***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 2 *****
Just been watching a bit of this on the TV. Two thoughts:
1) If they think that paying back the amounts of money involved are going to be a burden, they have a rude awakening coming, not least of all when they apply for a mortgage
2) I have a feeling that a lot of the protesters probably think that this is "their 60s" - but fighting for your own financial benefit, isn't quite the same as fighting for civil rights, is it?
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 13 Dec 10 at 01:01
|
Students protest. It goes with the territory along with cheap beer in the SU and furry beans in the fridge.
Of late, they have struggled to find stuff to protest about.
The trouble is of course, that universities are full of people who
a: Really shouldn't be there because they just don't have the brains or work ethic.
b: Devalue the "degree" for everyone
c: Subsequently have Bob Hopes chance of getting a well paid job and paying back the tuition fee.
If you want to cut university costs? cut the intake down by chopping places for the lowest 50%
|
|
This should get rid of a lot of the "ology" courses - there was a "media" campus on the business park where we had an office - some of the "installations" were so frightening they frightened off the doggers.
|
To be fair most people don't understand what ologys involved. My sister studied socialogy at the universty of Manchester. She has never worked in her life but to be fair she got a 1st.
She walked into a 32k a year job within the GMP without any experience. Her grade As in all her A levels probably helped though. They were not micky mouse subjects.
There was quite a lot of maths involved in her course and as far as I am aware she didn't watch a single film!
I just think it is too easy for people make comments about courses they know nothing about.
|
|
Sorry Rats it wasn't fair to lump everything under the "ology" flag - scrub that what I meant there are courses that at best are pretty pointless in the end, no offence meant.
|
Even then it is not the students faults. Some universities have a habbit of miss selling their courses. Promising things they cannot deliver.
I have some regrets about my own course but out of my mates who graduated a lot of them are doing pretty well now. A lot of my own failings have been down to my own personal problems which I have been sorting out.
|
|
I agree with the devaluing the degrees for sure. It used to be the bright people that went to university but now there are some mickey mouse universities (ex colleges) that give out pretty worthless degrees. It would be better to have smaller institutions again that could be centrally funded.
|
The problem is the sector employs 100000s of people. Manchester has for example 120,000 HE students if you include Salford, Manchester Met, Manchester and Bolton. There is also a few colleges offering HE courses which makes up that high number.
Students don't tend to have cars so they use buses - that keeps bus drivers in jobs.
Students like to drink - so they keep bars in clubs in business
Students are lazy - they so they keep the take aways in business.
Students often want small poor quality cheap housing - keeps landlords in business and houses occupied which would atherwise be empty.
Students keep the teaching staff and support workers in jobs.
The industry is massive and the government are threatening to destroy it. If these so called mickey mousers were not doing HE what else would they be doing? There certainly is not enough jobs to go round. Youth unemployment is is bigger than it has ever been.
Now I agree there are courses and students who shouldn't be there but I just don't know what the solution is. The government could save a lot of money by making it harder to get into university in the first place. There needs to be a gradual reduction in HE places but I fear what is going to happen is a sudden crash of the sector which would have major consequences.
|
...The problem is the sector employs 100000s of people...
It's an illusion of prosperity built on an unsustainable model of using mostly public money.
|
Do you realise how much money universities get from private companies? My department was extremely rich and always flashing out on new goods, paid for companies such as Sony who the department has done research for.
There is also international students who bring in a massive amount of money into the UK.
As for wealth generated by public money you could say that about half the public sector jobs.
Things do need to change in the HE sector I am not denying that. I just think too much change too quickly would be dire.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Thu 9 Dec 10 at 16:56
|
|
So using your argument Rattle 0 the could use all this huge private income to subsidise their UK based student fees !?
|
No but a lot of universities can. I am sure Salford (where I went) which has a large research income will probably use this to subsidise the fees. The flipside is it could get higher quality students who don't want the massive debt but the downside is the research quality could suffer.
Salford wasn't on the list of universities at risk from the changes so I can only assume that is because of its high research income compared to the new HE colleges and ex polys.
|
|
It was a big mistake for all these Polytechs to convert to Universities, but that was a million years ago when the future was very rosy.
|
I agree they offered some very good courses and had a very good place. My dad went to Manchester Poly and did a course after his A levels which you can now only do at post graduate level. He ended up with a good job out of it for many years until he had his mid life crisis.
