Open University, take a Foundation Degree (one day a week study) and covert to a full honours in your final year, send out a batch of CVs before you have even started university. :money:

I think it's interesting that you believe "Upper school/College Students" [in general] are capable of making a rational choice regarding the financial implications of university. In fact, the goverment pushes undergraduate-education very intensely. I remember, many years ago, we we're 'forced' to look at various brosures and material to 'choose' which university we went to. Note the lack of apparent choice.

On a similar line of thought, I'd also disagree with the capability of a student to save up a "nest egg" on a year out. I've seen plenty of students who had the best of intentions but basically were unable (admittedly due to their own incompatance) to save any money. Also worth noting the value to the tax payer of taking that approach, considering the salary I'm on now (and many others) we (at least now) are more valuable to society than we would otherwise had of been.

It's not the government that is handing out money to students it is the taxpayer - your mum and dad, your teacher at school, the man who owns the corner shop, the bus driver ... these people work hard and expect the government not to dole out cash willy nilly to every person who decides they fancy three years of fun before they have to get a proper job.

..And I agree, my argument is the 'choice'. It's basically spin, they want to pad the numbers out so it seems a more viable option

This is how students get into debt
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR725.pdf
And this is how to get out or stay out of debt
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=767513

:beer:

For your own reference, I am not in debt (or much should I say, I quite like my ultra-low interest rate loan - it's making me money). I know what it takes to work through university as, well, I did it.

Just a final thought, you should pick up on a trend during my comments. Not everyone is alike, not every family has the finances to help their offspring through univesity. Not all students are bright-little-sparks, some are complete time-wasters - that is NOT my argument.

TeamMCS

Fire_Fox wrote: »

:rotfl:And if you had bothered to read around this board you would see that Oldernotwiser is a million miles from ignorant. :rolleyes:

Ignorant comment, not an ignorant person. Be very careful before you start pulling a dyslexic person on their spelling.

Fire_Fox

TeamMCS wrote: »

I never said they should, my belief is the goverment is giving students a "pseudo choice". As you said, at the age of 18 a person is now an adult and as such needs to be considered independent. Yes, you're right suggesting some students 'could' stay at home and again, yes, it is a life-style choice they are making - but what about the students who's parents have a stricter approach on life.

What about the remifications of staying home could be? Young adults learn a lot more by being away from home (in my opinion, and from personal experience), I wonder how eager they would be to move out once they'd completed their degree - what effect do you think that would have on taxes, govement and susequently everyone?

As I said in my previous post
"Take a year out and work until you have built up a little nest egg, do you degree part-time or via the Open University, take a Foundation Degree (one day a week study) and covert to a full honours in your final year, send out a batch of CVs before you have even started university." :rolleyes:

TeamMCS wrote: »

I think it's interesting that you believe "Upper school/College Students" [in general] are capable of making a rational choice regarding the financial implications of university. In fact, the goverment pushes undergraduate-education very intensely. I remember, many years ago, we we're 'forced' to look at various brosures and material to 'choose' which university we went to. Note the lack of apparent choice.

On a similar line of thought, I'd also disagree with the capability of a student to save up a "nest egg" on a year out. I've seen plenty of students who had the best of intentions but basically were unable (admittedly due to their own incompatance) to save any money.

So because young people are incapable of budgeting or saving, the taxpayer or parent should be funding the student lifestyle? :rotfl: Parents who cannot or will not contribute to their adult child's education should be helping their offspring to prepare for the financial aspect of going away to university. Failing that, any young adult capable of studying at degree level is capable of the basic research necessary to locate and utilise MSE (according to Martin's last e-mail a website in the top ten social networking sites).

Throwing money at students does not help prepare them for real life. This website is full of examples of students who walk around the house in a t-shirt all winter and are then surprised when an energy bill for hundreds of pounds drops through the letterbox, or who needlessly run a car and wonder why their bank won't extend their overdraft facility. This website is also full of examples of young adults who are dealing with their debts or have a maxed out cash ISA. :cool:

If a student is struggling to make ends meet in London with a half price Oyster card, council tax exemption certificate and more potential employers than any other city in the country, then I would question how they are going to manage financially when the the ride is over. Students, even without a maintenance grant, have it a whole lot easier than those on minimum wage or Jobseekers Allowance.

TeamMCS

Fire_Fox wrote: »

As I said in my previous post
"Take a year out and work until you have built up a little nest egg, do you degree part-time or via the Open University, take a Foundation Degree (one day a week study) and covert to a full honours in your final year, send out a batch of CVs before you have even started university." :rolleyes:



So because young people are incapable of budgeting or saving, the taxpayer or parent should be funding the student lifestyle? :rotfl: Parents who cannot or will not contribute to their adult child's education should be helping their offspring to prepare for the financial aspect of going away to university. Failing that, any young adult capable of studying at degree level is capable of the basic research necessary to locate and utilise MSE (according to Martin's last e-mail a website in the top ten social networking sites).

Throwing money at students does not help prepare them for real life. This website is full of examples of students who walk around the house in a t-shirt all winter and are then surprised when an energy bill for hundreds of pounds drops through the letterbox, or who needlessly run a car and wonder why their bank won't extend their overdraft facility. This website is also full of examples of young adults who are dealing with their debts or have a maxed out cash ISA. :cool:

If a student is struggling to make ends meet in London with a half price Oyster card, council tax exemption certificate and more potential employers than any other city in the country, then I would question how they are going to manage financially when the the ride is over. Students, even without a maintenance grant, have it a whole lot easier than those on minimum wage or Jobseekers Allowance.

