MSE News: 'We need war against student fee confusion'

Former_MSE_Guy

This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:

"New UCAS figures show applications to university down on last year with the fall attributed to a misguided fear over higher fees. ..."

Read the full story:
'We need war against student fee confusion'

michaels

I know this campaign needs doing but quoting the reduced applications may be slightly disingenuous as no doubt applications were inflated last year due to students wanting to start before the higher fees came in.

What I find most amusing is that what has been introduced is basically a fairly progressive graduate tax system of which the Liberal Democrats were generally in favour and nothing like a competitive fees system which the Tories were hoping would bring competition between universities and innovation in areas such as course duration and yet politically it is seen as the Tories imposing their will on the Lib Dems. I guess a good a reflection as any on the educational standards in this country that one outcome can be perceived as completely the opposite.

anselld

It is also possible that prospective students fully understand all these issues and have still decided that they do not wish to be burdened by this much debt (however you spin it).

If you did a net cash flow calculation over 30 years accounting for fees vs expected increase in earnings from having a degree, there are probably many careers where gaining a degree no longer "pays back".

michaels

I'm not arguing with that position at all and would probably go as far as to say that if there really is no net benefit to the individual or the country from them doing a certain degree then is it a bad thing that they are discouraged? My only point was that a reduction of applications compared to last year may not definitely confirm that higher fees are putting students off as last year's figures may have been distorted.

anselld wrote: »

It is also possible that prospective students fully understand all these issues and have still decided that they do not wish to be burdened by this much debt (however you spin it).

If you did a net cash flow calculation over 30 years accounting for fees vs expected increase in earnings from having a degree, there are probably many careers where gaining a degree no longer "pays back".

wozearly

The UCAS applications from previous years that I could easily find are:

2011: 69,700
2010: 76,600
2009: 71,883
2008: 64,438

...just for reference.

Lokolo

wozearly wrote: »

The UCAS applications from previous years that I could easily find are:

2011: 69,700
2010: 76,600
2009: 71,883
2008: 64,438

...just for reference.

Nice on the numbers. The thing I don't like about this report is that its only October. Applications don't need to be made until January at the latest!

Charlton_Taz

I think we need to think about this in a different way. Essentially lets forget the 'debt' and just think of the repayments as essentially a tax.

So by going to university you are essentially opting in to paying 9% additional tax on a chunk of your earnings for most of the rest of your life. Doesn't sound great does it?

Ok...you have the argument that if you don't end up earning lots then you don't pay much back...but why go to university then? You can get a lower paid job without going to university (and can also work an extra 3 years earning money in job you wouldn't have done otherwise by going to university).

Or...actually manage to be aspirational and earn a reasonable wage after university and you get cobblered! There has been all the furore around the 50% tax band and whether it discourages people to work hard / or to encourage them to emigrate..yet nothing has been said about the 9% student loan repayment which will have almost the same effect on people's salaries but from a much lower base (i.e. those on £40K+).

I think we'll find a much higher % of our best graduates will end up going abroad (a good majority of my degree-owning friends have ended up abroad already where they pay lower tax - and I'm in my 30s so am of a generation where we either just missed tution fees or had them at £1,000 a year), to escape high tax and now their repayments too!

Essentially we are pretty much inventing a system which rewards those people who shouldn't have bothered going to university in the first place (i.e. the people being paid less)...and clobbering those who are successful. Don't we already tax those 'successful' people enough already, by getting them to pay 40% tax rather than 20%?

anselld

michaels wrote: »

I'm not arguing with that position at all and would probably go as far as to say that if there really is no net benefit to the individual or the country from them doing a certain degree then is it a bad thing that they are discouraged? My only point was that a reduction of applications compared to last year may not definitely confirm that higher fees are putting students off as last year's figures may have been distorted.

Thanks Michaels, I agree. In fact I think I was typing at the same time as you were so I was just responding to the orignial article.

Catapa

Charlton_Taz wrote: »

I think we need to think about this in a different way. Essentially lets forget the 'debt' and just think of the repayments as essentially a tax.

If a student graduates at Groningen, Leuwen, Lyon or Munich the employment prospects on many degrees will increase, though he won't pay a graduate tax (plus interest) from his or her net income...?

Charlton_Taz

Catapa wrote: »

If a student graduates at Groningen, Leuwen, Lyon or Munich the employment prospects on many degrees will increase, though he won't pay a graduate tax (plus interest) from his or her net income...?

Agreed..but where is the sense in encouraging our potential students to study abroad when we have perfectly good universities here? For those students who decide to study in this country (maybe those who couldn't afford the up-front costs of studying in another country) they will effectively be in a disadvantage in the workplace compared to people who have studied abroad as to get the same take-home pay they would have to be paid more!!