The problem is by becoming universities they destroyed their reputation as they were no longer compared to class leading education colleges but to world class universities which they were not.
That said my ex went to Manchester Met and she is more than capable fo showing the Manchester grads the door at interviews! Even in her medicine related field the employers seem to care more about her work experience than her degree. Now she is applying for her doctorate it will be interesting to see if MMU has caused a problem.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Thu 9 Dec 10 at 17:33
|
"My dad went to Manchester Poly and did a course after his A levels which you can now only do at post graduate level. He ended up with a good job out of it for many years until he had his mid life crisis."
And that sums it up - and people (mainly lads) who didn't do too well in school had Polytechs as a second chance have now become educational, and consequently economic outcasts for that very reason.
Last edited by: Pugugly on Thu 9 Dec 10 at 17:38
|
My dad is actually very clever he did have an offer for Camrbridge but he fell into the wrong crowd who drank too much (i.e his teachers) and was too busy drinking in pubs with his mates and teachers instead of studying.
He went to a grammar school in a very posh part of London (in Chelsea) so he had it made. The reason he went to Manchester Met is he wanted to get out of London and the course he did was only offered in a few places. Manchester was one of them and seemed far enough but also close enough to London so he moved here.
He could have easily done a lot better if he had a different attitude to life. Two of his colleagues also went to Manchester Met doing the same course and are now running things very high up in councils.
|
"It was a big mistake for all these Polytechs to convert to Universities"
If they had "converted" it would not have too bad, - some of them just changed their names, and retained all the same staff who did not change their values.
|
>>>> "It was a big mistake for all these Polytechs to convert to Universities"
The postal address of the University of Greenwich gives me a laugh: polytechnic street.
|
>> 2) I have a feeling that a lot of the protesters probably think that this
>> is "their 60s" - but fighting for your own financial benefit, isn't quite the same
>> as fighting for civil rights, is it?
>>
Fighting for their own financial benefit - it cannot be said to apply to current students and those who start courses before 2012. It applies to those future students who start their courses in 2012 and who then expect to get jobs where they earn £40k pa or more, as they are the ones who will have to repay the full £6,000-£9,000 pa fees loans, and at a higher rate of interest than those earning less.
Most of those on Arts/humanities courses will probably never earn the £21k pa (earnings index linked) and will never have to pay a penny back. Those earning between £21k and £40k will pay back on a sliding scale, a quarter of them will less than the amount per month that current students for their £3k pa student loans. Indeed, those who fail to repay their notional loan over 30 years will then have the debt written off.
As for Labour's alternative to tax people, that would mean that a pensioner, or cleaner, or school-dinner-lady, and Zero's son, who had never been to University would be paying tax to support these students. If the tax is applied only to those graduating and getting jobs from 2015, the graduates would start paying the extra tax when their income exceeds the tax threshold and would impact poor students disproportionately.
The expansion of students population from 300,000 in 1996 to 480,000 plus last year has to be funded somehow. You can now do a "Lady Gaga and the Sociology of the Fame" degree though not yet in the UK.
|
My parents although bright left school @ 14 yrs old. 4 sons and 3 @ Uni - full grants, no fees, time well spent.
My 3 x sons @ Uni all engineering - no fees, no grants but I paid all their bills so they started working life debt free.
I am now retired and they are earning > £300K / year between them - they are there to look after me if I were to need financial help (which I do not)
Was Uni worth it? - YES - would I have paid fees 40+ years ago? YES, would my sons paid fees - YES.
I paid back my grants in higher tax rates working for 40 years after graduation - without the Uni I would have been a plumber/builder or whatever and paid less in taxes over all these years.
|
Sorry to through a spanner in the sink but most plumbers probably earn more than the average graduate anyway. How many plumbers which are graduates is another question - probably a lot.
|
Of Polish universities maybe Rattle !
The students the have been interviewing on the BBC seemed to struggle to put sentences together, didn't really seem to know why they were there....some of them were clearly not studying economics either.
|
A lot of people protesting have been A level/colelge students.
There were some people on my course who should not have been there. Somebody on my course got a 3rd which is a scrape pass. She has recently ask me to setup a website using a CMS as she cannot do it herself. That worried me a bit.
|
I think the problem is that university has become a rights of passage for students. They all just assume they can do it as an alternative to work. I have friends who went to uni, ended up in debt, and then got jobs the same as the rest of us.
