Are degrees in the UK value for money?

GreatApe

Windofchange wrote: »

So you're genius idea is giving a jobless 18 year old 30 grand to buy a 200k house, so he / she can pay the 170k mortgage how? You're also going to extend help to buy to dish out billions of pounds of taxpayer money in servicing the mortgage? I can't even be bothered trying to debate this one! I'm broken.

I was thinking if two people aka a couple which is how most people buy homes
The typically FTB property price in our second biggest city Birmingham' is about £120k for a 3 bed
So if two 18 year olds get together their £30k each adds to £60k which is a 50% deposit .

So long as the two work even if they have min wage jobs they could borrow the other £60k which would be less than 2x joint income. And Birmingham isn't special in about half the country a FTB type property costs £120k or thereabouts

If they wanted a £200k property. They would have a 30% deposit and would need to borrow £140k.
At 4 x joint income they would need a combined income of £35k which is just a tad over min wage so easily doable. If course we shouldn't be assuming the worst most people earn well above min wage but as can be seen even a couple in min wage can sort their lives out if inky the government would give them £30k instead of £60k to go to university!

Cakeguts

Windofchange wrote: »

You do a nursing course, you come out as a registered nurse. What on earth are you on about? This isn't a case of having some random degree in history and not getting on the Accenture consulting graduate scheme because someone with PPE beat you to it! The nursing qualification is standardised across all universities, and the link you post to states slightly further down the page:

We have a 98.9% employment rate (Source 2014-15 DLHE).

Another MSE expert giving opinions on something they know nothing about.

It may do but not in nursing. That is the point. Somewhere and I can't remember where there were figures for nursing courses and many of the graduates could not get jobs in nursing because they were not what the employers wanted so they get jobs in anything. A 98.9% employment rate could quite easily be 1 person becoming a nurse and the rest getting jobs stacking shelves in a supermarket. There was a comment with the figures that many nursing students used their nursing degrees like degrees in any other subject. With them coming from this university that would mean getting a job in a supermarket or a fast food establishment. There is nothing wrong with this but it seems to me to be a waste of tax payers money for student loans for a nursing course that a) does nothing to reduce the shortage of nurses and b) leads to a non graduate job in something else.

GreatApe

Windofchange wrote: »

Because Henrietta who's dad earns 20 million a year in finance would need to get a student loan of course. Just for the thrill of feeling like a proper student - oh look daddy, I'm a proper poor person, how magical. And of course she would go scouring the local council estate for a future husband. Dean should probably go visit the old people's home and marry a rich 80 year old shouldn't he according to your madness a few months ago? Or should he get Henrietta on a date and immediately enquire about how rich her parents are and what her financial situation is like?

I'd love to meet you in real life. It would be fascinating.

If Dean has any sense he would marry Henrietta and then inform his father in law :rotfl: and probably best not to bring up the motorbike thieving too soon

Your not Dean the motorbike thief are you Bagofwind?

GreatApe

Windofchange wrote: »

Because Henrietta who's dad earns 20 million a year in finance would need to get a student loan of course. Just for the thrill of feeling like a proper student - oh look daddy, I'm a proper poor person, how magical. And of course she would go scouring the local council estate for a future husband. Dean should probably go visit the old people's home and marry a rich 80 year old shouldn't he according to your madness a few months ago? Or should he get Henrietta on a date and immediately enquire about how rich her parents are and what her financial situation is like?

I'd love to meet you in real life. It would be fascinating.

Why can't Dean be a public schoolboy?
And why can't Henrietta be kicked out the house on her 18th birthday for not getting on with the family. These things happen. Why must you stereotype the council estate boys as the motorbike thieves?

Anyway this reminds me of Mays speech about the British dream where a poor grandmother can leave behind two professors and a prime minister. Well the reverse also happens. Professors and other middle class people do leave behind kids and grand kids much lessor and poorer than themselves. So while moving up is possible and it happens so does moving down. In fact if we define the middle class as the top 10% for every one that gets in one needs to fall down.

Windofchange

Cakeguts wrote: »

It may do but not in nursing. That is the point. Somewhere and I can't remember where there were figures for nursing courses and many of the graduates could not get jobs in nursing because they were not what the employers wanted so they get jobs in anything. A 98.9% employment rate could quite easily be 1 person becoming a nurse and the rest getting jobs stacking shelves in a supermarket. There was a comment with the figures that many nursing students used their nursing degrees like degrees in any other subject. With them coming from this university that would mean getting a job in a supermarket or a fast food establishment. There is nothing wrong with this but it seems to me to be a waste of tax payers money for student loans for a nursing course that a) does nothing to reduce the shortage of nurses and b) leads to a non graduate job in something else.

So we'll just take your word for it that somewhere in the ether there is some sort of thing that says loads of nurses are not suitable for interviews at hospitals? And of course a near 99% employment rate is based on 1 nurse qualifying with 99 others working in their local Sainsbury's.

Please don't bother yourself with doing any actual reading such as:

https://www.prospects.ac.uk/careers-advice/what-can-i-do-with-my-degree/nursing

97.1% of nursing graduates are health professionals (i.e. nurses), and 1.2% are 'other' such as maybe some supermarket work, or gone travelling etc.

GreatApe

Windofchange wrote: »

So we'll just take your word for it that somewhere in the ether there is some sort of thing that says loads of nurses are not suitable for interviews at hospitals? And of course a near 99% employment rate is based on 1 nurse qualifying with 99 others working in their local Sainsbury's.

Please don't bother yourself with doing any actual reading such as:

https://www.prospects.ac.uk/careers-advice/what-can-i-do-with-my-degree/nursing

97.1% of nursing graduates are health professionals (i.e. nurses), and 1.2% are 'other' such as maybe some supermarket work, or gone travelling etc.

