No smilies, no avatars, no flashing gifs. Just discuss the issues of the day, from last night's telly via football to science or philosophy.
Previous
|
Next
|
Top
|
Bottom
Policywatcher - 10 Jun 2018 15:11:30 (#1 of 248)

Now it seems Labour has another brand new and costly policy



"Brand new"?

It's not all that many years since (means tested) student grants were the norm, until various politicians decided that monetising students was a good wheeze......

col2001 - 10 Jun 2018 15:19:16 (#2 of 248)

'Shock' ... 'costly' ...

I'm so fed up with the dishonesty, the framing, the open bias.

Policywatcher - 10 Jun 2018 15:20:15 (#3 of 248)

I get so fucking tired of the fact that deliberate lies have been made the new normal.

col2001 - 10 Jun 2018 15:21:00 (#4 of 248)

And no shame when caught out...

Tadagee - 10 Jun 2018 15:21:42 (#5 of 248)

Its all a nonsense. Fees are here to stay.

What is needed is the reintroduction of maintenance grants for poorer students.

col2001 - 10 Jun 2018 15:26:32 (#6 of 248)

Why are fees here to stay?

Jacob_Richter - 10 Jun 2018 15:26:59 (#7 of 248)

But Corbyn......

AlanII - 10 Jun 2018 15:28:14 (#8 of 248)

Why are fees here to stay?

Because, with the increased student numbers, it's not feasible to finance it any other way.

col2001 - 10 Jun 2018 15:30:38 (#9 of 248)

Feasible?

How much is actually paid-back?

Gotout - 10 Jun 2018 15:32:42 (#10 of 248)

Why are fees here to stay?

Because, with the increased student numbers, it's not feasible to finance it any other way.

So cut down on student numbers, make more use of apprenticeships.

I went to college and got a full grant and expenses. I then taught for over 25 years which in my view paid off any debt I could morally owe. Without a grant there is no way I would have gone.

Shadrack22 - 10 Jun 2018 15:38:54 (#11 of 248)

People are forgetting the mess that higher education funding was in at the time of the 1997 Dearing Report. You also need to think about the proportion of the population in HE at that point compared to now. Are you willing to see student numbers reduced to pre-1997 levels? If so, which institutions would go to the wall? Think about the knock-on effect this will have not just on social mobility and individual life chances, but also on local economies.

There is a conversation to be had about fee levels and indeed Dearing’s report is worth revisiting, but current Labour policy is essentially an unworkable electoral bribe.

barkis - 10 Jun 2018 15:42:23 (#12 of 248)

The economy has grown since 1997.

In considering the cost it has to be born in mind that the greater part of student debt is expected to be written off.

Policywatcher - 10 Jun 2018 15:57:13 (#13 of 248)

As well as the fact that the money owed on student loans reduces graduates' spending power, ability to afford a mortgage or ability to afford rent, increases their insecurity, and much else of what has gone wrong in the last couple of decades.

Jacob_Richter - 10 Jun 2018 16:00:15 (#14 of 248)

Those inflated vice-chancellor salaries won't pay themselves.

nemo75 - 10 Jun 2018 16:01:22 (#15 of 248)

Like that's got much to do with it.

Jacob_Richter - 10 Jun 2018 16:10:43 (#16 of 248)

One factor among many.

Tadagee - 10 Jun 2018 16:11:02 (#17 of 248)

Getting rid of student fees was a simply understood, attractive vote winning policy that is however, not feasible and counter productive.

There is no such thing as 'free' HE it's simply who bears the cost. Currently it's about 35% taxpayer 65% students.

100% treasury funding at current levels is not feasible. whatever the increase levels from tax revenue it would be nowhere near the level of funding currently from loans. Universities would reduce numbers and courses would shut down. HE would once more become the preserve of the middle classes. Not i suspect, ideal for Labour.

The better option would have been to have a graduate tax instead, but the treasury wouldn't have that as loans balance the budget in a way tax revenue doesn't.

Interestingly HEPI research published last week showed that the large majority of students think that they should make a contribution

Jacob_Richter - 10 Jun 2018 16:15:52 (#18 of 248)

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/may/02/
jeremy-corbyn-end-student-tuition-fees

Policywatcher - 10 Jun 2018 16:22:22 (#19 of 248)

> Interestingly HEPI research published last week showed that the large majority of students think that they should make a contribution

Are they the same ones whose survey on the disabled showed that they felt they should make a contribution, and so on?

dottie30 - 10 Jun 2018 16:22:47 (#20 of 248)

It's difficult. Many degrees simply are not worth the money a student pays for them and essentially what is happening is the cheap, useless but relatively popular degrees are subsidising more expensive degrees which produce essential and higher paid workers (medics, engineers, etc).

But what is the alternative if we want to continue to see university entrants in the numbers we currently see them? The reality is a purely taxpayer funded system is not feasible.

Previous
|
Next
|
Top
|
Bottom
Check Subscriptions
|
Home » UK News