Increasing Tuition Fees : Yay or nay?

DeletedUser

Guest
Stutzy said:
A lot of the people who get there pensions were around during the world war, fighting for this country ETC, most of them have worked for 40/50/60+ years, paying tax along the way, so to get something back for there efforts is better than granting students loads of money that just gets spent down the student union bar.
Click to expand...

1. Pensions don't benefit the economy. Students do. They ensure future finances, future tax, future economic growth via the better jobs they will fill up. This is a generalisation, some degrees are a pointless waste of time. Sciences, economics etc are VERY MUCH worth the effort.

2. Fighting in a war to kill loads of people, even if they are Germans, isn't something to proud of. Sure, there is respect for defending yourself, but do not rejoice in the deaths of so many people. Wars are a shame, regardless of the reasoning behind them. They are the cesspit of our inventive powers.

You disgust me for being proud of killing people.

3. A significant proportion of students are teetotal. I am one of them. How dare you brand me so?

4. Many of the biggest advances in medicine (which SAVES lives rather than killing them which you seem so proud of) are due to doctors and biochemists who have STUDIED as students to get that far. The majority of corporate business is run by people with degrees and other well-educated people; this is a massive tax boost, far more useful for this country.

A former student invented the defibrillator. Clever-clogs who were former students created the internet. The Spaceship.
The VERY warcraft you take so much pride in.

Can you not see how students are far more useful than many other costs the government has to face, and thus, should be ring-fenced at the cost of other costs?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Timmyhill said:
Couldn't agree more - students spend 3 years of their lives - borrowing money - not contributing in tax etc
Click to expand...

How do students not contribute towards tax? :icon_confused:

Timmyhill said:
there are so many of you we simply don't have the work in the country for that many graduates.
Click to expand...

Who said they'd stay in this country?

Timmyhill said:
Let alone the fact undergrads don't put thought into what their job will be after uni
Click to expand...

Not a fact. :icon_idea:

Timmyhill said:
the majority just pick a course that sounds interesting.
Click to expand...

If you want to go into a job you preferably want to go into a job that interests you and you would enjoy. So, I fail to see your point? People obviously don't choose a course on the aesthetic value of the name but they'll look into it and see etc.

Timmyhill said:
I'll take media studies as an example, around 100k students per year goto study this subject. Around the country, new employment opportunities for this sector are around 6-7k jobs per year. So you tell me who's draining society chap..
Click to expand...

Jobs change regularly and it's a competition. Anyhow, a Uni qualification would look more impressive than a college drop-out on a CV even if it was completely unrelated to the job you're applying for.
 

DeletedUser512

Guest
add this to the arguments.

the people who are saying we should pay for uni, most of them got their degrees substituted fully by the government. Just slightly hypocritical don't you think,
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Adellion said:
Increasing Tuition Fees : Yay or nay?

  • The coalition government seeks to increase tuition fees from £3290 to £9870 from 2012.
  • The government insists this is to continue funding high standards at UK universities while keeping higher education sustainable.
  • Tuition fee loans and maintenance loans will be more generous, however commercial rates of interest may be introduced.
  • Scholarships and bursaries will be more numerous to assist poorer students.
  • The NUS accuses the government of harming those most able to get the UK out of recession.
  • The Liberal Democrats, in particular Nick Clegg, have come under heavy fire for their U-turn on this tuition fee policy when their election pledge was not to raise tuition fees beyond inflation.
  • Protests dated on 11/10/10 were 200% of NUS estimates in turnout.
  • The Conservative HQ was ransacked by radical student groups and suspected freeloading rioters. The police were overwhelmed by the underestimated turnout.
  • EMA will also be slashed under government plans.

Discuss.

Rep appreciated. ;)
Click to expand...

surely you should pay for a service you are getting? one cant clap his hands and make it so..

a more important question would be, why is government in charge of the tuition increases? Surely if there was there was a demand of education and the free market was to work, there would be a supply of someone providing education at the price point you want...

the government perhaps should promote the supply of education? not control it..
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
Bad Horse said:
surely you should pay for a service you are getting? one cant clap his hands and make it so..

a more important question would be, why is government in charge of the tuition increases? Surely if there was there was a demand of education and the free market was to work, there would be a supply of someone providing education at the price point you want...

the government perhaps should promote the supply of education? not control it..
Click to expand...

The government has, historically, promoted the supply of education by paying for it. It is one thing that can't be left to the markets. Now it has decided it doesn't want to pay quite so much, and as a consequence the standard of education will fall. Had it been left to the markets, however, the vast majority of people would have not had a chance to go to school, nevermind uni.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
onetruth said:
The government has, historically, promoted the supply of education by paying for it. It is one thing that can't be left to the markets. Now it has decided it doesn't want to pay quite so much, and as a consequence the standard of education will fall. Had it been left to the markets, however, the vast majority of people would have not had a chance to go to school, nevermind uni.
Click to expand...


Promoting the supply of schooling isn't paying for education, that is driving up the demand :) promoting the supply would be encouraging more schools to start up and increasing the competition.
 