IMO a degree has become a diluted asset and the numbers need to be reduced.
|
>> Sorry to through a spanner in the sink but most plumbers probably earn more than
>> the average graduate anyway. How many plumbers which are graduates is another >>question - probably a lot.
>>
>>
Last 5 of my working life 2001-2006 - I earned £60-£84K / year - up and down but still useful
££££s when you are mortgage and debt free.................
How many builders / plumbers earn that money in their late 50's - rheumatism, banged up joints.................
|
|
I was talking about averages though. The average Disney studies student dosn't end up earning £80k a year and that is what makes up large number of HE students. In your case university has paid off :).
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Thu 9 Dec 10 at 18:01
|
|
A self employed plumber round my way earns about 70k a year.
|
...A self employed plumber round my way earns about 70k a year...
If you get any of this weather down there he'll probably earn £70K a week. :)
|
You couldnt get the b..... like rocking horse merde they were.
Good job I can do all my own - tho Nicole wouldn't let me fit a new boiler. (this time round - I have done one)
|
I've done all the none gas plumbing in our house too. With compression joints and a basic understanding of how water preasure works it is not hard really. I admit I find some plumbing tasks very fiddly though and I couldn't do it for a living.
I do not touch anything gas related.
|
>> I've done all the none gas plumbing in our house too. With compression joints and
>> a basic understanding of how water preasure works it is not hard really. I admit
>> I find some plumbing tasks very fiddly though and I couldn't do it for a
>> living.
>>
>> I do not touch anything gas related.
Did you get your boiler checked after your recent CO alarm episode?
|
|
Well it hasn't gone off since but we are studying the T&Cs of the British gas £13 a month plan which includes an anual service. I just need to get hold the T&Cs probably on their website. Not sure if they will cover a 1984 boiler!.
|
Ive always been a fan of pushing practical careers. When you look at the cash landscape gardners, plumbers and plasterers seem to earn, I think id be far better to push my son in the direction of a trade because if your good, you will do very well indeed an no need for a mass of debt once you start earning either.
Even house cleaning pays pretty well if people like you, I should know, Im doing it.
Ive had to turn down work as I have other commitments, but if I devote fulltime to it, I could easily get £80 a day from it, which certainly pays the bills.
|
Universities have taken the place of vocational training and apprenticeships. Both were useful, current and valued forms of education and training.
|
CO can kill and does. Get it done and stop fannying about! Gas fitters usually charge about £100 for a service. BG will want to know the state of the boiler before they will cover it and may charge you that much to look at it and give you an initial check anyway.
Sort it before it blows the house up!
|
McDonalds are full of people with degrees in Meeja Studies and other worthless subjects, yet we have to import plumbers, electricians and dentists from Poland.
Go figure.
|
|
According to my BIL who was a manager at McDonalds, an untrained chimp could do the job ( and apparently they treat staff in much the same way ). He is a club manager now though so it must help on the CV.
|
My local McDonalds is full of foreign workers. I have never personaly known a Polish plumber.
|
|
Nor have I. My plumber lives half a mile away, is a scruff engish bloke who looks a bit like Barry Gibb who had a much harder paperound. He also charged me just £35 for two hours work. He is absolute gold.
|
|
Funnily enough the guy who came here to fix the showers - was a big hearty Welshman and a bill to match (£65.00 labour) not bad really. Given what happened....
|
Everyone cites McDonalds as a bad thing. Maybe, but it employs a hell of a lot of kids, and instils a work discipline in them.
I would guess its prevented a lot of long term unemployed and given kids a basic grounding and leg up for better work.
|
|
Indeed. McJobs have a very important place in society. We can't all earn £40k a year+.
|
The last one we used charge £60 to disconnect a gas fire. It was that point I decided to learn how to plumb by going in the deep end and ripping an old sink out and replacing it with a new one including taps. Considering before that I had never even changed washer I think I did quite well.
I suspect that none Corgi plumbers are quite a lot cheaper than corgi ones.
|
|
Have you thought of doing a course Rattle ? It would certainly future proof you.
|
Have thought of something in those lines but I have never been that practical really. I have just had to things because nobody else could and because we could not afford trades people. I am scared of heights too.
