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

Lokolo

2sides2everystory wrote: »

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

Brilliant thinking.... then in 30 years when no buinesses come to the UK because they worry about their assets being frozen. Yes, because that'll be brilliant for the economy.

The UK already has one of the highest taxations in Europe, raising them more will not do anyone any favours.

Soubrette

The poor saps that earn £42,000 a year on average will be paying the whole lot back. Those that earn more will actually pay back less because they'll finish paying it off early.

I personally have no problems with students making a contribution to their education but up to a max of about £20,000.

To stick them with a second mortgage after the government actually had a goal of getting 50% of them into university is pretty disgusting imo.

Lokolo

Soubrette wrote: »

The poor saps that earn £42,000 a year on average will be paying the whole lot back. Those that earn more will actually pay back less because they'll finish paying it off early.

I personally have no problems with students making a contribution to their education but up to a max of about £20,000.

To stick them with a second mortgage after the government actually had a goal of getting 50% of them into university is pretty disgusting imo.

Have you seen how much they repay every month? Hardly "a second mortgage". Even now on £33k I only pay back £135 a month, the mortgages I am looking at will be around £600.

2sides2everystory

Lokolo wrote: »

Brilliant thinking.... then in 30 years when no buinesses come to the UK because they worry about their assets being frozen.

You didn't spell it as 'businesses' and I think you meant crooks? So yes, because that will indeed be brilliant for the economy.

The UK already has one of the highest taxations in Europe, raising them more will not do anyone any favours.

Oh yes it will if the people who never made anything except a bloody financial mess are the ones who are made to pay.

callum9999

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!

While I broadly agree, this is kind of like another case of "I want XXXX but I want someone else to pay for it".

I can still remember when the BBC went around interviewing people about benefit cuts etc. Everyone was strongly in favour - until the reporter then listed some benefits that they get and suddenly it's wrong to cut them!

And to the person moaning about banks etc. - you conveniently miss out the huge amount of good the banks do to our economy. I know it's in fashion to moan about the thousands of jobs lost etc. - but what about the (hundreds of?) thousands more that are around because of them? And the several services they provide, free of charge, to us that have almost become essential? I don't think it's very fair to ignore them while they are doing good, then the second they make a few mistakes (you may call it "greed"...) they are evil and need to be severely punished for eternity.

Finally, it's wrong to make the assumption that everyone will be UK tax payers for 30 years paying off their education. I'm under the current system, and there is no way whatsoever I will come remotely close to paying enough tax in this country to cover their contribution. And I'd wager a large percentage of the hundreds of thousands of people who emigrate every year have government-funded degrees.

flexrider

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?



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

Alot of them do this anyway anyone heard of monaco? Its were most offshore accounts are opened to sifen off paying tax in the u.k and the funny thing is most companies in the u.k have been doing this for years. "Leaving poor old peter and paul of the U.k" to Foot the bill for services....

PaulW1965

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!

As a 50% tax payer I can tell you I'm not prepared to pay anymore tax.

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

wozearly wrote: »

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.

:T:T:T:T:T

Good on ya mate! I don't want my taxes to rise.

Shame this is a burden left for my kids though :think:

2sides2everystory

callum9999 wrote: »

And to the person moaning about banks etc...

You mean me I think callum.

... - you conveniently miss out the huge amount of good the banks do to our economy. I know it's in fashion to moan about the thousands of jobs lost etc. - but what about the (hundreds of?) thousands more that are around because of them? And the several services they provide, free of charge, to us that have almost become essential? I don't think it's very fair to ignore them while they are doing good, then the second they make a few mistakes (you may call it "greed"...) they are evil and need to be severely punished for eternity.

Unfortunately you have been brainwashed. Banking has been around for centuries but in the last twenty years the financial services industry has become an absolute disgrace. Those that run the biggest companies have not simply made mistakes, they are crooks. There is nothing good about the industry full stop. Tell us one thing that is an example of them doing good which outweighs the harm they have done to our economies.

Most of the "jobs" they provide are non-jobs - they are contracts to do dirty work barely one step above the "roles" in emails that jobseekers commonly receive with invitations to apply for nefarious money transacting activities.

Sure, the banks and insurance companies and pension "providers" pay lip service to supporting community but look at the damage they have done.

I suggest you wise up.

As this is the UK and we no longer make anything I suppose if you are not in retail then you may well be in "financial services". You may be one of those who has a "retail" job in "financial services". I feel sorry for you if you are - either you will continue in your brainwashed state doing the rest of us harm directly or indirectly, or you will have a hard time keeping your job if you decide at some point that you wish to keep your head high.

flimsier

Another blog on student finance that follows the same pattern:

1) Lots of arguments for the new system assuming that what is being proposed now will hold in 30 years and we can trust this.
2) A disclaimer saying this is not an argument for the new system.

It's either a political position (that the kids from my school who attended the rock concert recognised as they recognise the provenance of the message) or he's being used by people with a political position.