How can people be so greedy?

clutton_2

i think that the withdrawal of student grants, and substituting them for loans, was the most iniquitous move the labour govt ever made - i had a fabulous free education - why shouldn't this generation have the same ?

neas

clutton wrote: »

i think that the withdrawal of student grants, and substituting them for loans, was the most iniquitous move the labour govt ever made - i had a fabulous free education - why shouldn't this generation have the same ?

the student loan doesnt help... and i went through when tuitions fees were 1k a year.

Know some students doing a 4 year course and their student loans will be close to 26k by the time they even start to pay it... rising a RPI (4% a year!!!).

So its really an uphill battle for the youth to get on the ladder. The increase in starting salary negates this but still with a student loan and high mortgage... with bank of mum and dad loan.... means more and more 'kids' have to rely on bank of mum and dad for deposits for a house. This to me is broken.

Im not spamming by the way im just trying to vent some anger... its nobodys fault just a problem of the system. Alot of people have gained alot of money from rising property but at the expense of their children.

Stevie1

I am sorry if this is a bit harsh but-

Stop whinging and feeling sorry for yourself!
No one owes you anything in life. No one made you go to university and the debt you have as a result was your choice and not "the government's". You expect taxpayers to fund your education??

Why would a 24 year-old feel they absolutely, definitely, must buy a house anyway? You are just starting your life, fresh out of university (btw, it's spelled 'lose') and will probably be moving around the country and/or world chasing your career in the next few years.

You don't have to buy somewhere, you know.

PasturesNew

clutton wrote: »

i think that the withdrawal of student grants, and substituting them for loans, was the most iniquitous move the labour govt ever made - i had a fabulous free education - why shouldn't this generation have the same ?

You had it free because not so many got the chance of the education.

It was largely reserved for the middle classes and in my day people going to Uni was about 12% and mostly boys.

Now 50% can go and they're all told about Uni.

Riq

I'm 24 next month, a graduate like you and I still live with my parents.

I wish I had someone to move in with so think yourself lucky you have a fiance!!!

PasturesNew

I never had a Uni education. Nor did I ever have a partner to try to share the cost with.

I was brought up in a very expensive town where wages were quite low for the masses.

A friend of mine (successful Mercedes Benz salesman with some contacts a bit on the dodgy side) managed to get a mortgage on a 2 bed terrace in 1987 for £85,000 that wasn't in a particularly good street and wasn't anything special. At the time I was earning £6,000/year aged 27, to put the figures in perspective. At the time, I'd looked. A complete and utter derelict wreck 15 miles out of town, a wrecked/smashed and abandoned ex-council house was on the market at £30,000. It wasn't even a village, just what looked like one of a short row of old farm-workers' cottages. We could only borrow 3x earnings back then.

I finally bought a house at 40, by moving to a cheaper area then working 100 miles away for a bit better money. I thought buying a house was "it". Then you find out it's a nuisance. An expensive millstone. Limiting how you think and what you can do.

My father bought his first house at 40.

My sister is a solicitor, she bought her first house aged 30.

This generation seem to expect it all at once.

aztec21

Well said Stevie1. What a whiner.

ginger

stevie 1 - I think you are a bit harsh. The recent governments have actually encouraged 18+ schooleavers to go into further education to replenish the stock of graduates/qualified professionals; the failing numbers being due not only to emigrants but also those working class youngsters whose parents could not afford to send them to university but also fell into the trap of being too "affluent" to receive grant aid. Take EMA - you receive nothing if you receive more than £30k family income - typical wages are £23k - so a two parent typical earning family would, as you would expect, not be funded for EMA - but what about a single parent family earning just over that £30k limit? Receives nothing.

On the news today was an item about salaries with or without the benefit further education - the "advantage" of further education is worth approx £2/3K a year. For the sake of a £30/40K debt! You'd have to work 15/20 years to pay off that advantage. And then the question of whether having a profession is worth the hassle. I know that sometimes my over average wage (ha) is not worth the daily stress - give me stocking shelves at Asda for minimum wage any day! I'm not denegrating the asda workers - far from it - I know only too well but too late who has the better option.

aztec21

ginger wrote: »

Take EMA - you receive nothing if you receive more than £30k family income - typical wages are £23k - so a two parent typical earning family would, as you would expect, not be funded for EMA - but what about a single parent family earning just over that £30k limit? Receives nothing.

Why do so many people think that the government owes them so much?

wymondham

ginger wrote: »

stevie 1 - I think you are a bit harsh. The recent governments have actually encouraged 18+ schooleavers to go into further education to replenish the stock of graduates/qualified professionals; the failing numbers being due not only to emigrants but also those working class youngsters whose parents could not afford to send them to university but also fell into the trap of being too "affluent" to receive grant aid. Take EMA - you receive nothing if you receive more than £30k family income - typical wages are £23k - so a two parent typical earning family would, as you would expect, not be funded for EMA - but what about a single parent family earning just over that £30k limit? Receives nothing.

On the news today was an item about salaries with or without the benefit further education - the "advantage" of further education is worth approx £2/3K a year. For the sake of a £30/40K debt! You'd have to work 15/20 years to pay off that advantage. And then the question of whether having a profession is worth the hassle. I know that sometimes my over average wage (ha) is not worth the daily stress - give me stocking shelves at Asda for minimum wage any day! I'm not denegrating the asda workers - far from it - I know only too well but too late who has the better option.

never went to uni .... went into a job as an apprentice. If the government keep telling Uni people how much more they should be earning by going, then it must be frustrating when in the real world it does not work that way, plus you have large debts... Most people i know who went to Uni only did it as they did'nt know at the time what to do....