I have certainly thought of doing something completly different though I will just have to see how things go with the cuts.
I certainly love the 'trader' aspect of my current job going into peoples homes and meeting new people. I hate office jobs I get bored after about 5 minutes.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Thu 9 Dec 10 at 22:02
|
Many years ago I applied to get on the McDonalds Management Training Program.
Very cleverly, after the second interview, they get you to do one day in a McD's as this can very quickly determine if this is for you.
I got changed into my uniform, hid behind someone when I saw a mate coming in to get served, and then I was given the task of making onions.
This consisted of a big bucket of water, dried onion, or some such concoction was poured in, and I had to stir vigorously until it "became" onions.
My McDonalds career lasted 34 mins from start to finish!
|
Watching the scenes on TV just now, one would have to come to the conclusion that many of those on the demonstration are actually too stupid to go to university.
Reminds me of the types who used to inhabit the North Bank at Upton Park in the seventies.
|
I have to say, the terms of repayment seem pretty fair on the whole and I wholly object to paying so someone gets a better job than me. If they choose a job that pays low but is essential Im happy for the state to charge nothing, but if they earn above the national average, I see no reason why that should be state sponsered.
Attacking pensioners on a night out and breaking stuff doesnt make me any more inclined to support them either.
|
.*********
I think the sit in protests are wonderful but I agree when they start breaking things etc it makes them look very bad and stupid. I am very much into the music and ideals of punk and protesting but I always think once they become violent or cause a lot of distruption the protesters just make things worse.
Argh swear filter, I said I was a lazy something......
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Thu 9 Dec 10 at 22:26
|
I used to inhabit the North Bank at Upton Park in the 70s.
It was much more dangerous to wear claret and blue in the Southbank.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 9 Dec 10 at 22:28
|
"Watching the scenes on TV just now, one would have to come to the conclusion that many of those on the demonstration are actually too stupid to go to university."
I wondered how many of the violent ones were students and how many were, how shall I put it, just disaffected youths who saw a good excuse for having a go at the police.
|
|
But with some courses all you need is a couple of D's at A level and you're in.
|
|
At least, finally, turning back the tide - a proper Parliamentary debate - an maybe the return of Parliamentary democracy, something that has been sadly lacking for years, whether you agree with the outcome or not.
Last edited by: Pugugly on Thu 9 Dec 10 at 22:40
|
I don't see why my tax should subsidise any students.
Every young person I know, and I know a lot, all having done barwork in my local these past 10 years, are going to Uni to get a degree so they can earn more money in higher salaried jobs. None are doing it for charitable purposes.
Personally I think that £10k pa minimum is reasonable. And that is for tuition only. The money does not have to be repaid with immediate effect, and only then when a certain level of earnings are achieved.
If this gets rid of the lazy, the spongers, and the other flotsom, then so much the better. Hopefully it will concentrate a few minds.
So ends the opinion of the locals at my pub!
|
So ends the opinion of the locals at my pub!
Who are probably so busy slagging of students while they cliam all sorts of benefits! I had this argument this week in a pub. Two of them were on the rock and roll.
|
As we are in the EU can't we borrow some French CRS riot police and water cannons to sort out these "students". The Met don't seem to be up to the job.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 9 Dec 10 at 23:29
|
>>>French CRS riot police and water cannons to sort out these "students".
That's what we were saying last night ON. Water cannons with orange fluorescent dye would be a start. Also weeding out anyone covering their face for special treatment would take out the troublesome core.
Tomorrow in Peterborough the English Defence League are marching. They seem to be mainly an anti-muslim group who's battle cry at the end of their info sheet for the day says *They're our streets*.
No they're not your streets or you wouldn't need complex arrangements for a fleet buses to bring your supporters into town. At the end of the day it's just more stirring of trouble.
I'm English and I don't need defending thanks... leave the pre-Christmas shoppers in peace.
|
|
Fenlander there was a very good BBC Wales programme on the Welsh Defence League the other night, sadly not on iPlayer - but a real eye opener as to the true motives of these criminals...
|
"English Defence League" - I think they were the people on a recent Coppers show in somewhere like Bolton - some ultra right group turned out to oppose. Both sides were penned in a few feet apart so they could have a good old shout at each other. AFAIR there were minor incidents only, but the numbers weren't huge - caused massive disruption and no doubt cost an arm and a leg to police.
