The government's own predictions on student loans
Discussion
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/only...
This would tend to suggest that the hike to £9000 is not about saving money.
So if we assume that Clegg has seen this report, and one would assume that he must have, what is the point of going back on his word and voting for the fee hike under the false suggestion it was a money saving option?
His rating for trustworthiness has gone from 2/3rd to a quarter in 6 months nd this can only harm him further. Even his mother will vote against him now.
This would tend to suggest that the hike to £9000 is not about saving money.
So if we assume that Clegg has seen this report, and one would assume that he must have, what is the point of going back on his word and voting for the fee hike under the false suggestion it was a money saving option?
His rating for trustworthiness has gone from 2/3rd to a quarter in 6 months nd this can only harm him further. Even his mother will vote against him now.
Very interesting and is rather compelling evidence to support something which most PHers seem to already grasp with the exception of some of the nutters. Which is that a vast majority of degrees are very very pointless and sending people to university is nothing to do with education for genuine benefit of the individual and the nation, but to keep them out of the unemployment figures and "occupied" until they can eventually take their role in "insert fast food chain name here" and strive to get their 5th star and picture on the wall as employee of the month! As that is all that their degree in advanced basket weaving and yoghurt knitting is actually worth!
Edited by 550Hep on Sunday 12th December 09:31
grrrr piss boiling on a sunday morning
Ministers believe most graduates will spend their whole working lives making monthly payments to cover their loans and interest – without ever being able to settle their debts.
Makes it sound like they have been burdened for life with massive payments they can never meet...
In reality it means they'll be paying a few quid a month and never have to pay back the full amount as it's written off in 30 years!!!
For example, if you could take a 30k loan over 30 years that meant you only had to pay back ANYTHING at all when you started earning a vaguely respectable salary, only had to make payment that amounted to less than you'd spend on beer in a month, only paid a paltry interest rate, only paid anywhere near a market rate if you earn over 75k a year and if you havent paid it off in full at the end of the term they just write off the rest of it, would you take it?
Yeah I would too, where do I sign up for my 30 grand?
Ministers believe most graduates will spend their whole working lives making monthly payments to cover their loans and interest – without ever being able to settle their debts.
Makes it sound like they have been burdened for life with massive payments they can never meet...
In reality it means they'll be paying a few quid a month and never have to pay back the full amount as it's written off in 30 years!!!
For example, if you could take a 30k loan over 30 years that meant you only had to pay back ANYTHING at all when you started earning a vaguely respectable salary, only had to make payment that amounted to less than you'd spend on beer in a month, only paid a paltry interest rate, only paid anywhere near a market rate if you earn over 75k a year and if you havent paid it off in full at the end of the term they just write off the rest of it, would you take it?
Yeah I would too, where do I sign up for my 30 grand?
I've had enough of this. Unfortunately you cannot discuss with thick. All the time they are being brainwashed by Union Leaders, Labour Ministers, newspapers, the BBC and Sky they will continue to believe in their little cause.
It'll all blow over in a few weeks. Hopefully after the students go home and their parents explain it to them, and the anarchists realise their are no students girls for them to impress and try to finger.
The only thing demonstrators discuss is the lifetime of debt that they will be in. This is very different to the party line of cuts in funding. Without realising it they have become as self centred as the bankers who they hate so much.
When my old da was at Uni (in the 1930's and 1940's interrupted by WW2) I don't think they paid any fees, but they had to feed clothe and house themselves without state assistance. He worked as a labourer in a scrapyard and didn't feel any unusual hardship involved in working AND doing a degree.
When I was at Uni (early '70's) we got grants and during holidays we could sign on and get benefits. You could live a basic life without working and there was no pressure from the state to work, although it was easy to get a job if you fancied earning more and living better. As far as I remember the grants were means tested on parents' income.
Nowadays we have a couple of students who each do 2 x shifts in our taxi callcentre at the weekends. They earn about £7 an hour and the system allows them to do more hours or less as they please. One is studying Forensic Science and the other one Health and Beauty. They both see these jobs as 'helping mum with the bills' (why are there never any men in these modern working class households?) and like my old da they don't seem to think there's any hardship involved in having a wee job as well as studying.
Of the 3 generations, mine was far and away the one which did the least, got given the most, and took the whole matter of education least seriously. We just f
ked about, frequently using the lumpsum grant handout to fund dropout holidays or worse, with noone ever interested in recouping the grant even if we dropped out completely.
Can I also say that the girl who studies Health and Beauty takes her course very seriously even though it's obviously less demanding and intellectually challenging than the other girl's forensic science degree. Each of them is challenged on their own levels, but it's obvious that the one doing H&B is getting immense gains in self esteem and confidence from being the first person in her family who's ever done further ed. I've seen some of her course work. It's on a par with O level Biology. But the point is, to HER it's hugely worthwhile, and results in a staff member in a salon who actually does know something about what she's doing. It may not be law, medicine or engineering, but I'm happy to subsidise it because it's definitely real.
