I don't understand the furore over the government's new policy on tuition fees which seems to be very fair considering the fact that the universities are having funding problems. Nobody including the Tories and Liberals seems to have come up with a better alternative...........Isn't it fair that the ppl that r gonna benefit directly from the degrees contribute a little bit towards it too?
Salty Gibbon
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,535
- Likes
- 6
There are too many so called Universities offering too many dead-beat courses to too many dead-beat wasters.
Make the dead-beats pay if they want to get a degree in Hairdressing, Soap Pyschology, The Life and Times of Kermit the Frog or some other s**t subject.
But let the government support serious students doing serious courses from general taxation. Also, double the fees of overseas students to subsidise home students. They can afford it.
As for B-Liar, he should just go hang and let some honest people deal with this issue.
Make the dead-beats pay if they want to get a degree in Hairdressing, Soap Pyschology, The Life and Times of Kermit the Frog or some other s**t subject.
But let the government support serious students doing serious courses from general taxation. Also, double the fees of overseas students to subsidise home students. They can afford it.
As for B-Liar, he should just go hang and let some honest people deal with this issue.
Whilst I agree with the sentiments expressed by Salty Gibbon, I think the way that this measure has been railroaded through is nothing short of scandalous.
The Scottish assembly voted by a majority to abolish tuition fees and not to introduce top-up fees. English and Welsh MPs had no vote on this.
In the recent Commons vote, English and Welsh MPs rejected top-up fees in England and Wales by a clear majority of about 48. It was only the 53 Scottish MPs, voting with the Government, that enabled the measure to be passed with a majority of just 5. So we now have top-up fees because Scottish MPs, having decided that Scottish students should not pay fees, have decided that English and Welsh students should, safe in the knowledge that the legislation would not apply to their own constituents. Their vote was pure vindictiveness in a matter that didn't concern them! And this is what now passes for democracy in Britain!
Did you see the students debating this with Blair, chaired by Paxman? One student pointed out that when he earns £15,000 he will be paying 42% tax (22% inc tax, 11% Nat Ins, 9% student loan repayment), which is 1% more than Blair, (and Richard Branson, the Beckhams and the Duke of Westminster). This is fair???
And finally there was a clear, unambiguous manifesto committment to not introducing top-up fees during the life of the parliament. We have been lied to yet again. In private business this would be a matter for litigation as a breach of contract.
The Scottish assembly voted by a majority to abolish tuition fees and not to introduce top-up fees. English and Welsh MPs had no vote on this.
In the recent Commons vote, English and Welsh MPs rejected top-up fees in England and Wales by a clear majority of about 48. It was only the 53 Scottish MPs, voting with the Government, that enabled the measure to be passed with a majority of just 5. So we now have top-up fees because Scottish MPs, having decided that Scottish students should not pay fees, have decided that English and Welsh students should, safe in the knowledge that the legislation would not apply to their own constituents. Their vote was pure vindictiveness in a matter that didn't concern them! And this is what now passes for democracy in Britain!
Did you see the students debating this with Blair, chaired by Paxman? One student pointed out that when he earns £15,000 he will be paying 42% tax (22% inc tax, 11% Nat Ins, 9% student loan repayment), which is 1% more than Blair, (and Richard Branson, the Beckhams and the Duke of Westminster). This is fair???
And finally there was a clear, unambiguous manifesto committment to not introducing top-up fees during the life of the parliament. We have been lied to yet again. In private business this would be a matter for litigation as a breach of contract.
Last edited:
I have problems with the basic assumption that going to university leads to a better paid job (the historic consequence). However, if 50% of the student population go to university how can they all command premium salaries. Economics tells you that law of demand and supply will bring graduate salaries/expectations down meaning that future students are actually potentially taking on a much bigger liability that they are being led to believe.
Secondly, while i understand the politics behind the basic tenant that a better educated population should be lead to more prosperous society, is not the 40% higher tax rate already there to capture the "benefit"accrued to a better education. In otherwords the solution is to raise the top rate of tax, so that the dustman quite rightly doesn't fund a students education. However, raising the top rate is seen as a no no politically.
Secondly, while i understand the politics behind the basic tenant that a better educated population should be lead to more prosperous society, is not the 40% higher tax rate already there to capture the "benefit"accrued to a better education. In otherwords the solution is to raise the top rate of tax, so that the dustman quite rightly doesn't fund a students education. However, raising the top rate is seen as a no no politically.
Salty Gibbon
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,535
- Likes
- 6
What do you expect from this totally dishonest, wicked and vindictive government.
I have advised my kids to get their degrees and then leave the country for good.
Having spent most of my working life overseas, I can say that this is a wonderful option. I will probably leave with them !!
I have advised my kids to get their degrees and then leave the country for good.