The police just can;t win in these events can they? Any protesters that Sky spoke to were mostly "caught up n something they didn't want to be in" but the poor old coppers had to stand there and have abuse and missiles hurled at them. Then have the journos criticise their handling of the situation.
As I understood it, there was a designated area for the protest and speeches etc, and Parliament Square wasn't it. Therefore those who were in the Square and it's surroundings really don't have too much to gripe about. One group even said "there are three fifteen year olds stuck in there". They chose to go there...
In particular those police standing inside the open Treasury window hidden behind their riot shields deserve recognition - they couldn't see what was coming at them yet stood firm - I'd have deployed CS or something worse!!
|
Anyone wearing a mask at a demo, is by default intent on causing trouble and nothing else.
They should be clubbed and dragged out on sight,
The very idea of free speech and the right to demonstrate by the populous is destroyed by the mask wearers. Its the uniform of the rioter.
|
>> Anyone wearing a mask at a demo, is by default intent on causing trouble and
>> nothing else.
>>
Oh dear, agreeing with Z again.
Any "demonstrators" off the agreed route should be fair game for the police, and cannot complain if they find themselves locked up for a few days while "investigations" are conducted.
|
>> Anyone wearing a mask at a demo, is by default intent on causing trouble and
>> nothing else.
>>
>> They should be clubbed and dragged out on sight,
Not sure I agree with that because, in these days when everyone has a camera phone, and images can be uploaded to Facebook, YouTube etc in seconds, there could be legitimate reasons to protect your identity.
Haven't you seen "V for Vendetta"? :)
What I did think though, when I watched bunch of idiots smashing up concrete blocks to make missiles, and then later use those missiles against the police, is that they should have sent in some kind of snatch squad to get them when they were fashioning weapons.
|
>> >> Anyone wearing a mask at a demo, is by default intent on causing trouble
>> and
>> >> nothing else.
>> >>
>> >> They should be clubbed and dragged out on sight,
>>
>> Not sure I agree with that because, in these days when everyone has a camera
>> phone, and images can be uploaded to Facebook, YouTube etc in seconds, there could be
>> legitimate reasons to protect your identity.
That's not a problem. No-one has ever suffered from recriminations in the future for being on a demo, march or whatever and making a lot of noise, stopping traffic or generally being noticed..
You put on a mask not to be identified because you are going to make trouble, Its that simple.
|
>> That's not a problem. No-one has ever suffered from recriminations in the future for being
>> on a demo, march or whatever and making a lot of noise, stopping traffic or
>> generally being noticed..
>>
>> You put on a mask not to be identified because you are going to make
>> trouble, Its that simple.
No it's not Zero. There are plenty of stories of prospective employers/educational institutions looking at Facebook and similar social networking sites, finding picture of people doing something innocuous like holding a beer and picking another candidate.
Do you think that HR departments are full of deep thinkers?
With image searching becoming more powerful, it may not be long before most picture can search for individuals just from a sample photos, without needing the photo to be tagged with their name.
It is prudent to keep yourself non-identifiable, just in case. I guess that Zero isn't your real name :)
There shouldn't be any recriminations just for being at a demo, and there wouldn't be any legal ones, but there could certainly be social ones.
They should snatch the guys fashioning weapons, not those covering their faces.
|
See this article from last year:
tinyurl.com/na9mg3
It is referring to US firms, but the UK is probably little different.
Note that "provocative" photos are the key issue.
Now, imagine that you are 18. Do you want a picture of you stood next to a stranger in a "Kill the Bill" t-shirt (or just been at a police demo for that matter), floating around the internet for the next 50 years, when Norris in HR, could kill you prospects with a couple of mouse clicks?
|
I do know that If I rock up to a protest wearing a mask, I am going to get tagged for further investigation by the old bill or special branch. I am going to be tagged by the old bill for robust treatment, and when unmasked have NO chance of getting a good job.
Common sense that isn't it?
|
|
Common sense says keep out of trouble, don't wear masks, don't go on protests. (I think there's a photograph somewhere of me sitting in the middle of the road in Parliament Square.)
|
No, I don't get that at all. What kind of scenario do you mean? Do you mean that you are going to have criminal charges brought against you for disguising your identity?
If you wear a mask, your only risk is that you get arrested, and convicted of some kind of crime that will give you a criminal record, which will then be searchable.
