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

melancholly

Lokolo wrote: »

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!

quite! given all the uncertainty about the new loans system (not yet defined in terms of early repayments) and people really considering the costs and benefits of a degree in a way not done in previous years, it's not surprising that many are taking their time. it also worth noting that when you take into account overseas students, numbers are even worse. plus Scottish unis are getting less applicants, even though the increase in fees won't apply to Scottish students at Scottish unis.......

anyone would think it's all just normal noise in the number of applications year on year and the media has gone crazy based on one statistic in isolation at an early point in the application timetable but that could never happen!

Oldernotwiser

Charlton_Taz wrote: »

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%?

Why should a university education be only for those who are going to be high earners - is this really all HE is about?

Charlton_Taz

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Why should a university education be only for those who are going to be high earners - is this really all HE is about?

In an ideal world it would be great that everyone who wanted to go to university got to go...but in the real world and considering value to the tax payer we should only educate those who need that education to further their careers and essentially pay more taxes in the future. It doesn't really make sense that we (as in the tax payer) are still (in the 'old' and 'new' system) pay many thousands of pounds to put people through degree courses that were never needed for the job they ended up with. Surely we should be concentrating our investment (and encouraging people of all backgrounds) to complete degrees related to industries that create weath for the country.

evespikey

michaels wrote: »

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.

It's very different to a graduate tax because the rich can buy their way out of paying that "tax" as they can pay the fees upfront, and not pay interest later on. Under a graduate tax system there is no option to buy your way out of it.

setmefree2

michaels wrote: »

What I find most amusing is that what has been introduced is basically a fairly progressive graduate tax system of

How is it progressive? At £21k this system creates a marginal tax rate of 41% and at £42k a marginal tax rate of 51%. Nothing progressive about that when the top tax rate for everyone else is 52% at £150k! (and that's only temporary - when the 50% tax rate is unwound they will have a marginal tax rate of 42%, so millionaires will have a lower tax rate than a graduate on £42K!)

setmefree2

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?

Indeed. The burden of todays HE fees is being kicked down the road. If the 2012 students don't actually pay the fees back they will certainly be paying for it through taxation when the fees have to be written off. There is no such thing as FREE, someone has to pay!

setmefree2

MSE GUY.
Repayments are £540/year LOWER than now. Current graduates repay 9% of earnings above £15,000. The new threshold's £21,000 (which will rise with average earnings), so while repaying, future graduates will have more disposable income.

It doesn't kick in until 2017. £21k will be worth a great deal less by then.

setmefree2

MSE GUY
You will owe money LONGER and may pay MORE. Compared to current graduates, under the new scheme, as you repay less each year, the original debt's bigger. Plus, you pay higher interest, so it'll take MUCH longer to repay the loan than now, and depending on earnings, may cost more than now.

Well you said it! And you're still surprised student application numbers are falling

setmefree2

I could go on but I will stop (you'll be glad to hear). I really, really don't understand MSEs position on SLs. How anyone can support this pile of junk is beyond me.

MacMickster

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.

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?

Worst effected by this will be those who earn only £20K to £30K per annum. 20% tax, 12% NIC, and now 9% graduate tax. A 41% effective tax rate on relatively low wages at a time when they are trying to start a family, save for a house deposit etc.

Arts degrees are going to be the preserve of the wealthy only. I think that as the implications of student finance become apparent, more youngsters will decide against a university education.