Thetownend.com

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11726822

I'd be there if I wasn't such a poor chode. Good on em. How much did those fuckers making these decisions pay? Changes need to be made, but I don't agree with this. More funding into vocational courses, apprenticeships would have been a much cheaper option and been of a greater overall good, instead of just pricing everybody out of it.

Only downside is there aren't similar scenes outside the lib dems offices. Those cunts got most of the student vote promising no fee's. Wankers.

Rarr Rarr Rarr. Not expecting much sympathy, but it's fucking bolocks

2 of my housemates have gone, wish I had now.

It's an absolute joke, after all his pre-election spiel Nick Clegg should be strung up.

MP in speaking bollocks to get your vote then acting like a cunt after shocker!

Tories and Lib Dems said they would scrap the project that would cause me to lose my job

Have they fuck

You've got mine FWIW (sympathy, not my bollocks). Although it's more the students in a few years' time than you lot isn't it? Actually, you lot are already paying horrendous fees as well, so yeah, have it back again.

True but this one actually makes a difference to me/my bros so I actually give a fuck in this instance

Yeah. I think the new system starts right after I graduate. But i've got a sister looking to start uni next year and a brother who'll probably want to start in 2014. I know i've joked about it before, but it's just not right. How the fuck is the country supposed to perform internaionally if the only people going to university are the upper class inbred twits who get daddy to pay for their education

Im not having a go mate, not at all. How come the sweaties get it for free anyhow?

My understanding of the scotland/wales situation is that they get £X from the govt every year, then spend it on what they choose. They choose to spend it on subsidising higher education

May be wrong though

Fair play to them im 100 percent behind them,its good to see British students grow some balls.Wont be long till we're told its a few "anarchist trouble makers" and not really students.

Agreed

I like that the BBC News seem obsessed with the placard of Stick man Cameron boffing stick man Clegg up the bottom :D

Fucking tax dodgers

Surely they should all be concentrating on their education. Protesting against tuition fees when they're all missing lectures/seminars/labs/whatever that they are paying to miss - just seems a touch ironic to me.

Plus, it's not even these people that will lose out, it's the students in 2/3 years time. Would be a bit more worthwhile if it was GCSE/Alevel students that were protesting. I bet most of the protesters don't even care/are only there for a day out/excuse not to go to uni.

But i do agree with the everybody that the government have fucked up and something needs doing.

It's a Wednesday... most of 'us' would have at least most of the day off anyway. As said before, my younger brother is now facing astronomical fees if/when he goes to Uni, god forbid I should want to protest just cos I'm done in 7 months...

Haha a woman on the news just said pretty much this

First of all the Liberals never won the election. In fact no one did. The country voted for a coalition & thats what they got. (In actual fact if you take the Scots out of the equation England voted conservative.) That means that by defintion not all parties can keep their promises.
The fact is that we can't afford as a country to give free education to all because Gordon Brown went on a spending spree, on borrowed money even when recieving record tax receipts meaning that he had to borrow even more when the downturn happened. The clown even sold some of the countries gold reserves at rock bottom prices.

Focusing on the students, they seem to forget that they only have to start paying the fees back when & if they earn over £21,000. Correct me if I'm wrong but the fees don't have to be paid by them up front. If they haven't repaid it within 30 years the debt is written off. I don't see why my taxes should fund jo bloggs going on a trendy art & design course when my daughter is on an apprenticeship at £95 per week.
I disagree with the notion that it is desirable for 50% of kids to go to Uni, but those that do should earn more in their lifetime than those who don't. Why the hell shouldn't they pay for it. (Of course I do realise that they may well do through higher income taxes any way)
If perchance they don't earn much they don't have to pay. Seems reasonably fair to me when the country is broke.

To which my rather flippant albeit serious reply would be why should me/my brother's generation have to fill the financial void and foot the bill for the way the last lot fucked it?

