cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Student Fees

N/A

Student Fees

A couple of days ago on the Today programme I heard Patricia Hewitt saying that student fees and "top-up" fees are legitimate because graduates will earn much more than average during their working lives. For what it's worth I look at it this way..

1. It is supremely arrogant to assume that a graduate will definitely have his/her earnings enhanced.. try asking some of the sweepers on the Tube (B.Sc Hons brush pushing!).

2. It is double taxation. The more anyone earns the more tax is paid. And having to repay a student loan over a long time period is also a form of tax. If you are having to repay fees paid up front from a loan then you should get a tax credit.

3. Who would ever have considered that a Labour Government would abolish "free" education? Surely it's better to give everyone the opportunity to be educated and flatten the costs across the tax spectrum (!!!) . If a graduate does in fact get to earn more in the long run then s/he will pay more tax accordingly.
7 REPLIES
elton
Grafter
Posts: 175
Registered: 30-07-2007

RE: Student Fees

> A couple of days ago on the Today programme I heard Patricia Hewitt saying that student fees and "top-up" fees are legitimate because graduates will earn much more than average during their working lives. For what it's worth I look at it this way..
>
> 1. It is supremely arrogant to assume that a graduate will definitely have his/her earnings enhanced.. try asking some of the sweepers on the Tube (B.Sc Hons brush pushing!).
>
> 2. It is double taxation. The more anyone earns the more tax is paid. And having to repay a student loan over a long time period is also a form of tax. If you are having to repay fees paid up front from a loan then you should get a tax credit.
>
> 3. Who would ever have considered that a Labour Government would abolish "free" education? Surely it's better to give everyone the opportunity to be educated and flatten the costs across the tax spectrum (!!!) . If a graduate does in fact get to earn more in the long run then s/he will pay more tax accordingly.

And where would the nation be without graduates? Down the pan, that's where. Graduates design, invent, engineer, and manage every aspect of the wealth producing engine of the national economy. If anything they should pay less tax than non-graduates.
--
Skonko!
N/A

RE: Student Fees

Not all degrees are the same. Some are worth more than others ,for example. Becoming a doctor in medicine is better than a doctor in Art. Why should the tax system pay for some student to live a life studying making pretty pictures.
What im trying to say diferent courses should attract different price fees and some should pay the student for taking them. We need more doctors but we ve got too may graphic designers.
A levels should be made harder and exactly the same percentage of pupils each year should get a,b c d and e. This way a establishment knows that the person with the A is 1 of say 2000. and is a good control for variations in exam difficulty .
elton
Grafter
Posts: 175
Registered: 30-07-2007

RE: Student Fees

> Not all degrees are the same. Some are worth more than others ,for example. Becoming a doctor in medicine is better than a doctor in Art. Why should the tax system pay for some student to live a life studying making pretty pictures.
> What im trying to say diferent courses should attract different price fees and some should pay the student for taking them. We need more doctors but we ve got too may graphic designers.
> A levels should be made harder and exactly the same percentage of pupils each year should get a,b c d and e. This way a establishment knows that the person with the A is 1 of say 2000. and is a good control for variations in exam difficulty .

Why do you say a doctor in medicine is "better" than a doctor in art? Better in what way?

--
Skonko!
N/A

RE: Student Fees

Better for 2 reasons
1: There arent enough of them compared to graphical people
2: Curing people is much more important than entertaining people , ( or reaching the inner depth of a persons imagination) or what ever graphical people do
N/A

RE: Student Fees

> Better for 2 reasons
> 1: There arent enough of them compared to graphical people
> 2: Curing people is much more important than entertaining people , ( or reaching the inner depth of a persons imagination) or what ever graphical people do

OOO very controversial! It could be argued that the way to a person's (or even a nation's) health is through art! Art is a long-term therapy, medicine is fire-fighting! The Greeks relished art and some say it held ancient civilisations together.

I reckon all graduates are equally important.. most don't stay with their discipline anyway. Taking a degree teaches you to think.
N/A

RE: Student Fees

As a recent gradute I can confirm that it is out of order to make people pay for their degree. For a masters - yes!

I know a lot of people who are much more intellingent than myself - more common sense, better ability etc... that wanted to go to university but couldnt afford to. These are the people who should be running the country and driving business forward. I now have a decent job in the city with a nice fat pay packet and a new pad just because I had the oppertunity to go to university (although my situation was a little unique as I was funded through university). And some of the people who i know who are more intelligent are still living at home ... doing crappy jobs and finding they cant get anywhere. Some are even saving to go to university.

Another oppertunity for Ms Hewitt is to provide large incentives (tax breaks etc...) for businesses that sponsor students through university. Therefore people with the proven skills can afford the fees etc... This would also probably help the ailing manufacturing sector which is struggling under the weight of the poor economy and tax situation and needs some serious innovation to take place really quickly.

Also to address the a level issue - you cant just say the top 2000 students get and A as what happens if there is double the students taking a levels one year - the good people will be pushed to lower grades and will not be comparable over the years.
You could try implementing a percentage situation - 10% get A's - but this means students will still not be comparable over the years.

The only solution is to say that people who pass with over 75% get an A ... and TRY to make the exam papers over the years consistent. To do this they need to get rid of those toss€rs at the EDEXCEL who keep fuking up.

Hope this works for some of you - no doubt the debate will continue ...

Chris
N/A

RE: Student Fees

I take it all the 16+ students who complain about having to pay for their education with a loan, and say they, or "people they know" cannot afford it, won't be buying houses either. In case they haven't realised, most of us have to borrow considerbly larger sums of money to buy a house.

I had a university education. I still feel guilty that I was privileged to have this education, and consequently earn lots more money during my working life, when a lot of my childhood friends left school at 16, so never had the same money spent on them. I may have paid a bit more in tax, but 60%+ of my enhanced earnings came directly to me, thank you very much.

In my utopia people would be paid in proportion to the effort they put into providing goods and services for others, not because they are more clever than others, belong to a profession that safeguards its members from competition, or have learned how to manipulate others.

Incidentally I wasn’t aware that Uni ever taught me to think. I simply learned a lot of facts, and remembered them for long enough to pass a few exams. When I got into industry, then I learned how to think things out, and discovered the consequences of getting it wrong in the real world.