What point are you trying to make
People study nursing and become nurses? And ....?

The thread is about the £30-80k in student debts and 3-4 years lost earnings studying at university being a good or bad investment for the individual and society. What do you think?

I think the time and treasure could be better spent elsewhere. Not only does university cost the kids a lot of money but it also delays peoples lives by 5-10 years. I'm sure one of the reason women have fewer kids and later on in life is the 3-4 years spent at university plus the lost income and additional loans pressure. How do you account for things like that?

Windofchange

GreatApe wrote: »

Why can't Dean be a public schoolboy?
And why can't Henrietta be kicked out the house on her 18th birthday for not getting on with the family. These things happen. Why must you stereotype the council estate boys as the motorbike thieves?

Anyway this reminds me of Mays speech about the British dream where a poor grandmother can leave behind two professors and a prime minister. Well the reverse also happens. Professors and other middle class people do leave behind kids and grand kids much lessor and poorer than themselves. So while moving up is possible and it happens so does moving down. In fact if we define the middle class as the top 10% for every one that gets in one needs to fall down.

So, take two 18 year olds and place whatever life situation you want on them. Your idea is to stop us loosing money. They can either buy a house and not be able to pay the mortgage, go to university and in your words waste 60 grand or whatever it is of money, or gamble on the stock market because of course they will make millions in a few years time and there is no hope of anyone ever losing any money with stocks and shares.

How long do you stipulate they have to hold their shares for before selling? 1 year? 5 years? 10 years? Oh, you must hold them for life - ok, so what is the point of them having it bar a few grand of dividend payments!? How long does someone have to hold the house for before cashing in? How long does someone have to stay in employment for with their degree in lesbian dance theory before their due is paid to society?

GreatApe

Windofchange wrote: »

So, take two 18 year olds and place whatever life situation you want on them. Your idea is to stop us loosing money. They can either buy a house and not be able to pay the mortgage, go to university and in your words waste 60 grand or whatever it is of money, or gamble on the stock market because of course they will make millions in a few years time and there is no hope of anyone ever losing any money with stocks and shares.

How long do you stipulate they have to hold their shares for before selling? 1 year? 5 years? 10 years? Oh, you must hold them for life - ok, so what is the point of them having it bar a few grand of dividend payments!? How long does someone have to hold the house for before cashing in? How long does someone have to stay in employment for with their degree in lesbian dance theory before their due is paid to society?

Why are you against choice?
If they want to use the £30k on tuition then fine
If they want to buy a house, which despite your protests they can afford easily, they can do that
If they keep it in a pension they can draw it only on retirement (unless buying a FTB house)

The house I'd say they can't sell for 5 years after that its upto them. You have a very negative view of people you think they would sell their own home and waste it on booze and drugs. I have more faith in people most poepe are decent and this £30k a head spent on housing or a pension would do much better for most students than £30k on tuition.

And despite your protests it will Long term be a huge saving as we have more homeowners and fewer poor pensioners and poor young adults. We night even see savings in the NHS via fewer women having kids so late. And potentially a multiplier benefit in having a younger population

Windofchange

GreatApe wrote: »

What point are you trying to make
People study nursing and become nurses? And ....?

The thread is about the £30-80k in student debts and 3-4 years lost earnings studying at university being a good or bad investment for the individual and society. What do you think?

I think the time and treasure could be better spent elsewhere. Not only does university cost the kids a lot of money but it also delays peoples lives by 5-10 years. I'm sure one of the reason women have fewer kids and later on in life is the 3-4 years spent at university plus the lost income and additional loans pressure. How do you account for things like that?

I'm replying to cakeguts who overheard Maureen and Dawn in the local newsagents relating a story about how there is this terrible university where no nurses are employed, and it is all a frightful waste of money. Can't remember where she heard that, just take my word for it ok. Oh, and the world is flat too. They definitely said that. It's true because I remember it.

As for the rest of it, I think we can agree that there are some degrees that are completely pointless. How much money have we wasted funding things that are completely pointless? Billions. That is capitalism for you. Where there is a demand, someone will fill it. If people will pay to go on Mickey mouse studies 101, someone will provide it. The UK government was in the news recently for giving £5 million to the Ethiopian spice girls. Reckon that is money well spent? Reckon bailing out the UK financial system to the tune of billions was money well spent? £1.5 billion to the DUP to keep the PM in her job? You could go on couldn't you. !!!!! degrees are hardly the hole that is sinking the UK economy. What about the lecturers that are employed to teach them? The cleaners keeping the lecture theatre clean? If I am to jump to assumptions as you love to do, I reckon the taxes paid by all the support staff on <pointless degree> more than covers the £50k per head or whatever we 'waste' on it.

You're one step away from communism - give 18 year olds 3 choices with life - university, stocks, house. How about a £30 grand loan to start up the next Virgin? The next Microsoft? Nope, sorry mate, got to be stocks or houses if you aren't going to university as they are the only things that will ever get you anywhere in life.

I'll check in again tomorrow to see how many likes (barring economic) your posts have collected. I foresee a whole lot of head scratching from anyone reading your last two pages of effort.

GreatApe

PS I'd be happy if it was even £60k a head and yes I would be happy to pay higher taxes if it was required especially as I am certain it would lead to lower taxes down the line. +5% on VAT would probably do it.

That way a young couple could buy outright a 3 bedroom house in places like Birmingham and much of the UK where prices are cheap.

Or of course they can use their £60k for tuition and living costs for their 3 years university.
My guess is 85% of students would opt for the house/pension and not the university.