It's a massive cop-out on the govt's behalf, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out they reckon one way of clawing back some of the deficit is to milk undergraduates for 30 grand rather than 15, where is the justification in inflating fees massively if little to none of it is reinvested in  further education - which it wont be?

By the NUS, for one:

There is that. But like what Phil_S say, they have raised the minimum level of income before the students pay back any loans. So the students will be getting more for it in the end anyway. With £6K (i think) difference between today's payment threshold and the future lowest level of paying money back, the future graduates could effectively pay off a whole years worth of tuition and still have as much money as recent graduates have before they are taxed/pay back.

Today : £15k repayment threshold (so the graduates are gettin less than £15k after repayment of some of their loan.
Future: £21k repayment threshold , £6k fees. The graduates can pay the whole £6k off and still have more money than todays graduates after repayment.
 

Ha ha Sky News are reporting that the MI5 building at Thames House is in lock down,seriously students you don't want to fuck with the Spooks :o

I've been bombarded with messages from my old uni for weeks about this. Glad to see it's been a success in terms of the numbers turning out.

I agree with Phil in the sense that these fees shouldn't stop people going to uni, as they don't have to be paid back afterwards, and those who argue it makes education only affordable for the rich are kind of missing the point.

But then, as DMR says, milking more and more money out of people so they can get an education is wrong. Especially given that at present there are people out there with good degrees who can't find jobs. There was a massive education drive under Labour and that isn ow unaffordable, so either we hike up the fees to recoup the money we're splashing out, or we reverse this stupid notion that anybody who doesn't have a degree isn't worth employing. Unfortunately the government are going for the former, so students who do the degree I did in 5 years time could be coming out with debts around £40k rather than £25k.

Sure it gets paid back bit by bit and only when you're earning enough... but that extra £15k is a lot of money to almost anybody.

hahahaha this ace,Sky News right now is hilarious

Firstly you can't do that - A levy would be put in place to stop people paying it off early
Secondly, the interest rate at which you repay is to rise. Double the current figure if you earn more than 41 grand.
Thirdly, just look at the numbers - A 3 year degree now costs just shy of 10 grand. A 3 year degree in he future costs anything from 18k to 27k. Surely a complettely fairer treatment would be to raise the repayment threshold to the same extent

That argument presumes today's graduate gets a £15k salary and the future graduate gets £21k salary. And is therefore no justification at all.

I'll accept that a student earning £21k today is worse off than a student earning £21k in the future, but only marginally, and only until the loan is paid off, which will happen much more quickly for the current student.

In other words, you're wrong.

That argument could apply to many things, duty on petrol being reinvested in roads, cigarette and alcohol duty reinvested in the NHS.

Who should foot the bill, and how then ?

Bollocks. The level of debt students are currently left with is a massive deterrent to kids facing taking on that level of debt, I know that from direct personal experience (my stepson) especially when what they get at the end of it is so devalued. Not making a party political point per se as both those things happened under Labour (fees and devaluing degrees, in fact qualifications in general). But doubling or trebling the level of debt they're going to incur only adds to that deterrent.

What about looking at the tax-dodgers (as in actual tax avoiders, not students for once) first?

What about a levy on banks and bankers? You know, maybe get the fuckers who caused the problem to pay for it.

EDIT: And to satisfy Phil and SummerOf79, a fine on every Labour Cabinet Minister in the previous government and a precept on their future earnings can also go in the pot. And we should repossess Cherie Blair's teeth

I said shouldn't, not doesn't. If you look into the economics of it, yes this new system makes people worse off, but does not make education any more 'unaffordable' than it was before. There is nobody out there who drops below the poverty line because of their student loan repayments, the system is designed so as to avoid that.

And in case I wasn't clear before, I am AGAINST the new system. I just happen to get rather annoyed by inaccurate economic arguments, whether for or against. Hence my mini rant at santasdead above.

Haha this is quality.
Did anyone see the fire extinguisher thrown from the top floor?