When I was at Uni (early '70's) we got grants and during holidays we could sign on and get benefits. You could live a basic life without working and there was no pressure from the state to work, although it was easy to get a job if you fancied earning more and living better. As far as I remember the grants were means tested on parents' income.
Nowadays we have a couple of students who each do 2 x shifts in our taxi callcentre at the weekends. They earn about £7 an hour and the system allows them to do more hours or less as they please. One is studying Forensic Science and the other one Health and Beauty. They both see these jobs as 'helping mum with the bills' (why are there never any men in these modern working class households?) and like my old da they don't seem to think there's any hardship involved in having a wee job as well as studying.
Of the 3 generations, mine was far and away the one which did the least, got given the most, and took the whole matter of education least seriously. We just f
ked about, frequently using the lumpsum grant handout to fund dropout holidays or worse, with noone ever interested in recouping the grant even if we dropped out completely. Can I also say that the girl who studies Health and Beauty takes her course very seriously even though it's obviously less demanding and intellectually challenging than the other girl's forensic science degree. Each of them is challenged on their own levels, but it's obvious that the one doing H&B is getting immense gains in self esteem and confidence from being the first person in her family who's ever done further ed. I've seen some of her course work. It's on a par with O level Biology. But the point is, to HER it's hugely worthwhile, and results in a staff member in a salon who actually does know something about what she's doing. It may not be law, medicine or engineering, but I'm happy to subsidise it because it's definitely real.
groak said:
When my old da was at Uni (in the 1930's and 1940's interrupted by WW2) I don't think they paid any fees, but they had to feed clothe and house themselves without state assistance. He worked as a labourer in a scrapyard and didn't feel any unusual hardship involved in working AND doing a degree.
When I was at Uni (early '70's) we got grants and during holidays we could sign on and get benefits. You could live a basic life without working and there was no pressure from the state to work, although it was easy to get a job if you fancied earning more and living better. As far as I remember the grants were means tested on parents' income.
Nowadays we have a couple of students who each do 2 x shifts in our taxi callcentre at the weekends. They earn about £7 an hour and the system allows them to do more hours or less as they please. One is studying Forensic Science and the other one Health and Beauty. They both see these jobs as 'helping mum with the bills' (why are there never any men in these modern working class households?) and like my old da they don't seem to think there's any hardship involved in having a wee job as well as studying.
Of the 3 generations, mine was far and away the one which did the least, got given the most, and took the whole matter of education least seriously. We just fked about, frequently using the lumpsum grant handout to fund dropout holidays or worse, with noone ever interested in recouping the grant even if we dropped out completely.
Can I also say that the girl who studies Health and Beauty takes her course very seriously even though it's obviously less demanding and intellectually challenging than the other girl's forensic science degree. Each of them is challenged on their own levels, but it's obvious that the one doing H&B is getting immense gains in self esteem and confidence from being the first person in her family who's ever done further ed. I've seen some of her course work. It's on a par with O level Biology. But the point is, to HER it's hugely worthwhile, and results in a staff member in a salon who actually does know something about what she's doing. It may not be law, medicine or engineering, but I'm happy to subsidise it because it's definitely real.
When your dad went to university the percentage of students doing so would have been very low, when you went it wouldn't of been much higher, now we seem to be aiming for 50% or more of students to go on to university. My view is that university fees should be fully funded by the government, and I would welcome the return of maintenance grants, but on the other hand I would like to see only 5 or 10% of the most able students study to degree level, that way we could afford to fully fund an excellent education for those that would most benefit from it.When I was at Uni (early '70's) we got grants and during holidays we could sign on and get benefits. You could live a basic life without working and there was no pressure from the state to work, although it was easy to get a job if you fancied earning more and living better. As far as I remember the grants were means tested on parents' income.
Nowadays we have a couple of students who each do 2 x shifts in our taxi callcentre at the weekends. They earn about £7 an hour and the system allows them to do more hours or less as they please. One is studying Forensic Science and the other one Health and Beauty. They both see these jobs as 'helping mum with the bills' (why are there never any men in these modern working class households?) and like my old da they don't seem to think there's any hardship involved in having a wee job as well as studying.
Of the 3 generations, mine was far and away the one which did the least, got given the most, and took the whole matter of education least seriously. We just f
ked about, frequently using the lumpsum grant handout to fund dropout holidays or worse, with noone ever interested in recouping the grant even if we dropped out completely. Can I also say that the girl who studies Health and Beauty takes her course very seriously even though it's obviously less demanding and intellectually challenging than the other girl's forensic science degree. Each of them is challenged on their own levels, but it's obvious that the one doing H&B is getting immense gains in self esteem and confidence from being the first person in her family who's ever done further ed. I've seen some of her course work. It's on a par with O level Biology. But the point is, to HER it's hugely worthwhile, and results in a staff member in a salon who actually does know something about what she's doing. It may not be law, medicine or engineering, but I'm happy to subsidise it because it's definitely real.
I am sure that your Health & Beauty student is an industrious and hard workng student, but does Health & Beauty need a degree level education? In my day, and yours, this would have been a day release course at the local college. Is the new way any better for the student or the country?