Before I run out of pacience with you. I never said a word about plowing money at incapable students, it's stupid incentives like that which have caused our current recession.

As far as a solution goes. Education, yes. I'd make MSE (and sites like it) mandatory in school. Get these kids up to speed and make them learn how the world ticks.

I think the goverment should stop putting spin on University, it's either fit for a person or it isn't. Don't pretend to sweeten it using grants/loans unless they deserve the assistance. Don't start implying that parents will pick up the tab when the quite obviously (in some scenarios) just wont. Don't bail out kids who have screwed themselves over through hard-ship funds UNLESS they can prove they can earn it.

.. I could go on all day but I've work to do...

Tommy99

All kinda of heated here, i am at uni and my parents earn over the threshold. But they do try to contribute when possible.

Firefox: i agree that it may not be the goverments probelm and more the parents. But, i live with a guy who get over £7000 out of the goverment. Because there parents don't earn enough.

The goverment loan and grant plan is right, getting people how's parents would be able to afford to go into uni with there parents help. One area i don't think is fair is that, all student leave uni hoopefully on the same level. Why don't w leave with the same amount of debt. Instead wouldn't it be better to say while give everyone the loan and the calculate how much extra you need due to you parents working on a poor wage.

No_Future

Don't forget that some students e.g. at Oxbridge or medical students have A LOT of lectures and extra work so getting a term time job may not be a realistic option.

If you are lucky to work for a company which allows you to transfer, that's great, but most people don't. I do agree that people should move their butt and look for a job, but it's not a question of just walking into a job, getting a job isn't easy and with many students looking for work you may not be able to get one

dieselhead

This is a very emotive subject, my own opinion is that when I turned 18 I become an adult I can vote, I can get married buy a house, and yet when I wanted to go to university my parents income is assessed. My personal belief is that at 18 you are an adult and should be treated like one, we should all start university on an equal footing with an equal amount. All I think this means testing does is create an atmosphere of haves and have nots, there will always be some kids that have more, but I firmly believe that we should all be given the same amount of student loan, it should be a living amount, that coupled with work in the holidays should make it possible to live a frugal, lifestyle.

I also believe that it would be useful for secondary school kids to learn a few more life skills, I am only now at the age of 25 learning to cook (thanks Jamie Oliver!!) I eat so much better that I ever have before and save a fortune on food.

Horace

This is a tip for all Uni students. Go along to the HR Department and see if they have a peri team (most do) that way you can get paid jobs temping within the Uni. You can do anything from answering telephones during clearance days and typing etc. It is also a great way to get a job during Uni student vacations too as this is the time when staff try and have their holidays.

Joining the University cleaning staff is also good as they pay reasonably well although you do need to be prepared to start work at silly o'clock (7am:eek: ). When I worked at a Uni in the cleaning section but not as a cleaner - we always employed students and it was the chinese students who were prepared to get up extra early to come into work. Training is given.

It might help you find a temporary job at least. Good Luck.

Oldernotwiser

TeamMCS wrote: »

That's a highly ignorent response. The relationship students have with their parents is completely irrelevant, across the board you have no idea of their individual situation and you cannot possibly justify such a sweeping statement.

If teenagers stayed at home rather than going to university then very few of them would be charged an economic rent for their keep. This sort of subsidy could just as well be given as an allowance when someone's at university, you're not usually talking about hundreds of pounds a month.

It always amazes me the number of parents of students who "can't afford" a small allowance for their student offspring but can still manage foreign holidays and decent cars. Even in this situation the kids still blame the government rather than the parents.

Fire_Fox

dieselhead wrote: »

This is a very emotive subject, my own opinion is that when I turned 18 I become an adult I can vote, I can get married buy a house, and yet when I wanted to go to university my parents income is assessed. My personal belief is that at 18 you are an adult and should be treated like one, we should all start university on an equal footing with an equal amount.

If you gave all students the same maintenance grant and the same amount of student loan (London weighting excluded), some students would still have this topped up by wealthy or generous parents and others would not. Without us all paying a lot more in taxes there is only a finite amount of money in the pot - if you divide this equally between all students, the ones from a less well off background would suffer.

dieselhead wrote: »

All I think this means testing does is create an atmosphere of haves and have nots, there will always be some kids that have more, but I firmly believe that we should all be given the same amount of student loan, it should be a living amount, that coupled with work in the holidays should make it possible to live a frugal, lifestyle.

The non-means tested student loan coupled with working in the holidays is more than sufficient to live a frugal lifestyle. In 2006/07 every student was entitled to receive £3305 of non-income assessed maintenance loan - rising to £6170 if studying in London and subject to income assessment.
http://www.hero.ac.uk/uk/studying/funding_your_study/sources_of_help/loans.cfm

Let's then say a student works for £5 an hour, an average of a 16 hour week year round (if not working at all in term time, that would be full time for 22 weeks): they would take home approximately £4000 a year. Thus a minimum of £7300 income for a student who is not entitled to a maintenance grant with parents who feel unable to contribute.

According to the Student Income and Expenditure Survey I linked to in an earlier post, the average full-time student spent £2276 on housing in 2004/5. There are entire families living on £4k a year excluding mortgage, rent and council tax (see DFW board). But let's be generous and say that one person needs the entire amount to live comfortably, outgoings total £6300 leaving £1000 a year to play with.

Obviously this is a very crude assessment, as my figures don't all relate to the same academic year nor take full account of individual circumstances. I have attempted to make it the worst case scenario for income, and been generous with the amount required to live on: bear in mind there is also a 0% overdraft to play with.