Sky news are shitting it

OK, you are economically and semantically accurate. In practice, though, these fees are a massive deterrent to anyone but the very well off from getting a university education. Doesn't mean some of the less well off won't do it, many still will, but many who would qualify academically will be put off by the debt. And I don't mean the poor and the destitute - at 3k, this is already hitting kids from those "decent hardworking families" we keep hearing so much about, fuck knows what impact 6-9k pa will have

ha ha I think you and I are probably missing the point and just enjoying a good afternoon watching the trouble

It doesn't presume anything. It just states that a future student earning the repayment threshold of £21k can pay off a years tuition and be left with more than todays graduate earning the repayment threshold.

But, if todays graduate was earning £21k then they could pay off two years tuition. So i suppose i am wrong, as usual:).

Sky always do, makes their reports seem more exciting. Bollocks, I'm going to have to stop working now so I can watch some of it, you and yeo are a bad influence :)

I don't care what anyone says,watching Tory party HQ get smashed up is great.

Youre probqbly right

I like the fact theyve got music blasting out and their pretty much having a rave on the ground floor :Ride On Fatbury's Lovestick: :D

I sent an angry email to my local mp (Lib dem) 8)

I feel like ché guevara

There's been some good tweets as well.

"there's an Anarchist on the roof complaining that the State wont pay his fees..."

"just when you thought this protest couldn't get more cliched a Reggae sound sytem has turned up"

haha

I agree that that's happening. And something should be done. I just saw a video of a guy from Cardiff uni who accepted it doesn't make education unaffordable, but that 9k would have put him off going. Perhaps between the ages of 16 and 18 more should be done to educate people on how the system works, to show that they're not going to have to have to pay £9k per year up front, and that they won't have somebody chasing them for £30-£40k as soon as they graduate.

Back to the point about the actual amounts being charged, I begrudgingly accepted the introduction of fees before I went to uni (I think my year was the first to pay £3k+ for every year of education). However, to double or treble that really is taking the piss. Especially when many students' studies may ultimately be worthless for them, or at least of little value.

Like.

Fair point, but I cannot accept an 80% cut in teaching grants (if you take Labour's point at face value, which to be fair you probably can't) warrants a up to a 200% rise in fees for what might be inferior teaching, which is probably inevitable if Unis have to cut their budgets left right and centre.

Just texted my housemates telling them to get themselves down to the Tory HQ and get themselves on telly, that really would make my day.

I thought it was your mates on the roof lobbing extinguishers dave...

You didn't vote for him as well did you?

I almost didn’t go to uni because of the debt etc. and that was before top up fees. No chance I would if I had that decision to make now.

In an ideal world potential students would look elsewhere e.g. different qualifications which cost less or different career paths. In practice it’s very difficult for young people to do this if employers will look for degrees as a general minimum, which they will because so much of the people looking for jobs do have degrees.

I think the politicians from all parties need to realise that the average graduate salary is heavily boosted by London and nearby areas. Other areas can be much less. When I started my graduate trainee job I was on less than £15k and that was only 4 years ago.

Okay, I'm on the side of anyone who smashes up Tory HQ, and the hypocrisy of a bunch of cunts who are milking the benefits of their free education hiking up the cost to future generations for the same opportunity is obvious, but no one earning more than £41,000 pa is getting any sympathy on the grounds of financial hardship from me.

Yup. All that. And what Si said as well - too many of the pundits and politicos just see these kinds of issues through a London/SE-centric prism.

Personally it isn't just the debt that would change my decision now but the constant; "you're over qualified" rejections when you leave. When I did eventually get a decent job I'd left my degree off my CV - it was the only reason I got the subsequent interview.

In my experience getting the qualification is irrelevant, living away from home for the first time is worthwhile for many reasons  :), but is it worth the subsequent £10,000 - £25,000 in debt for the experience? I don't think so.