Having spent most of my working life overseas, I can say that this is a wonderful option. I will probably leave with them !!
Salty Gibbon
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,535
- Likes
- 6
Besides, if B-Liar hadn't started a war against Iraq under totally false pretences to satisfy his bitchy blood-lust, then there would probably have been plenty of money to fund "proper" Universities.
Unless of course the b*****d is going to raise taxes to pay for his sick war.
Unless of course the b*****d is going to raise taxes to pay for his sick war.
I really wonder at the morality of a country that can find £billions to bomb other people's children, but not enough to educate it's own.
Mully - I think you are right, and I also think that students are graduating with expectations beyond the ability of the workplace to deliver, which will lead to a lot of disillusioned graduates.
Not sure about the "dustman" arguement. As a student doctor said, when the dustman has a heart attack he'll be very glad that she graduated as a doctor. A doctor paying higher rate tax and with student debt will be paying 50% as his/her marginal rate.
Mully - I think you are right, and I also think that students are graduating with expectations beyond the ability of the workplace to deliver, which will lead to a lot of disillusioned graduates.
Not sure about the "dustman" arguement. As a student doctor said, when the dustman has a heart attack he'll be very glad that she graduated as a doctor. A doctor paying higher rate tax and with student debt will be paying 50% as his/her marginal rate.
The argument re dustman is that it is not fair that non graduates should pay for graduate education, therefore graduates should pay something for their future benefit. To get around that line, if increased funds are required to fund universities, increase the top rate of taxation (the graduate rate) and say so, rather like the increase in NI was to fund the Health Service.
IMO I think they know that the yield from hiking the top rate is not going to work (re my line about too many future 'grads' demeaning their value)
IMO I think they know that the yield from hiking the top rate is not going to work (re my line about too many future 'grads' demeaning their value)
Salty Gibbon
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,535
- Likes
- 6
Most University educations are not worth paying for and the degrees they hand out are worthless.
When I was at University ( a real one ) there were only 44 such establishments in the UK and they tended to cater for the brightest people in the country.
Now, God only knows how many establishments there are calling themselves Universities and fraudulently funding themselves by attracting second rate students and requiring them to pay a high fee for what will ultimately be a worthless piece of paper.
A lot of " graduates" will still become dustmen because they will be qualified for little else, and you may in fact require a degree in Environmental Waste Disposal in order to become a dustman, or should I say Waste Disposal Specialist ?
The majority of these fraudulent establishments should be closed down - or better, burnt down.
When I was at University ( a real one ) there were only 44 such establishments in the UK and they tended to cater for the brightest people in the country.
Now, God only knows how many establishments there are calling themselves Universities and fraudulently funding themselves by attracting second rate students and requiring them to pay a high fee for what will ultimately be a worthless piece of paper.
A lot of " graduates" will still become dustmen because they will be qualified for little else, and you may in fact require a degree in Environmental Waste Disposal in order to become a dustman, or should I say Waste Disposal Specialist ?
The majority of these fraudulent establishments should be closed down - or better, burnt down.
Did you get out of the wrong side of the bed this morning, Salty? 
Interesting enough - and picking up on Roger's point about SMPs - YouGov conducted a poll of its members on these very questions last night. If you go to their site and sign up, you’ll probably be able to give your “share of abuse” too – indirectly, of course!
Here’s the link to Peter Kellner's: http://www.yougov.com/yougov_website/default.asp?wID=0&uID=
Spot on as usual, Roger!
Cheers
Mayfly
Interesting enough - and picking up on Roger's point about SMPs - YouGov conducted a poll of its members on these very questions last night. If you go to their site and sign up, you’ll probably be able to give your “share of abuse” too – indirectly, of course!
Here’s the link to Peter Kellner's: http://www.yougov.com/yougov_website/default.asp?wID=0&uID=
Spot on as usual, Roger!
Cheers
Mayfly
Last edited:
Salty Gibbon
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,535
- Likes
- 6
I got out of bed the right side m8.
I just have pretty strong views on this subject and I am not afraid to express them despite the prescence of thought police everywhere trying to impose political and emotional correctness.
I'm just waiting for my kids to grow up so I can leave this sad country for good.
I just have pretty strong views on this subject and I am not afraid to express them despite the prescence of thought police everywhere trying to impose political and emotional correctness.
I'm just waiting for my kids to grow up so I can leave this sad country for good.
To coin a phrase, it seems to me that we have: “Government of the politically inept, by the political correct”?
It sort of makes you wonder how far the socialists are prepared to go with this – we’re already seeing signs – warnings, perhaps - of social unrest? Take for example, the issues of Council Tax, speeding cameras and parking fines, etc to name but a few – there are clear signs of “discontent”, are there not?