If you don't wear a mask, you quite easily risk falling foul of Norris and his extra-judicial killing of your CV. Norris doesn't need a criminal record to kill you off, he just needs to get a bad feeling about you, and you'll never be any the wiser.
|
As I said, wear a mask at a demo, and you attract the attention of the police, who will photograph you for reference and later attempts at identification. You will attract hit squads of riot police who will target you. The press will take photos of you because you will look sinister.
All the mask does is attract attention not hide it.
Norris wont find you by facial recognition. It will find you by name or other tags.
Now what's better
Your face book page with you at a demo, or your facebook page with you at a demo wearing a mask?
|
Norris might well find you with facial recognition. Maybe not today, but probably quite soon. Image search is very powerful now and getting more so.
In the meantime, Norris can find you via tags. Maybe not on your own page, but a friend's page who has tagged you.
>> Now what's better
>> Your face book page with you at a demo, or your Facebook page with you at a demo wearing a mask?
Well, if you post on your own page, there is no hope. But if you don't, how exactly are they going to identify you from your picture if you are wearing a mask.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Fri 10 Dec 10 at 17:35
|
|
As I understand it, there's going to be a cap on university fees. That doesn't mean to say they're certain to increase to the level of the cap at all universities.
Last edited by: L'escargot on Fri 10 Dec 10 at 07:14
|
>> As I understand it, there's going to be a cap on university fees. That doesn't
>> mean to say they're certain to increase to the level of the cap at all
>> universities.
My understanding too, L'escargot.
|
>> >> As I understand it, there's going to be a cap on university fees. That
>> doesn't
>> >> mean to say they're certain to increase to the level of the cap at
>> all
>> >> universities.
>>
>> My understanding too, L'escargot.
Even then, it seems that the most they will have to pay is £18,000 (£6,000 x 3 years), 1% above base, and only if they earn more than £21K.
If they don't pay it off after 30 years the debt is cancelled. Interest aside, that it only £600 a year, if they pay for the whole 30 years.
I wish I could get a mortgage on those terms.
|
Indeed. There are alot of wild figures being thown about by Labour and even students who clearly either havent read or dont understand the proposals.
In that instance, the only thing id like to fund for them are reading classes.
|
>> If they don't pay it off after 30 years the debt is cancelled.
I expect that that will become the norm, unless the rules are altered to prevent that particular term of the loan from being exploited.
|
>> >> If they don't pay it off after 30 years the debt is cancelled.
>>
>> I expect that that will become the norm, unless the rules are altered to prevent
>> that particular term of the loan from being exploited.
>>
It can only be exploited by making sure you earn less than the amount needed to pay it of within 30 years. Your reasoning is the same as I hear some people who refuse to try to earn above the higher rate tax threshold "because they don't want to pay higher rate tax".
There is a definite loophole which was mentioned on Radio five-live : declare yourself bankrupt after you graduate.
There is another possible loophole which has not been discussed anywhere yet AFAIK, and so I do not know if it will stand: move to a non-EU country and they won't be able to pursue you for the debt.
One thing I don't understand is how the equality and discrimination laws allow that the Scots Universities can offer free education to anyone from the EU, but not if you come from England.
|
>> It can only be exploited by making sure you earn less than the amount needed
>> to pay it of within 30 years.
The daughter of a friend spent several years at university, ending up with a doctorate. Within weeks she got married and started a family. She's not worked a day in her life. I don't suppose she'll be unique in that respect.
|
>> The daughter of a friend spent several years at university, ending up with a doctorate.
>> Within weeks she got married and started a family. She's not worked a day in
>> her life. I don't suppose she'll be unique in that respect.
>>
Even if she did work, full time or part time, any year in which her pay is below £21k (indexed from 2015), she won't have to pay.
|
A minor point within this discussion but Steel Spark, when you say this:
''Not sure I agree with that because, in these days when everyone has a camera phone, and images can be uploaded to Facebook, YouTube etc in seconds, there could be legitimate reasons to protect your identity.''
There is no law to stop any of us being photographed in public. If your picture gets displayed elsewhere that doesn't mean that your identity has been revealed; merely your picture. Even if someone adds your correct name to that picture, there are no offences.
