'If no-one will fully repay £9,000 student fees, how is the system sustainable?' blog

Dustykitten

The thing I'm struggling with is that the system is really set up to encourage you to borrow as much as possible if you don't think you will repay it all. Even if you have set a little money aside to help your kids through uni they are best to take both the living expenses loan and the tuition loan as they will pay the same amount back in the long term unless they are earning enough to pay the tuition part back. It has taken me a while to accept this.

I wonder what the rules will be on early repayment should a windfall (say some inheritance) falls to the student in the future and would it still be best not to clear the debt?

Lokolo

Dustykitten wrote: »

I wonder what the rules will be on early repayment should a windfall (say some inheritance) falls to the student in the future and would it still be best not to clear the debt?

Early repayments haven't been fully told yet unfortunately!

2sides2everystory

Lokolo wrote: »

But would you rather the government pay out £100million and get none back (no student loans).

By Jiminy I think you've finally got it, Lokolo

Lokolo

2sides2everystory wrote: »

By Jiminy I think you've finally got it, Lokolo

So you're happy for everyone to go to university? For this to happen, taxes would need to rise.

mintymoneysaver

Dustykitten wrote: »

The thing I'm struggling with is that the system is really set up to encourage you to borrow as much as possible if you don't think you will repay it all. Even if you have set a little money aside to help your kids through uni they are best to take both the living expenses loan and the tuition loan as they will pay the same amount back in the long term unless they are earning enough to pay the tuition part back. It has taken me a while to accept this.

I wonder what the rules will be on early repayment should a windfall (say some inheritance) falls to the student in the future and would it still be best not to clear the debt?

That's what has taken me a while too. I'm going to save my money ( apart from providing some top up maintenance money)and give it to them as a house deposit!

Money_Saving_Dude

Lokolo wrote: »

So you're happy for everyone to go to university? For this to happen, taxes would need to rise.

Finally someone talking sense. Since the 80s this has become a taboo subject. But a change in the tax system, to reduce the burden at the lower end and to increase the tax take of the more wealthy (say via a Land Value Tax of some kind to prevent evasion), means we could properly fund the education system and provide the appropriate investment in our nation's future.

Good call!

2sides2everystory

Lokolo wrote: »

So you're happy for everyone to go to university? For this to happen, taxes would need to rise.

Yep. Let's start with anyone remotely linked to fraudulent misrepresentation especially those running banks, property and insurance companies including those early retired from same.

wozearly

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

Most of us want a government that just spends what we've got and stops spending what we we don't have.

Of course I'm happy to let you pay this bill as you will still be a tax payer in 30 years time whereas I will be retired. So thanks for offering to pay the extra £50 million.

Generation Y sure is generous.

Heh...in fairness to the government, things like education are an investment into future earnings as much as they are spending. If the government wasn't putting the money forward, only those with rich parents or several years of work and savings behind them could afford to go to university.

Shifting that so that the students who benefit directly a) pay more over time and b) pay greater amounts the more they benefit financially isn't actually such a terrible concept.

But the way its been packaged via the student loan system has made the government look like they're slamming vast debts onto students when, in reality, the payments are likely to be a lot lower. D'oh!

Lokolo

Money_Saving_Dude wrote: »

Finally someone talking sense. Since the 80s this has become a taboo subject. But a change in the tax system, to reduce the burden at the lower end and to increase the tax take of the more wealthy (say via a Land Value Tax of some kind to prevent evasion), means we could properly fund the education system and provide the appropriate investment in our nation's future.

Good call!

But if you keep raising the taxes of the higher earners, they will leave the country and go elsewhere.

Then what would that achieve?

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Yep. Let's start with anyone remotely linked to fraudulent misrepresentation especially those running banks, property and insurance companies including those early retired from same.

Could you give me some facts about how much that would raise, and then compare with facts about how much university education costs?

2sides2everystory

Lokolo wrote: »

But if you keep raising the taxes of the higher earners, they will leave the country and go elsewhere.

Then what would that achieve?

Everything we need if their assets were frozen so they couldn't take them with them.

Could you give me some facts about how much that would raise, and then compare with facts about how much university education costs?

Difficult to say, but it seems that billions not millions have been routinely misappropriated. Why not re-appropriate some of that instead of taxing the hell out of the main population who don't wake up every morning wondering whose wealth they can have it away with next.