DeletedUser2918

Guest
kind of been half following this and the arguments both for and against. Here are my main ten penneth worth

a) the main problem i have with the "no" people however is that they just dont seem to understand (or understand but ignore) that there is no money left. So this means hard choices. Now regarding the other things that could be cut (e.g. nurses wages, hospital beds, firefighters, winter fuel allowance etc) rather than someone paying for the advantages they may get in their future life then i know where my vote goes.

b) our Universities are slowly getting worse each year. The best Universities in the world are in America (yes - where you have to pay to go - between $5,000 and $30,000 per year). Now i am not overly fond of all things American, however having increased charges certainly hasnt bought thier higher education system down.

(btw Adellion - all those great graduates you mentioned? The defribrillator - created by a graduate of a US uni. The first internet? - American uni's.)

c) i think the idea is to stop people going to university 'for the laugh'. Some of the courses and entrace requirements out there are just pathetic. Indeed, some people i went to uni with have now ended up working in Game......... well worth the 3 years subsidy. Now you cant differentiate up front who is in it for the career and will work and who is in it for the £1 a pint partying. But if you make it so that people have to pay back an amount.....then only people will go who can reasonably expect to do well enough to pay back that amount will attend.

d) Unfortunately there are just too many people in higher education. This lessons the quality of our seats of learning and cheapens all degrees. Yes - even the one you hope to get yourself one day. Hopefully by attaching a price to a degree will stop such rubbish as "equine studies"

a few lesser points:
Payney - yes - but the people arguing for no fees are those either going or thinking of going to uni. Both sides have their bias and hypocrisy
Adellion - a significant proportion of students are teetotal?!?!? wtf?!!? where do you go to uni? Oman? :lol:
 

DeletedUser

Guest
as a new graduate who was involed in the campain against the rises i am apouled at what is beeing done to those who are only a year or two behing me. i studed theology which is an expencive subject due to the number of books required. i still have my full lone to repay and i am not brave enuf to work out the full amount of the lone, tuishan fees and matance lone (which eveyone perticuly politians always forgett, which is as much again as the tuisan lone).

a big Nay to higher tuition fees
(sorry about the spellings i just cannot get my head round some words)
 

DeletedUser613

Guest
Perhaps you should have done an english course jkjk.

Yeah but it is what it is really. I think the way it was first explained was very bad and would really put some people off uni, however when you do look closer it gets a bit better. Still annoying mind.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Make the students pay more.......and up front.............bone idle lot they are :)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I am a student, I got in the last year just before the fees went up. Lucky me right.

Anyway I say NAY to this, students are mostly aged 19-25. We are just starting off in life really, getting our degrees to get ourselves decent well paid jobs. We are doing what we can to make our lives better for us and our families. In stead of just passing on all your financial problems to the younger generations why not try and deal with them the best you can as adults.
With these fees of £9k a year for all new students and an average of £4k accommodation if you live outside London we are talking an outstanding £13k a year minimum!
The minimum degree is 3 years for most courses so that's almost £40k to get a degree. Then we have to find jobs, get a car, mortgage for a house ect. which will set us back even more.
If someone chooses to do a doctors degree that 6-7 years which would come out to around £100k including accommodation costs. Plus these costs don't even include the interest charged.
This will mean less people are likely to take a medical degrees and all the actual important degrees not stuff like media studies, art (you can even study ice cream and david beckham if you want).
Personally I think fees at £4k per year is high enough and then cut all the silly degrees out and sort out the rest of the spending elsewhere, maybe if the big guys stopped taking such big bonuses that might be a start.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I'm not a political genius, but as a 16 year old I'm concerned for my own further education because the way it's going at the moment I won't be able to fund my own education to which I'm quite sure is a basic human right.

Knowledge should be free.

- Soli.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Not looking forward to paying such high fees. As soli said, knowledge should be free.
With retirement ages going up all the time as well (meaning less people leaving jobs, so less jobs for graduates, and then having to work longer than the current generation) it's the younger generation who will have to deal with all the problems of the current generation.

In my opinion this generation should deal with their problems themselves and pass on to the younger generations a clean slate that they can build on, but no, they are too busy being greedy taking their £££million bonuses, dodging tax and forcing younger ones to pay the price of it all before it even becomes their responsibility. This generation are the bone idol ones, and to be honest they will probably always be remembered for being selfish too.

Rant over :lol:
 

DeletedUser

Guest
The way I see it, is the government complains and complains that young people like myself are just too lazy to go out and get jobs. However, I have applied for God knows how many jobs in the past year to try and gain some experience and fund some of my own parts of my life in an attempt to gain some independence and put less pressure on my parents.

But all the government does is call us lazy and think we're all benefit scroungers. Personally, around where I live there are very very limited opportunities to get jobs, even on a weekend basis! And even then you need experience, which is something I can't get because there as no jobs!

This all links into Tuition fees, as how am I meant to pay off an ever increasing size of a student loan when I can't even get a job to start saving for it?

The UK is run by complete goons, always placing the blame somewhere else rather than getting stuck in and sorting it out.

- Soli.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Solitude said:
I have applied for God knows how many jobs in the past year to try and gain some experience and fund some of my own parts of my life in an attempt to gain some independence and put less pressure on my parents.

Personally, around where I live there are very very limited opportunities to get jobs, even on a weekend basis! And even then you need experience, which is something I can't get because there as no jobs!

- Soli.
Click to expand...

sad-i-know-that-feel-bro_3969556_lrg.jpg


Spent all last year looking for a job. Just got one a few weeks back, good luck on your hunt! :icon_biggrin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top