2sides2everystory

The 2012 Tuition Fees Loan Scheme is a disgusting deferred tax on young people, sweating over UCAS forms, being hood-winked in a home near you right now.

A rule of thumb might be that it is not worth going to university unless you can guarantee yourself a job immediately afterwards starting at the national average wage or better. On the other hand there may be no rule of thumb.

Depending on where you look, you will find suggestion that the average wage in the UK is anything between £23,000 and £30,000+.

If you go to university starting in 2012 and end up in 2015 or 2016 working in a supermarket or a bank branch then unless you are on some well recognised fast track graduate entry scheme then you will evidently have fallen flat on your face if you signed up to the 2012 Student Loan Scheme, don't you think?

Signing up for the 2012 SLC scheme basically means that you have signed up to something that once you have graduated, enables you to bumble along for the forseeable future (well until you get made redundant the first time) much like a flounder on a sea-floor/shop-floor, in your average supermarket or bank branch, not having to pay a penny back. Aspiring to that, are we? No? Well granted you can fight your way up in your chosen work environment or maybe even one you didn't get much choice over, and very soon get yourself into the 9% extra tax bracket as soon as you earn anything approaching the national average wage. You'll then know you've made it.

Well done. You could have got the same job 5 or 6 years earlier without even A levels if you were bright and would have got 5 or 6 years working under your belt if you had grafted and kept your nose clean. You'd be just as likely to get promoted as the hoards of graduates saddled by loans and the new tax, because graduates are two a penny. Ah ... but not if they have a masters ... So an extra year you reckon ? Yes you've got to if you are serious about uni ... Oh ... is that new ?

But if you think you are actually amongst the top 2-5% of the brightest UK students then uni might actually be worth it because after you graduate you will soon smash through the national average wage nonsense, won't you? Especially if you do a 4 year masters course - 5 if you do one with an outplacement. You'll soon start earning megabucks and you'll hardly notice the 9% extra tax you pay on the megabucks, will you ?

Now then, you 17 and 18 year olds ... Hands up who thinks they are in the top 2-5% of brightest students ? ... Don't be bashful.

What do you mean you don't know because you got more than 3 A*/A grades at A level same as everyone else in the top 12.5%? So why didn't you do 5 or 6 or 7 A levels like the top 1% so at least you knew where you stood before you knew you would have to decide on goin' uni? What's that ? You wanted to do one more A level but the school doesn't allow it ? Could you have got an extra A*/A out of it ? What's that ? Your school doesn't have very good teachers in that many subjects - some are pretty dire actually ? The one you had last year was better ? You wanted a life ? Don't we all ?

Oh. Sorry to hear that it has been a bit hit and miss so far. So, what makes you think you are top 2-5% material? You don't know? What do you mean you don't know ? So why do want to join the ranks of the hoards who are 'goin' uni' and saddling themselves with £50,000 loans? Your teacher said it was a good idea ? The one you like ? You did too Dad. Did I ? When was that ? Oh okay. And you want to earn loadsamoney ? Good enough reasons I suppose. Mustn't blunt ambition this early in your career ...

Have you thought about becoming a pilot with Ryanair? You could do that with a spare £100,000 but you might get a job as an airline pilot and be earning €100,000 in 10 years - easy. What's that? Only 5 years ago I thought you said Dad I could do it for £50,000 ?? Same price as a BSc in 2012? Price of training must've gone up eh? Costs twice a BSc to be a pilot now.

What do you mean the airlines used to pay to train their pilot cadets, didn't they Dad? Why isn't that happening any more ? Were pilots trained that way no good ? They were probably better, weren't they ?

Oh ... you think it was because some sharp practice airlines found out that there were hoards of young people who were wannabe pilots and decided that large numbers within those hoards either had rich parents or who would beg steal, borrow or be bankers for a bit, for a chance to become a pilot? And then the whole industry decided that's the way it should be ? Exploit the wannabes? And how many of those wannabes who spent all those tens of thousands actually become pilots ? Not sure ? Hmmm ... so is that a good idea ? Who does it benefit ? The airlines! The training organisations. Yes of course. No? Wider than that isn't it ? All of us you say ? How's that? Oh you mean low cost flights - yes, very good thing those. More people benefit from those than ever went to university ...

But isn't this goin' uni business in 2012 very much like coughing up a few tens of thousands in the hope of becoming a commercial pilot ? Beginning to look like it, you think? Who does it benefit ? All of us you say again ? Who's us ? Low cost lives generally is it ? How does one of those work ?

Hmm not convinced ... and that MSE fella keeps banging on about it not working like real money. Who's he kidding ? It's all real money isn't it Dad ?

Dad ... ?

Tell you what ... it's a Euromillions Rollover again tomorrow night. Have you thought about trying that, son ?