'Don't pay your kids tuition fees upfront' Discussion Area

The_One_Who

setmefree2 wrote: »

Only you.

I'm aware that you asked me on this thread, no other time as I recall, so that would be just the once.

There have been several threads similar to this one over the past few months. I can't be bothered searching back through them, but I'm sure it was you. If not, then I apologise.

and I did post, to say that I think HE should be funded out of general taxation
..... maybe you missed that bit?

No, I didn't. However, saying that something should be funded out of general taxation is hardly a groundbreaking solution. Everything is funded out of general taxation. How about something more concrete?

Perhaps, how much would you be willing to see taxation rise by so as to support this system? How much money should the government be footing for higher education? If it comes to the situation where another department gets their budget squeezed, which would you be happy to cut the money for? Why should higher education get more money than primary and secondary education, at a time when too many youths are leaving school unable to read? These are the types of things governments have to wrestle with. It's not as simply as saying "fund it out of taxation".

But hey, you know, this thread is about paying upfront. I know that some people are gonna be upset because some people can afford to pay upfront when other's can't but there is no point attacking me or any other parent on here. I didn't invent this system and I never even voted for one of the coalition parties (believe it or not)..... so I don't feel in the slightest bit guilty!

I don't think anyone has been attacking a parent who chooses to fund their child's education. People have suggested that the money might be better saved for a house deposit later down the line, which is a sensible suggestion. I'd rather have a lower mortgage than have no student loan debt. I think most people would, considering if you can't pay the mortgage you're in serious trouble, whereas if you can't pay the student loan then it doesn't really matter.

If a parent can afford to pay the fees upfront and that is what they think will work best for their family situation, then that's totally fine. Why would anyone have a problem with that?

setmefree2

melancholly wrote: »

for most people, paying up front won't be as good an option as saving the money to give to their kids as a lump sum later in life.

....And I questioned how you can reach that conclusion, when it is virtually impossible to quantify the demotivating effect of a 41% tax rate on a student's earning potential?

And how do you quantify the motivating effect of saving for something, like your kids tuiton fees? If people are motivated to do something - anything - they can achieve great things which could help their kids though this. If they are told, ney enouraged, to do nothing then these kids will be just left to flounder....

setmefree2

melancholly wrote: »

*sigh* really?!

That's sad, so sad.

setmefree2

The_One_Who wrote: »

There have been several threads similar to this one over the past few months. I can't be bothered searching back through them, but I'm sure it was you. If not, then I apologise.

It definitely wasn't me (well I don't think ) and I accept you're apology. However, if indeed you did ask me before and I didn't respond then I apologise to you.

setmefree2

The_One_Who wrote: »

o, I didn't. However, saying that something should be funded out of general taxation is hardly a groundbreaking solution. Everything is funded out of general taxation. How about something more concrete?

No that's it. I'm all for keeping things simple (though I'm not sure why anyone would care what I think!). It's making things complicated that gets us into a mess and creates stupid anomalies imho.

setmefree2

The_One_Who wrote: »

It's not as simply as saying "fund it out of taxation".

It is to me. Why make things complicated? We need a HE system, we fund it out of general taxation, end off.

If we can't afford it maybe we should scrap Trident? So far that has cost us £40bn according to Wiki....(the obvious answer I know.....)

setmefree2

The_One_Who wrote: »

People have suggested that the money might be better saved for a house deposit later down the line, which is a sensible suggestion.

But maybe people will never get around to saving for a deposit for their kids house? Isn't that really the most likely scenario? Then the kids will be left with the big tax bill and a big mortgage. Whereas parents may be motivated to pay their kids tuition fees if encouraged? Or at least feel obliged to help their kids in someway. So encouraging parents to do nothing, does that really help the students of 2012?

If you had the choice between having your tuition fess paid or nothing, which would you pick?

The_One_Who

setmefree2 wrote: »

It is to me. Why make things complicated? We need a HE system, we fund it out of general taxation, end off.

If we can't afford it maybe we should scrap Trident? So far that has cost us £40bn according to Wiki....(the obvious answer I know.....)

Because life is complicated, especially when it comes to balancing the books of the government. It'd be lovely if they could pour money into everything, but they can't. Something needs to give. And in this case higher education has taken a hit. If it was HE it'd be something else.

setmefree2 wrote: »

But maybe people will never get around to saving for a deposit for their kids house? Isn't that really the most likely scenario? Then the kids will be left with the big tax bill and a big mortgage. Whereas parents may be motivated to pay their kids tuition fees if encouraged? Or at least feel obliged to help their kids in someway. So encouraging parents to do nothing, does that really help the students of 2012?

If you had the choice between having your tuition fess paid or nothing, which would you pick?

I think if the parents have managed to save the £30,000 for their child's tuition fees, then they've been at it for a while. Most people I know don't have a spare £30k lying around with no ultimate purpose. And if it was me in that situation then I'd ask them to keep it for until I graduate. So it wouldn't be a choice of "take the £30k for your fees or you don't get anything".

What parents do is ultimately up to themselves, and they will decide what is best for their own family's circumstances.

Oldernotwiser

I think it's all very well to suggest that HE should be funded out of general taxation but the cynic in me smiles when that suggestion's made by an accountant whose profession will be making damned sure that its wealthy clients will be making use of every loophole going to avoid paying any extra taxes.

Oldernotwiser

The_One_Who wrote: »

I think if the parents have managed to save the £30,000 for their child's tuition fees, then they've been at it for a while. Most people I know don't have a spare £30k lying around with no ultimate purpose. And if it was me in that situation then I'd ask them to keep it for until I graduate. So it wouldn't be a choice of "take the £30k for your fees or you don't get anything".

And, if it were me, I'd have too much pride to take money that they'd scrimped and scraped to save.