Cameron - the shrimp in China

[Simster]

4th i think.

Split the difference:

The World’s Largest Economies | Economy Watch

 

[Pavilionaire]

I agree with pretty much all of that statement Cameron made.

His audience was a group of Chinese students, so it was important to talk about the future and have the balls to refer to human rights issues.

And to pretend Britain has no influence in global affairs is just plain bollocks. Our Commonwealth links, relationship with the USA and counterweight to France and Germany in the EU mean we'll be big players for years to come.

 

[mikeyjh]

You'd think the twot might want to worry about what's happening to his HQ.... Fair play to the police, wonder how long they'll feel like defending them while they're falling victim to the ridiculous cuts.

 

[brightonandhove567]

Oh come off it. How does raising tuition fees do that ? You go to Uni etc, get a better education and so have the ability to earn more. Only seems fair you pay a little more towards that when the country has no money. I notice you don't mention that they raised the amount you need to earn before you start paying it back.

While some of the cuts could be considered badly thought out and affecting the wrong people the rise in tuition fees is spot on. Complaining that you have to pay a little more for the education that YOU benefit from sounds very much like a Nimby to me.

University is no longer about ability it's about wealth so the most intelligent in this fine nation aern't nesscasarily getting degrees therefore we are much more ineffecient at producing talent.

 

[bhaexpress]

I have a friend who's 21, she's Chinese and now lives in California/ Thanks to their excellent teaching she's speaks English fluently with no accent at all'

 

[Paskman]

University is no longer about ability it's about wealth so the most intelligent in this fine nation aern't nesscasarily getting degrees therefore we are much more ineffecient at producing talent.

I assume that the ability to spell is not a prerequisite for admittance into University these days?

 

[mikeyjh]

Oh come off it. How does raising tuition fees do that ? You go to Uni etc, get a better education and so have the ability to earn more. Only seems fair you pay a little more towards that when the country has no money. I notice you don't mention that they raised the amount you need to earn before you start paying it back.

While some of the cuts could be considered badly thought out and affecting the wrong people the rise in tuition fees is spot on. Complaining that you have to pay a little more for the education that YOU benefit from sounds very much like a Nimby to me.

Point is, when you're 17/18 from a poor or lower mid class family, the idea of taking on all this debt is frightening, it really is. I protested against the end of grants by you know who in the 1980s and I would do so again, it's idealogical policy that discriminates against the less well off.

 

[brightonandhove567]

I assume that the ability to spell is not a prerequisite for admittance into University these days?

No it's generally done on A - Levels.
The fella above is quite correct.

I'm suprised hippy - vill isn't more Left Wing to be honest or do you all vote for that despicable Green party?

 

[fruitnveg]

No it's generally done on A - Levels.
The fella above is quite correct.

I'm suprised hippy - vill isn't more Left Wing to be honest or do you all vote for that despicable Green party?

Its Hippy-ville, Moron!

 

[Paskman]

No it's generally done on A - Levels.
The fella above is quite correct.

I'm suprised hippy - vill isn't more Left Wing to be honest or do you all vote for that despicable Green party?

I assume that the ability to spell is not a prerequisite for A - levels these days either?

 

[sten_super]

Point is, when you're 17/18 from a poor or lower mid class family, the idea of taking on all this debt is frightening, it really is. I protested against the end of grants by you know who in the 1980s and I would do so again, it's idealogical policy that discriminates against the less well off.

I don't think it's fair to say it's idealogical, when the investigation into the future of university funding was undertaken by someone neutral, and was instigated by the previous government. You also have to consider that tuition fees and top up fees were bought in by the previous government.

I agree with your first point, however, and the way they are setting up this system really annoys me. Massive fees will put people off going to university, rightly or wrongly, and I feel strongly that the method of 'subsidising' the less well off that says "it's okay, you don't have to pay off your loan" is sending out completely the wrong message. I thought we were trying to engender fiscal responsibility into our population, after the problems associated with the credit bubble? I would much rather see direct subsidies given to those that are less well off, and students encouraged to pay off all of the loan that they are given (which is relative to their ability to pay, either now or later) than the encouragement of such irresponsibility.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

University is no longer about ability it's about wealth so the most intelligent in this fine nation aern't nesscasarily getting degrees therefore we are much more ineffecient at producing talent.

There are still grants available for those on low incomes. This talent you talk of, is this the same degree waving talent that went into banking in the past and brought the country to its knees ?

I would suggest becoming a flag retailer - you won't have any fees to pay then

 

[Westdene Seagull]

I don't think it's fair to say it's idealogical, when the investigation into the future of university funding was undertaken by someone neutral, and was instigated by the previous government. You also have to consider that tuition fees and top up fees were bought in by the previous government.

I agree with your first point, however, and the way they are setting up this system really annoys me. Massive fees will put people off going to university, rightly or wrongly, and I feel strongly that the method of 'subsidising' the less well off that says "it's okay, you don't have to pay off your loan" is sending out completely the wrong message. I thought we were trying to engender fiscal responsibility into our population, after the problems associated with the credit bubble? I would much rather see direct subsidies given to those that are less well off, and students encouraged to pay off all of the loan that they are given (which is relative to their ability to pay, either now or later) than the encouragement of such irresponsibility.

Personally I'd rather see a graduate tax. That way there would be no debts from fees and if students didn't want debt from day to day living expenses then they could get part time jobs.

 

[sten_super]

Personally I'd rather see a graduate tax. That way there would be no debts from fees and if students didn't want debt from day to day living expenses then they could get part time jobs.

I would rather see this as well; however the Browne report dismissed it. I don't think it is viable at a level that would be acceptable to graduates; the Browne report looked at a 3% tax, but realistically it'd have to be more like double that.

 

[withdeanwombat]

I hate David Cameron very dearly.

Post#3 and already the right response. Long live NSC !!