RYH64E said:
When your dad went to university the percentage of students doing so would have been very low, when you went it wouldn't of been much higher, now we seem to be aiming for 50% or more of students to go on to university. My view is that university fees should be fully funded by the government, and I would welcome the return of maintenance grants, but on the other hand I would like to see only 5 or 10% of the most able students study to degree level, that way we could afford to fully fund an excellent education for those that would most benefit from it.
I am sure that your Health & Beauty student is an industrious and hard workng student, but does Health & Beauty need a degree level education? In my day, and yours, this would have been a day release course at the local college. Is the new way any better for the student or the country?
Yes even in the 70's uni attendance was for an intellectual elite. And the H&B girl isn't on a degree course. I think it's a national certificate or something. I cetainly don't think there's any place for degree awards for this that and the other. My point is that there's a place for these very valid lower level forms of study and that they should be subsidised, along with degree level studies, even though they result in lower levels of qualification. Apart from basically silly things there's always merit in study. And we should be facilitating it, not discouraging it, especially within economically deprived or 'underclass' sections of the community. I am sure that your Health & Beauty student is an industrious and hard workng student, but does Health & Beauty need a degree level education? In my day, and yours, this would have been a day release course at the local college. Is the new way any better for the student or the country?
groak said:
Yes even in the 70's uni attendance was for an intellectual elite. And the H&B girl isn't on a degree course. I think it's a national certificate or something. I cetainly don't think there's any place for degree awards for this that and the other. My point is that there's a place for these very valid lower level forms of study and that they should be subsidised, along with degree level studies, even though they result in lower levels of qualification. Apart from basically silly things there's always merit in study. And we should be facilitating it, not discouraging it, especially within economically deprived or 'underclass' sections of the community.
I don't have a problem about subsidising lower level education, and I don't have a problem with funding degree level education. What I would like to see is a balanced, thought out programme of further education that was a) affordable, b) reflected the educational needs of the country as a whole, and c) actually benefitted the recipient of said education.
In terms social mobility, as an ex-council estate boy my route out of relative poverty was Eleven Plus - Grammar School - University. You didn't have to be a member of the intellectual elite in the 70s and 80s, just reasonably bright and hard working, and when you qualified with a degree there were degree level jobs available - in numbers which pretty much matched the numbers of graduates. Fast forward 25 years and there are very few Grammar schools left, the number of graduates has increased enormously but the number of SUITABLE jobs hasn't, and of course there is the debt. I think that the old way was better.
RYH64E said:
...but does Health & Beauty need a degree level education?
Without a doubt, no!But such a course is the result of the previous Government's 50% Uni placement target.
Not enough students interested in Physical Sciences to meet the targets? No problem, create courses that will appeal to them.
RYH64E said:
groak said:
Yes even in the 70's uni attendance was for an intellectual elite.
In terms social mobility, as an ex-council estate boy my route out of relative poverty was Eleven Plus - Grammar School - University. You didn't have to be a member of the intellectual elite in the 70s and 80s, just reasonably bright and hard working.But i think we all agree that it's pointless to make studies of relatively undemanding subjects into degree courses, and also all agree that there should be subsidised study for a wide variety of abilities, of a wide variety of subjects, and leading to a wide variety of qualifications. For example, whilst it is wholly unnecessary for someone wishing to serve in a shop to take a 4 years honours course, it's very healthy for there to be a short well designed course that shop assistants can become certified for attending and passing. From the simple certificate to the PhD there should be study open to everyman so that 'unskilled' becomes the same as 'can't be bothered'.
Edited by groak on Sunday 12th December 16:06
chim666 said:
RYH64E said:
...but does Health & Beauty need a degree level education?
Without a doubt, no!But such a course is the result of the previous Government's 50% Uni placement target.
Not enough students interested in Physical Sciences to meet the targets? No problem, create courses that will appeal to them.
My personal feeling is that for a lot of professions, you will learn more by working and learning on the job over 4 years that you will by studying a degree.
gamefreaks said:
chim666 said:
RYH64E said:
...but does Health & Beauty need a degree level education?
Without a doubt, no!But such a course is the result of the previous Government's 50% Uni placement target.
Not enough students interested in Physical Sciences to meet the targets? No problem, create courses that will appeal to them.
LongQ said:
cptsideways said:
All they have to do is pay for the education that business requires, the rest of them doing lifestyle courses can pay their own way. It's not rocket science is it?
But ..... do we need rocket science?EADS Astrium and Surrey satellites being the two big boys, with a lot of good suppliers also in the chain.
If you want some extra thrust, Qinetic are doing some interesting things.
http://www.qinetiq.com/home/markets/related_market...
turbobloke said:
PaulG40 said:
Well on the Marr show today, they said it was because the government has removed 80% of the funding to uni lecturers and professors pay...
Really? They were badly paid at the outset.So it is a 20% reduction in government funding, but it still comes from the public purse in the form of student loans.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff