If a football club's fans behave like these RUDDY students (Merged)

[Simster]

For me, it is all about balance. Students should pay towards their education, but not so much as to saddle them with an absurdly large debt. Back in my day, higher education was virtually free and consequently there were a minority of people using university to arse about. Some got chucked off their course, but more often than not, even that didn't happen because the universities were being paid per graduate, so it was never in their interests.

The solution was always going to be that students need to pay for some of their education, but now we're in this position where the debts are going to be so large that there is no incentive for potentially lower paid key workers choosing to go into that profession for non-financial reasons.

I feel the payable debt should be taxed and repaid in the form of a tax based on the ability to pay, but this really is only half the problem. The other problem is that Labour (mostly) have encouraged a situation where most young people feel they need to go to university and get a degree in order to be competitive. What they should have been doing instead was encouraging apprenticeships through company tax breaks in particular sectors where skills are necessary. The lack of apprenticeships in this country is a national disgrace, a legacy of Thatcher compounded by more Labour inertia.

As for Clegg, he too is an absolute disgrace as are the rest of the MPs in his party who voted for this.

 

[bhaexpress]

I did read the rest of your post. The last paragraph was a simplistic analogy which I felt was superfluous. It did not add any value to your argument.

Obviously went over your head, it annoys me that your education was such a waste of money. The simple answer is that if you want things in life that will better you then you have to pay for them. Is that simple enough ? The World does not owe you or anybody else a free passage (no I didn't mean your arse this time, so please try not to get confused).

 

[Simster]

Obviously went over your head, it annoys me that your education was such a waste of money. The simple answer is that if you want things in life that will better you then you have to pay for them. Is that simple enough ? The World does not owe you or anybody else a free passage (no I didn't mean your arse this time, so please try not to get confused).

You seem quite adamant about students paying for their own education.

Who paid for yours?

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

For me, it is all about balance. Students should pay towards their education, but not so much as to saddle them with an absurdly large debt. Back in my day, higher education was virtually free and consequently there were a minority of people using university to arse about. Some got chucked off their course, but more often than not, even that didn't happen because the universities were being paid per graduate, so it was never in their interests.

The solution was always going to be that students need to pay for some of their education, but now we're in this position where the debts are going to be so large that there is no incentive for potentially lower paid key workers choosing to go into that profession for non-financial reasons.

I feel the payable debt should be taxed and repaid in the form of a tax based on the ability to pay, but this really is only half the problem. The other problem is that Labour (mostly) have encouraged a situation where most young people feel they need to go to university and get a degree in order to be competitive. What they should have been doing instead was encouraging apprenticeships through company tax breaks in particular sectors where skills are necessary. The lack of apprenticeships in this country is a national disgrace, a legacy of Thatcher compounded by more Labour inertia.

As for Clegg, he too is an absolute disgrace as are the rest of the MPs in his party who voted for this.

Bloody Hell.... I more or less agree with you.

I think though the loan system is the progressive system you crave. That will mean that those on low pay will payback nothing or very little. I don't think a graduate tax will encourage people to think carefully about whether university is right for them, so not addressing the valid points you make in the 2nd part of your post.

A graduate tax also has a huge problem as it will only start cashing in once people get onto the high salaries they will earn once they have been employed for a long time after graduation. In the meantime, Government has to find the money.

 

[ROKERITE]

For me, it is all about balance. Students should pay towards their education, but not so much as to saddle them with an absurdly large debt. Back in my day, higher education was virtually free and consequently there were a minority of people using university to arse about. Some got chucked off their course, but more often than not, even that didn't happen because the universities were being paid per graduate, so it was never in their interests.

The solution was always going to be that students need to pay for some of their education, but now we're in this position where the debts are going to be so large that there is no incentive for potentially lower paid key workers choosing to go into that profession for non-financial reasons.

I feel the payable debt should be taxed and repaid in the form of a tax based on the ability to pay, but this really is only half the problem. The other problem is that Labour (mostly) have encouraged a situation where most young people feel they need to go to university and get a degree in order to be competitive. What they should have been doing instead was encouraging apprenticeships through company tax breaks in particular sectors where skills are necessary. The lack of apprenticeships in this country is a national disgrace, a legacy of Thatcher compounded by more Labour inertia.

As for Clegg, he too is an absolute disgrace as are the rest of the MPs in his party who voted for this.

I'd no time for Clegg before the election, I thought him a shallow populist. However, I applaud him for his brave stance yesterday. He's showing himself to be a statesman, putting the long term good of the nation ahead of his own party's popularity.

 

[Rookie]

all that the 'protests' did yesterday was lose even more public support. People who started thinking the students were right at the beginning will have watched the news over the last few weeks and yesterday in particular and changed their minds. And having watched Question Time yesterday the NUS president needs a nice slap and told to wake up, god help us if he raises up the Labour party like he clearly wants to do.

 

[Hunting 784561]

The other problem is that Labour (mostly) have encouraged a situation where most young people feel they need to go to university and get a degree in order to be competitive. What they should have been doing instead was encouraging apprenticeships through company tax breaks in particular sectors where skills are necessary.

and here lies the real problem...

When I left school in in the early 1980's only 5% of the population went to University.

In the 1990s, the governemnet decided that a target figure of 50% of the population should go to University.