I'd be amazed if anyone genuinely thought that people wearing masks at this demo were doing it for anything other than criminal intent. There is legislation that allows for the removal of face coverings albeit somewhat impractical in yesterdays circumstance.
As for the fees, I'm with some other contributors insofar as there's been a dumbing down of many degrees and a proliferation of virtually worthless ones. The payback is on an entirely reasonable sliding scale.
My former wife went to uni many years ago and worked solidly through the hols to earn money. I'm not suggesting that a student could earn enough to pay their way but the debt burden could certainly be reduced.
My neighbours son has just graduated with £21k debt, but then I note the computers, Playstation, Blu Ray player etc that he has acquired in the same time, and the fact that he never worked during the holidays.
|
>> If they don't pay it off after 30 years the debt is cancelled. Interest aside,
>> that it only £600 a year, if they pay for the whole 30 years.
>>
£600 a year.
Say it was an "extortionate" £1000 a year, i.e. £20 per week =
4 packets of cigs a week or a pint of beer a day
|
For someone earning £30k pa, the repayment will be £68 per month, say £17 per week.
I quote the figures below from yesterday's Hansard:
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm101209/debtext/101209-0002.htm#10120946000003
"9 Dec 2010 : Column 548
Vince Cable: Furthermore, we are introducing variable interest rates so that those on high incomes pay relatively more to ensure the progressivity of the scheme, as a result of which a £30,000 salary will carry a monthly payment of approximately £68, which is far lower, incidentally, than it would be under a graduate tax system. Under that system, people would have to start paying much earlier and at much lower levels of income. "
|
>> For someone earning £30k pa, the repayment will be £68 per month, say £17 per
>> week.
>>
>> I quote the figures below from yesterday's Hansard:
>> www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm101209/debtext/101209-0002.htm#10120946000003
Vince Cable: "We have rejected those recommendations and proposed instead that we proceed as the statutory instrument describes. That involves the introduction of a fee cap of £6,000, rising to £9,000 in exceptional circumstances."
He doesn't say whether the fee cap is per annum or in toto.
|
>> He doesn't say whether the fee cap is per annum or in toto.
>>
12.25 pm
The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (Vince Cable): I beg to move,
That, for the purpose of section 24 of the Higher Education Act 2004, the higher amount should be increased to £9,000, and to £4,500 in the cases described in regulation 5 of the draft regulations in Command Paper Cm 7986, and that the increase should take effect from 1 September 2012.
www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2010/draft/ukdsi_9780111504161_en_1
Prescribed basic amount from 1st September 2012
4. Subject to regulation 5, for the purpose of section 24 of the 2004 Act the basic amount is £6,000.
Command Paper Cm 7986
www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm79/7986/7986.pdf
|
>> >> >>
>>
>> If they don't pay it off after 30 years the debt is cancelled. >>
>>
>>
I haven't heard the words "pay it off" associated with debt for years. What a quaint idea.
Surely sub-prime student loans are packaged, sold on, repackaged, and then emerge as AAA investments.
|
While my gut reaction is to oppose these new fees and loans, that's an emotional reaction, and I'm not actually sure that my rational self agrees with it.
It is undoubtedly true that debt in the traditional sense could be a huge problem. If you walked out of university with a £30,000 debt that was occurring interest, and that had a fixed repayment schedule, that's a problem. That's even more of a problem when defaulting on it could cause all sorts of problems.
The thing is, from what I know of these proposals, that's not the sort of debt that has been proposed. As far as I can tell, the new debt is actually a form of graduate tax, only payable if you're actually getting the benefit from the degree, and impossible to default on. In fact, the only thing I can see that really differentiates it from a graduate tax is that, once you've paid back what you borrowed plus interest, you stop being taxed. I may be wrong, but you can't default. If your earnings remain low, you don't have to pay anything, and it's not something that will ruin your old age because if you get to a certain point the debt gets written off.
So, is this fair? There is of course the risk that those who might otherwise have gone to university will be put off by the spectre of debt, and therefore will decide not to go. That would be a real shame, because I think university offers far more than just the academic qualification, certainly at a decent university, and certainly from a social point of view.
