Reviewing the Coalition

kabayiri

michaels wrote: »

Except it has basically changed from being a tuition fee to a graduate tax.

I was thinking the other day that perhaps the 9k cap was the mistake, with no cap rather than all the unis going to a single price as a herd they woudl probably actually have had to set prices based on the perceived value of the courses they run and then of course market forces would combine what they could sell the courses for and what they cost to run and make sure that the courses available and the prices met what was most suitable for the country.

I think there should be much more variety in the post-school education market.

Have we ever questioned the typical 3 year University structure?

What about a modern version of the OU for many?

If I were a private supplier, I wonder how much I could leverage out of remote based learning, using one-to-ones using Skype combined with high quality YouTube style lecture delivery.

When Universities were first conceived, none of this was available.

kabayiri

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

So, you believe that University should be on the basis of affordability rather than ability?
...

I read DW's HR journals.

They were commenting on the rise of so called super Apprenticeships, where really talented people would be plucked post A-level and employed / even sent to Uni paid for by the employer if they thought it worthwhile.

Those with ability will always find a way. I have worked with IT contractors without a degree who run rings around so called academics.

I believe we deserve the education system we can afford.

MumOf2

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

All this since you moved from Scotland to England?

Why wasn't this so evident where you used to live?

Absolutely where we live now. I'm talking about what we actually see every day, not what people would like us to think. Is there something wrong with that?

IveSeenTheLight

MumOf2 wrote: »

Absolutely where we live now. I'm talking about what we actually see every day, not what people would like us to think. Is there something wrong with that?

Not at all, just putting in context this is your perception of the last 6 months or so, not the whole duration of the last parliament

Do you have a comment on the debt levels?

IveSeenTheLight

kabayiri wrote: »

I read DW's HR journals.

They were commenting on the rise of so called super Apprenticeships, were really talented people would be plucked post A-level and employed / even sent to Uni paid for by the employer if they thought it worthwhile.

Those with ability will always find a way. I have worked with IT contractors without a degree who run rings around so called academics.

I believe we deserve the education system we can afford.

Sorry, I'm not aware of what "DW's HR Journals" are.

Certainly as a person who gained an apprenticeship, was put through my ONC and HNC courses by my employers and then paid for myself to complete my degree through the OU route, I fully endorse this method.

I'm not devaluing the expertice that is gained through apprenticeship nor think that graduates walk in and contribute value from day one.

I do believe that this is a longer route however and that opportunity for direct University should be based on achievement and capability rather than affordability though.

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

What about tuition fees trebling?

Do you agree with a 300% rise?

Two points to that:

1. Most won't pay off their tuition fees so they aren't really a debt
2. Is that really a Poll Tax/Winter of Discontent moment? Surely not.

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

P.S., you may be surprised to know that the debt has increased more in the last 5 years than the previous 5 years

What else would you expect. Brown's expenditure plans in the early 00's were built on inflation busting rises in tax on petrol for example. Not only have the rises been stopped. With the crash in oil price so has Government taxation revenue now. Likewise the contribution from the Financial Services sector.

In all likelihood. HSBC will move it's head office if Labour win the election. Only impacts around 250 staff. With it will go around $1.5 billion of banking tax levy revenue that Milliband has committed to spend elsewhere. Having an anti business government ( Labour and SNP) will do little for the UK economy. I agree that issues need resolving. Simply taxing and regulating profit isn't the answer.

ukcarper

Generali wrote: »

Two points to that:

1. Most won't pay off their tuition fees so they aren't really a debt
2. Is that really a Poll Tax/Winter of Discontent moment? Surely not.

Isn't that the crunch if most of the debt won't be paid off how will it help the deficit.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

Two points to that:

1. Most won't pay off their tuition fees so they aren't really a debt
2. Is that really a Poll Tax/Winter of Discontent moment? Surely not.

Two points back

1. Great advert for Universities if you don't believe they will earn over £21k. This is not what I see in my local area. My wife had student loans which were to be repaid and she did so over many years

2. I don't believe the OP mentioned anything about Poll Tax / WOD moments. I was simply reviewing a controversial policy that the coalition implemented. Incidentally, one I am hearing they are opening up to higher levels of courses.

IveSeenTheLight

Thrugelmir wrote: »

What else would you expect. Brown's expenditure plans in the early 00's were built on inflation busting rises in tax on petrol for example.

So my response was to mumof2's statement that the recovery was not built on debt and showing the debt incurred was higher in the las parliament than the one before.

Your response is that it's not the Con/ Dems fault but that still of Labour.

!!!!!!, I wish politicians would take accountability for their actions and term and stop harking back to the past.

Take responsibility of what you do now and what you offer in your manifestos.