[Politics] The Labour Government

[chip]

Fundamentally we need to educate the right number of people in a range of skills according to the likely future demands of society. It doesn't matter how or by which institution this is achieved. This would likely dramatically reduce the numbers going current style universities as the Media Studies and Football Finance type degrees are weeded out. Education should be free but it should be strictly targeted to produce the skills we need and currently lack.

Is that evidence-based? There are a huge number of jobs in media and it looks like a few clubs could do with people who know about finance. Your proposing a production driven model. How about developing young people who are interested and excited about what they are learning who then go on to be innovators and creators in the future. serve the person, not the machine.

 

[Eeyore]

I don't think young people, or the country, get very good value from university now.

I don't understand why such a high percentage of youngsters go to university in the first place, It was much, much lower when I was that age. Many of those degrees are just pointless.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Yes, and it gets worse when you factor in an increased number of people in a class, especially when a significant number can't adequately communicate in English.

Because the greatest way to spend huge amounts of money is to pay for University classes in a country and language you don't know

Do you ever think how truly stupid a statement is before you post it

I'm afraid NSC has tipped over the stupid level for tonight. Have fun everyone

 

[chip]

Because the greatest way to spend huge amounts of money is to pay for University classes in a country and language you don't know

Do you ever think how truly stupid a statement is before you post it

Unlike you, I do. But you have no idea of the chaos this causes, hence your typically opinionated but ill informed desire to trivialise things you don't understand.

 

[chip]

I don't understand why such a high percentage of youngsters go to university in the first place, It was much, much lower when I was that age. Many of those degrees are just pointless.

I sort of agree with you, but I'm not so sure that there are really that many pointless degrees or that they are offered by the institutions we might be expected to think they are.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Because the greatest way to spend huge amounts of money is to pay for University classes in a country and language you don't know

Do you ever think how truly stupid a statement is before you post it

I'm afraid NSC has tipped over the stupid level for tonight. Have fun everyone

At which University did you get your degree in Condescension?

 

[beorhthelm]

I don't understand why such a high percentage of youngsters go to university in the first place, It was much, much lower when I was that age. Many of those degrees are just pointless.

30 odd years of being told it's the thing to do, expected by schools, college, parents that a degree was the best way for a career in anything. service/knowledge economy see, many jobs ask for degree it became self fulfilling to"need" one.

 

[Bry Nylon]

Because the greatest way to spend huge amounts of money is to pay for University classes in a country and language you don't know

Do you ever think how truly stupid a statement is before you post it

I'm afraid NSC has tipped over the stupid level for tonight. Have fun everyone

Nothing stupid about it.

I’ve just returned home University of Cambridge athletics facility. I’m there a couple of evenings a week plus most weekends in the summer and know a fair few of the University academic staff pretty well. Cambridge has huge numbers of Chinese students who have no difficulty paying the tuition fees but a high proportion have minimal spoken English skills.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Fundamentally we need to educate the right number of people in a range of skills according to the likely future demands of society. It doesn't matter how or by which institution this is achieved. This would likely dramatically reduce the numbers going current style universities as the Media Studies and Football Finance type degrees are weeded out. Education should be free but it should be strictly targeted to produce the skills we need and currently lack.

Do you mean the media industry which is worth over 80 billion a year in revenue to the UK? Great idea!

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Education should be free but it should be strictly targeted to produce the skills we need and currently lack.

Only if you have an anti-intellectual outlook on life. You should be able to freely educate yourself beyond topics directly relating to job vacancies.

 

[Pondicherry]

Is that evidence-based? There are a huge number of jobs in media and it looks like a few clubs could do with people who know about finance. Your proposing a production driven model. How about developing young people who are interested and excited about what they are learning who then go on to be innovators and creators in the future. serve the person, not the machine.

Sorry I picked those two to exaggerate a point and with no evidence. However, as best as I can determine, roughly half of graduates end up in roles unrelated to their degree. Funds for education are finite. That's a fact. If the government (in other words us) is to fund free university places (and i think it should, including a return to living expenses grants) then I am wanting doctors and engineers trained in preference to Horologists and Puppeteers (exaggeration again).

 

[Pondicherry]

Only if you have an anti-intellectual outlook on life. You should be able to freely educate yourself beyond topics directly relating to job vacancies.

I agree, at your own expense.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I agree, at your own expense.

This is a very narrow minded view imo

 

[dsr-burnley]

Only if you have an anti-intellectual outlook on life. You should be able to freely educate yourself beyond topics directly relating to job vacancies.

But if the question is put the other way round, is it fair that less intellectual people (those that can't get into university) should be taxed so that the cleverer ones who are ultimately likely to be on higher wages, can have three subsidised years of education?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

But if the question is put the other way round, is it fair that less intellectual people (those that can't get into university) should be taxed so that the cleverer ones who are ultimately likely to be on higher wages, can have three subsidised years of education?

There used to be on the job training. Nurses studied for three years before qualifying but someone decided that to earn more money they needed a degree. (Bear with me)
Obviously, nursing is far more medically advanced now, than making beds & emptying bed pans, so it was a good idea, but then the bursary was reduced. Yes, those medical degrees should be subsidised, including radiologists, physiotherapists etc. We want an NHS and should be prepared to fund it, according to our means.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

But if the question is put the other way round, is it fair that less intellectual people (those that can't get into university) should be taxed so that the cleverer ones who are ultimately likely to be on higher wages, can have three subsidised years of education?

I support the simple premise that education should be free, if people do not want to take up this free offer then fine. Regarding tax, we all subsidise someone or something we do not use. London subsidises the entire country to varying degrees, I was happy to do this when I lived there.

 

[Is it PotG?]

London subsidises the entire country to varying degrees, I was happy to do this when I lived there.

Very magnanimous of you.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

But if the question is put the other way round, is it fair that less intellectual people (those that can't get into university) should be taxed so that the cleverer ones who are ultimately likely to be on higher wages, can have three subsidised years of education?

I support the simple premise that education should be free, if people do not want to take up this free offer then fine. Regarding tax, we all subsidise someone or something we do not use. London subsidises the entire country to varying degrees, I was happy to do this when I lived there.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Very magnanimous of you.

I have been all over England watching Brighton play, and seen some very desperate places.....these scenes tugged at my warm socialist heart.

 

[Weststander]

There used to be on the job training. Nurses studied for three years before qualifying but someone decided that to earn more money they needed a degree. (Bear with me)
Obviously, nursing is far more medically advanced now, than making beds & emptying bed pans, so it was a good idea, but then the bursary was reduced. Yes, those medical degrees should be subsidised, including radiologists, physiotherapists etc. We want an NHS and should be prepared to fund it, according to our means.

I agree with all that. With a condition that a certain numbers of years are spent solely in the NHS post qualifying.

Regarding ending the nursing bursary, that was madness and imho spiteful. It’s very much a vocational course, they’re contributing from say year 2.