The flipside, and this is something was pointed out to me by a friend, is that this might actually encourage those who just want to spend three years dossing about on a completely pointless course. If you believe that you are never going to earn more than about £21,000 anyway, you might as well go to university and have a ball and run up debts in this new system. You will never have to pay the money back, you can't default on the debts and ruin your life, and even if things go better than you expect, the payments are never going to cripple you. If we're not careful, this could be a way of the feckless having three years without having to work, and without having any problems with jobseeking or all those other tedious features of real life.
Now of course, we also have the interesting question of whether it really appropriate for 50% of the population to have a university degree? I am almost certainly it isn't, and that a lot of subjects that would previously have been an FE course are now dressed up as degrees. In engineering this has already meant that the default degree has moved to being a master's, and that you have to do a Ph.D. if you want to differentiate yourself academically. This seems like a pretty slippery slope. I suspect that making people really think about what a degree may offer them, both from an earnings / career point of view, but also from a personal perspective, may be very useful.
Do we want this many people to be in higher education? If yes, maybe we have to accept that this isn't affordable, and look at other ways of doing it? Perhaps there is no alternative other than to put the cost onto the students taking the course? I don't actually like this conclusion, but I'm struggling to find a rational argument the other way.
Sorry to have rambled, if it's any consolation this has just taken my lunch hour.
Last edited by: Statistical Outlier on Fri 10 Dec 10 at 13:02
|
I agree totally with SO. My experience of family and friends overseas is that almost every student has to pay large fees and living costs and that this is covered by parental contributions, grants, loans and the student working at holiday times.
The corollary of it is that there are some Mickey Mouse degrees and a too high student population. Therefore everyone with any brains does a first degree and then a second degree. If degree courses were dropped so that only academic courses were eligible for degrees the government could probably fund it with much top up charging. In other words, as it used to be about 30 years ago.
|
I oppose top up fees for Russell Group Universities.
The cost to the Government should be offset by increasing student fees for the former polytechnics to a point where most of them would shut.
Notably the letter in yesterday's Telegraph opposing the fees was signed by the Vice Chancellors of the University of East London and a dozen other institutions of which I had also not heard. tinyurl.com/2964utr
The letter in Wednesday's paper supporting the fees was signed by VCs of reputable places. tinyurl.com/3xhj5vx
The useless Universities know nobody would PAY to get a degree there, so are entirely reliant on state handouts. I had a friend who was reading a degree at one of the best ex-Polys (and got a 2:1). The essays written were not even of GCSE standard. Complete waste of money and time. We are kidding ourselves and - worse - the young that they will obtain any benefit from going to university and getting themselves into debt.
Vocational courses are what is needed, not "degrees".
|
If these degrees are now paid for by the student essentially does that not mean you can now do more than one? I can understand if HMG were paying then you'd be allowed so much study for free but if you're essentially paying for it yourself can you not do more than one?
I'd also like to know what is happening with masters and phd courses as they're traditionally paid for up front. If masters and phds become easier due to funding through loans being more readily available I wonder if they will then become as worthless as a normal degree?
|
Teabelly
Masters degrees are already worthless - they're essential to bring undergraduates up to the level of undergraduates twenty years ago (i.e. a level where they can take a PhD.)
You can already do more than one undergraduate degree if you pay for it.
|
|
Statistical Outlier - you're not rambling, I agree entirely. To take the point a step further -if parents are concerned , they needn't be. If they've got money to help then lock it away and wait until son/daughter starts making repayments from their salary on the loan and pay it for them. the interest rate is lower than you'd have got by bonding your savings. Quids in.
|
|
Ah. That's saved me a year of time on a masters! I graduated nearly 15 years ago so I might as well go straight for a phd.
|
I'd also like to know what is happening with masters and phd courses as they're traditionally paid for up front. If masters and phds become easier due to funding through loans being more readily available I wonder if they will then become as worthless as a normal degree?
>>
>>Masters degrees are already worthless - they're essential to bring undergraduates up to the level of undergraduates twenty years ago (i.e. a level where they can take a PhD.)
>>
My daughter has just started a DPhil and that was quite involved re funding. In her case it will be worth a lot especially for those using the NHS.
>>You can already do more than one undergraduate degree if you pay for it.
>>
Been there done that. During daughters MB BS degree it is "encouraged" to do an intercalated BSc (Hons) but of course it is self funded along with a full years living accomodation costs. At least the course is only one not three / four years.
So those two would be just six years of fees.
No guesses where most of the future doctors will be sourced.
|
Tuition fee protests - Zero
