Am I missing the point about tuition fees?

[Herr Tubthumper]

Most people manage to learn as part of growing up. .

Maybe if you get out a bit more and meet the nation you will have a different view of this. I argue that the vast majority of people have not managed to learn about life and it's very rich tapestry...otherwise they would not act like spastics all the time.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Alright, so if you want to cut out the ambiguous "opinion" side of it, let's just say that if you asked most people who have a degree whether they thought it was an important thing to do they would say it was. A lot of them struggled to afford it under the current constraints - it was hardly a luxurious financial proposition for potential students in the first place. Why should anyone who wants to do it now not have the same opportunity they had? The country is not so economically strained that education and universities have to get cut. Nobody can answer whether this or that degree is more or less worthwhile than any other degree/going straight down t'pit, but everyone should be entitled to the opportunity. If more of our taxes went on "pointless" degrees and less went on, say, bonuses for Topshop executives, I'd be proud of that.

Everybody DOES have the opportunity ( grades allowing ) to go to University. Nobody has to pay up front and after graduating, if you earn £25k then you only pay £32 per month back.

 

[simmo]

Yes, I am biased towards labour although as a party I don't like them but they are the closest to what I believe in (and no, I'm not a communist). Yes I don't like the conservatives because I saw what 18 years of their rule did. And exactly how do you suggest that a hung parliament reflects a resounding victory for the Tories. With the bad press, the recession and a leader who was everything but, Cameron could still not deliver a 'resounding' victory. The conservatives are only in power because the libdems prostituted themselves, demonstrated by the about turn on tuition fees. Let's see what happens at the next few by-elections.

Just where do I say it was a 'resounding' victory for the Tories!!! Why don't you actually read what I put? Instead of going on some rant about Cameron and the press and putting in quotes that I did not write.

I have absoultely no doubt Labour may win a few by elections but that is only because the Con/Lib's have to make some very tough cuts because of the present state of the economy which are always going to be unpopular.

 

[sten_super]

All parties agree that the current funding model, for the volume of students attending university, is unsustainable. Therefore you are presented with a situation where you either i) keep the current funding model and cut the number of students or ii) change (cut) the funding model and keep the current number of students. In an ideal world we'd all like to keep education for all available for free. However, that's not the world that we live in. The question that has to be asked is what is the least bad option? Where on a sliding scale of student numbers versus increased fees does the balance lie?

 

[Biscuit]

No one is asking for education to be free (Apart from Secondary education - Thanks to the 1944 education act bought it under a War Time Government) what they are asking are for prices not to go up significantly and for a worse service. You're right we do need to find a balance, but the current plays are simply not the right way forward.

 

[drew]

Just where do I say it was a 'resounding' victory for the Tories!!! Why don't you actually read what I put? Instead of going on some rant about Cameron and the press and putting in quotes that I did not write.

I have absoultely no doubt Labour may win a few by elections but that is only because the Con/Lib's have to make some very tough cuts because of the present state of the economy which are always going to be unpopular.

Sorry but I'll try to make it easy for you. By suggesting that Labour were resoundingly beaten conversely means that whoever won, won resoundingly, well in most people eyes that would mean that but apparently not yours. Read my post, the only quote was the word resounding.

 

[Joey Deacon's Disco Suit]

Sorry but I'll try to make it easy for you. By suggesting that Labour were resoundingly beaten conversely means that whoever won, won resoundingly, well in most people eyes that would mean that but apparently not yours. Read my post, the only quote was the word resounding.

That's false logic. It's quite possible for a party in power to be resoundingly beaten in the polls yet there be no outright winner.

Party A has 400 seats before last election but loses over half of them at election to parties B,C,D & E equally. There's clearly a loser (party A) but no clear (resounding) winner.

 

[simmo]

Sorry but I'll try to make it easy for you. By suggesting that Labour were resoundingly beaten conversely means that whoever won, won resoundingly, well in most people eyes that would mean that but apparently not yours. Read my post, the only quote was the word resounding.

Again, you just don't bother reading anybody's post do you. I have re-read mine again and I stated in post 169

"The general public have all seen where 13 years of Labour rule leave us now and that is why they were resoundingly rejected when they put these 13 years of rule up for re-election in May."

That is the truth, whether you like it or not. Or do you disagree with that?

You would be right if it was just a two horse race, but a general election is not that. It is a multi horse race and it is possible for someone to be rejected resoundingly, but it is not a necessity for someone to win resoundingly or even outright (I have never said that the Cons won the election outright and I don't believe that to be the case). Just that the people don't want Labour and their policies and when put to the vote rejected them in May.

 

[bhaexpress]

Maybe if you get out a bit more and meet the nation you will have a different view of this. I argue that the vast majority of people have not managed to learn about life and it's very rich tapestry...otherwise they would not act like spastics all the time.

I would guarantee that I get out and meet more people that you do because of the job I do. The statement that you think that 'the vast majority of people have not managed to learn about life and it's very rich tapestry' is a sublime example of an arrogant pompous wanker. What on earth makes you think you think you're the fount of all knowledge ?

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Sorry but I'll try to make it easy for you. By suggesting that Labour were resoundingly beaten conversely means that whoever won, won resoundingly, well in most people eyes that would mean that but apparently not yours. Read my post, the only quote was the word resounding.

That's false logic. It's quite possible for a party in power to be resoundingly beaten in the polls yet there be no outright winner.

Party A has 400 seats before last election but loses over half of them at election to parties B,C,D & E equally. There's clearly a loser (party A) but no clear (resounding) winner.

Indeed, the swing away from Labour was massive so you could say they were resoundingly beaten.