Tuition fee protest

tomterm8

Well, I don't think the problems will be solved, but I am hardly an expert.

I am not government. The government experts, the Treasury and the new independent financial watchdog, have produced forecasts which it used to create the budget. The treasury and the government think the deficit will be eliminated in four years time.

So, what does the government and its expert think about this policy?

The treasury says this will not save any money for at least four years.

I mean, it’s pretty obvious why this measure won’t save any money for four years. It’s because during the time students are actually studying, the government pays full whack. At the end, there is a period of several months where students don’t start to repay their loans.

So, I agree with the government – there is no way this measure will save money until four years time.

Of course, in four years time when this new batch of students start to repay, they will be paying the debt back in smaller instalments, and they will not repay anything until they are earning much more money than at present.

So it is hard for me to understand how, in fact, even when the students start repaying the money, in four to six years time this scheme will not actually raise less revenue for a short time than the current scheme.

It only starts to save the treasury money in the very long term, after around 6 years.

But, according to the government, in 6 years time, we will be in surplus as a nation, and we will already be repaying the national debt.

Of course, all this depends on the government not being a bunch of incompetent hacks. But if they are incompetent hacks, why should we listen to them anyway?

wotsthat

No one can treat Camilla like that and think they are going to get my sympathy!

ukcarper

Really2 wrote: »

True, but I think the state of the economy has forced that.
I think part of this has been borne out of neccisty, the economic situation has forced the government to look at how universities can still be open to all.
I would prefer higher university fees for those that go than lowering the funding of state secondary education for all.
The only other option would be to lower the number of places.

Rock and a hard place really.

Can you explain something to me isn’t this increase going to costs us more in the short term as people starting university now will not have to start paying back for at least 3 years.

Really2

ukcarper wrote: »

Can you explain something to me isn’t this increase going to costs us more in the short term as people starting university now will not have to start paying back for at least 3 years.

I think it will but costing is not based on the short term in this case, It is a future model.
Any major change will usually end up costing your more in the short term unless it is increasing taxes.

N1AK

Pennywise wrote: »

I think university students have had it too cushy for too long.

Even if that's true it isn't the next crop of students who have had it cushy. It is the last 40+ years worth who have. No one is suggesting that the government ask past graduates to pay back grants.

Students today are feeling ripped off because previous generations who got free university education, are raiding education funding while at the same time setting themselves up for a comfy retirement by improving pensions (linking to inflation) and protecting the NHS.

Why? Because the political parties would rather screw the current generation of students (who don't offer enough votes) than anger the 40+ demographic who could cost them an election.

Why else would we protect free bus travel for the last generation, instead of helping the next one increase its ability to pay tax to fund future government spending.

FTBFun

ILW wrote: »

I take no notice of any protests about how to spend public money, unless the protestors are actually paying tax and contributing.

So, for example, you'd ignore housewives protesting that the NHS isn't spending enough on post-natal care then?

I agree with Cleaver, an odd stance to take.

Degenerate

My advice to any young person now contemplating higher education is to broaden your horizons and make the EU work for you. For example, in Warsaw there are undergraduate courses with English language tution available. You can study Maths, IT, architecture or a multitude of engineering disciplines for £800-1200 a year. Accomodation costs are also much lower, and it's even possible that you might get your tuition free, as a certain number are funded by the EU social fund (which applies equally to EU students of any nationality.)

These are perfectly good institutions that stand comparison with our own universities. I daresay they're much better than many of our low-grade former polys. What mug would pay £6-9K a year over here?

StevieJ

tomterm8 wrote: »

Your claim that this measure is necessary because there is no money is a simple, dishonest, down right untrue, blatant lie.

This measure will have no significant effect on the public debt until the deficit problem has already resolved.

This measure is not required as part of the national belt tightning, and will only have any effect of public finances once that belt tightning has already worked.

The debt markets are looking for long term control over finances, which is why the pension problem is also being addressed.

halight

Really2 wrote: »

I have a question on fees which I do not know the answer to.

How many countries ranked above us pay higher fees than the UK?

I know schools have slipped back 11 places since 2000 a time we have been spending more on schools than ever.

Could it be possible state funding takes away competition and can be detrimental to the education system.
Perhaps state funding makes students put up with mediocre tutors etc?

Will paying for education mean people want more? if so is that a bad thing?

The better our system is in the future should mean it can get more state funding in the future (better education should = better paid students)

Some very good points mate:T:T

StevieJ

N1AK wrote: »

Even if that's true it isn't the next crop of students who have had it cushy. It is the last 40+ years worth who have. No one is suggesting that the government ask past graduates to pay back grants.

Students today are feeling ripped off because previous generations who got free university education, are raiding education funding while at the same time setting themselves up for a comfy retirement by improving pensions (linking to inflation) and protecting the NHS.
.

Tell that to the women who thought they were retiring at 60.