Now that we have nearly hit the target figure of 50% ( think it stands at 45%), someone has blown 'offside', and said, er sorry guys, but we cant afford it anymore.

We now have an entire generation, maybe two, that will not be told to take an apprenticeship instead and become a plumber, or whatever.

Expecations have now been raised, and this particular genie will struggle to get back in the bottle.

 

[Simster]

I'd no time for Clegg before the election, I thought him a shallow populist. However, I applaud him for his brave stance yesterday. He's showing himself to be a statesman, putting the long term good of the nation ahead of his own party's popularity.

Too funny.

To clarify, there is nothing brave about doing an about turn on a flagship policy to save your own cosy position in government. He's basically bargained away everything his party supposedly stood for (this flagship policy and proportional representation in particular) for a sniff of power. I won't be voting Lib Dem all the while this wanker is running the show. Simon Hughes some time soon, please.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Obviously went over your head, it annoys me that your education was such a waste of money. The simple answer is that if you want things in life that will better you then you have to pay for them. Is that simple enough ? The World does not owe you or anybody else a free passage (no I didn't mean your arse this time, so please try not to get confused).

No, I understand that. I also understand that my life will be better by everyone around me being more educated. And I'm happy to pay for free education through my taxes. I support one attempt at uni paid for by the state, and I'm happy to help pay for this.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

all that the 'protests' did yesterday was lose even more public support. People who started thinking the students were right at the beginning will have watched the news over the last few weeks and yesterday in particular and changed their minds. And having watched Question Time yesterday the NUS president needs a nice slap and told to wake up, god help us if he raises up the Labour party like he clearly wants to do.

That blond lecturer on Newsnight was nice though.

 

[bhaexpress]

and here lies the real problem...

When I left school in in the early 1980's only 5% of the population went to University.

In the 1990s, the governemnet decided that a target figure of 50% of the population should go to University.

Now that we have nearly hit the target figure of 50% ( think it stands at 45%), someone has blown 'offside', and said, er sorry guys, but we cant afford it anymore.

We now have an entire generation, maybe two, that will not be told to take an apprenticeship instead and become a plumber, or whatever.

Expecations have now been raised, and this particular genie will struggle to get back in the bottle.

And As I have said several times, a big part of the thinking behind getting more people into higher education was to massage the unemployment figures. The problem now is that this altruistic thinking has to be paid for. The plain fact is that we will all end up paying for it, not just students.

I would love to know how anybody here who went to university feels that their education has benefited me personally. Whilst I have no doubt there are some who who may have I would hazard a guess plenty of others haven't. Education may be of benefit to certain parts of society but of the lot of the time the prime beneficiary is the recipient.

 

[bhaexpress]

No, I understand that. I also understand that my life will be better by everyone around me being more educated. And I'm happy to pay for free education through my taxes. I support one attempt at uni paid for by the state, and I'm happy to help pay for this.

So apparently you need to go to university to be acceptable in your little world, what a pompous ass you are.

 

[BigGully]

The issue has been clouded by most current MP's having free access to Universities in their day.

My wife is a teacher and went to university and is still paying back her student loan etc ( she was a mature student ).

Before that we were both our own bosses and self employed, had some real successes and some real difficulties during the last recession as did most people.

Teaching is particularly difficult and unless you know someone within the profession you couldn't possibly know just how demanding it is.

Having experienced both self employment/private sector that was borne out of entrepreneurial spirit and my wifes teaching borne out of the University system I think I have a fair insight into whether paying for your fee's is fair.

My honest conclusion is that Academics havent got a clue about the real world, most go from school, to college, to university to the public sector without an understanding of the vigour's of surviving in the world outside of their cocooned employment.

Why should the less academic 16 year old labourer, who gets picked up at 5.30am to work a physical shift on site give his taxes to fund a likely teacher who will soon be earning £35 000 without ever likely being sacked and the many safeguards if they should fall poorly etc.

Teaching is a fantastically important job, and more power to them, but like my wife just pay your way, you'll be ok.

 

[The Spanish]

For me

hmmm

 

[Simster]

hmmm

Good point well made, sorry about that.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

So apparently you need to go to university to be acceptable in your little world, what a pompous ass you are.

That's not quite what I was suggesting. And with your comments about me being a self-righteous pompouse arse, you're starting to sound like an ex-girlfriend of mine. Let's just agree to differ. I am going to make myself a sandwich and do some work now.

(and for those who know me....I'm referring to the annoying short-arse ex.)

 

[Simster]

So apparently you need to go to university to be acceptable in your little world, what a pompous ass you are.

Oh for FUCKS sake, he didn't say that.

 

[The Spanish]

Good point well made, sorry about that.

eternal vigilance is the only real defence.

 

[bhaexpress]

You seem quite adamant about students paying for their own education.

Who paid for yours?

I didn't go to university and the law made me go to school, not quite thought that through have you Simeon ? I paid for my CNE, my MCSE and my ITIL though.

 

[Dave the OAP]

.

A graduate tax also has a huge problem as it will only start cashing in once people get onto the high salaries they will earn once they have been employed for a long time after graduation. In the meantime, Government has to find the money.

I heard a very good conversation of t'radio from some businessmen who thought the graduate tax could be a problem for the government as it would lead to a "brain drain" with graduates with science and maths degrees going abroad and therefore not paying any graduate tax at all.