Cheers
Mayfly
It sort of makes you wonder how far the socialists are prepared to go with this – we’re already seeing signs – warnings, perhaps - of social unrest? Take for example, the issues of Council Tax, speeding cameras and parking fines, etc to name but a few – there are clear signs of “discontent”, are there not?
Cheers
Mayfly
We would have had a change of gov't at the last election if there had been any sort of credible opposition. The problem the gov't has is a soaring need for revenue, and they've boxed themselves into a corner over not increasing income tax (which they haven't) as opposed to tax on income (which they have - Nat Ins).
BTW - I've just found the section in the last Labour Manifesto about Tuition Fees. Page 20 reads :-
"We will not introduce top-up fees and have legislated to prevent them."
No "ifs", no "buts", no "unlesses" - just a clear unambiguous lie!
BTW - I've just found the section in the last Labour Manifesto about Tuition Fees. Page 20 reads :-
"We will not introduce top-up fees and have legislated to prevent them."
No "ifs", no "buts", no "unlesses" - just a clear unambiguous lie!
I will vote for any goverment that runs on this central mandate.We the goverment promise to use every opportunity to get the f..k out of your lives and leave you has responsible adults to make your own choices.
In relation to higher education this means if you choose to want it (either you the prospective student or parents of) then you pay for it.
There is no implied suggestion in this one way or the other as to whether higher education is good,bad or indifferent. It just comes down to choices ,and how you want to make them.
If you want to stick a very basic safety net under that then no probs..I'm thinking you get subsided if your abode is the YMCA...
Cheers
In relation to higher education this means if you choose to want it (either you the prospective student or parents of) then you pay for it.
There is no implied suggestion in this one way or the other as to whether higher education is good,bad or indifferent. It just comes down to choices ,and how you want to make them.
If you want to stick a very basic safety net under that then no probs..I'm thinking you get subsided if your abode is the YMCA...
Cheers
I also do not like inconsistency/bad laws.
If it is now ok that those who directly benefit from a service have to pay, ie graduates for education.
Where is the legislation to charge users of the health service. They obviously have benefitted.
( I am not making a political point just taking the principle of students paying for their education to a wider audience.) Certainly it would go someway to meet the government need for tax revenue
If it is now ok that those who directly benefit from a service have to pay, ie graduates for education.
Where is the legislation to charge users of the health service. They obviously have benefitted.
( I am not making a political point just taking the principle of students paying for their education to a wider audience.) Certainly it would go someway to meet the government need for tax revenue
Last edited:
Blair has lost a lot credibility with me esp with his stance and continued arrogance and stubbornness with regards to the issue of WMD's but i think he is right with regards to the issue of top up fees............the graduate doesn't get to pay it if they r earning less than £15k and the amount they have to pay in reality is less than £20 a week (as low as £9-10 for the lower end of the scale)...........ppl from low income backgrounds r also entitled to grants and other benefits.
With regards to the dustman analogy, i think it is very irresponsible to dismiss the role that every profession plays in our everyday life.........how would the doctor feel if his bins r not cleared and his streets r not swept? we all benefit from each other and it is a well known fact that a graduate is more likely to earn more than a non graduate over the period of their working lives.
With regards to the dustman analogy, i think it is very irresponsible to dismiss the role that every profession plays in our everyday life.........how would the doctor feel if his bins r not cleared and his streets r not swept? we all benefit from each other and it is a well known fact that a graduate is more likely to earn more than a non graduate over the period of their working lives.
I back Salty ONE HUNDRED PERCENT!
Yes his views are strong - but I understand that. I'm not really a violent person or take much interest in politics generally, but what this b&st&£d has done to this country and our reputation overseas is criminal. He should hang. AND IM NOT TALKING ABOUT SALTY!
The thing that really gets my goat though is these anti Bush/war protesters. If they had any sense of the revolution, they should have stormed no 10 and thrown him and his LYING wife out on the street and left them to the mob.
It's a disgrace that his wife is still allowed to practise law after publicly admitting she is a lier. So much for the great british justice system - any way I digress - but I cant stand his wife either.
Guess who got out of bed on the wrong side lol!
SALTY 4 PM!
Yes his views are strong - but I understand that. I'm not really a violent person or take much interest in politics generally, but what this b&st&£d has done to this country and our reputation overseas is criminal. He should hang. AND IM NOT TALKING ABOUT SALTY!
The thing that really gets my goat though is these anti Bush/war protesters. If they had any sense of the revolution, they should have stormed no 10 and thrown him and his LYING wife out on the street and left them to the mob.
It's a disgrace that his wife is still allowed to practise law after publicly admitting she is a lier. So much for the great british justice system - any way I digress - but I cant stand his wife either.
Guess who got out of bed on the wrong side lol!
SALTY 4 PM!
Similar threads