Fuck students and hardship and debt. Hardship= they cant go down the pub all day. Debt= they have been down the pub all day. Stick the fucking lot in the army.

I sure did. Most people I know did too.

Well, there you are, that's an education in itself :)

Should have known not to trust anything yellow

Spot on. Lib Dems? The only principles they understand is not to have any. Anyone with principles doesn't abstain on a three line whip (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3449054.ece).

I think most people in my situation didn't really understand the ins and outs (first major election in which we could vote) and were swayed by the pledge to abolish tuition fees. Which is where a lot of the anger, or at least mine, stems from.

[url width=300 height=420]http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg835/scaled.php?tn=0&server=835&filename=g03y.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640[/url]

 In my day when students were less in number, poor but not excessively lumbered with debt, we used to protest about things like the Vietnam war, nuclear proliferation, government policy in N Ireland, workers rights.

You couldn't beat a good occupation of some uni admin block....always plenty of drugs and birds. (Not that was why I was there you'll understand.)

There's always more street protest when Tories are in government.

So there you are then. You've now learned you can't trust a single word a politician says. Especially when they use words like "pledge" and "promise". Valuable lesson learned. That'll be 40 grand please, payable over the next 15-20 years

I'm in favour of all education being free, so it is open to everyone and due to the benefits of having a better educated population. But the problem is that there simply isn't any money left, Labour pissed most of it away and then the economic problems did for the rest meaning there has to be massive and widespread cuts.

The students think it shouldn't be education that gets cut.
Those on benefits think it shouldn't be benefits that get cut.
Unions think it shouldn't be the public bodies that employ their members that get cuts.
Commuters think it shouldn't be public transport that gets cut.
Doctors and nurses think it shouldn't be the NHS that gets cut.
And so on.

Everyone needs to stop fucking moaning and take their medicine until the country's finances are sorted out. Once we're not paying billions in interest every year perhaps there will be money to put back in to public services.

Anyone slagging off Clegg for going back on his word needs a reality check. Labour did exactly the same thing - every government does. They weren't lying, things change and sometimes they can't do everything they said they would.

Except for the seriously rich tax dodgers and the banks of course. That would never do. "We're all in this together" - well, some of us are

In much the same boat as Dave. I'm generally fairly politically neutral, but I surprisingly proud that my girlfriend ended up (fortunately outside and not involved in anything excessive) at Millbank today.

Cuts have to be made in this country, but trebling fees is not acceptable. Rise, sure, as long as it goes back when we can afford it, which it won't. Treble? fuck off.

Quite. Anyone who believes any of these "temporary emergency measures" will be reversed is, well, Nick Clegg probably

Come on Nemo, we all know it was her who threw the extinguisher off the roof :D

The cost of tax avoidance and tax evasion costs approx three quarters of the deficit, evasion is costly to deal with needs job creation in HMRC....avoidance upsets the rich, so the rest of us have to pay.

Other than anti-Iraq rally back in 2003 (which I did attend, principally mainly to see the Rev. Jesse Jackson), my student years were sadly void of significant rebellion/protests and this has always disappointed me.

The fat cat bankers should be helping fill the financial void they created firstly. Education in my opinion should not be made to plug gaps nor should young people of today be financially penalised.

This, and the govt. capping the number of skilled migrant workers has really pissed me off. This country is going to the dogs.

Dont know why they are capping the skilled migrant workers........seeing as they are returning to there homelands in droves anyway.

He's my MP. He's always been a cunt. He better not knock on my fucking door anytime soon.

I imagine he'll moving to Spain/exile with his missus after this :)

I doubt other developed countries are having a good time of it in the recession either. Those sorts of flippant remarks belong in the Daily Mail

Was my jovial comment compared to the Daily Mail?

(If so) Amazing! It's going on the C.V.

Oops I was meant to quote Luci. I'll find the Russell Howard clip when I get home. It's funny because its true.

Is there a protest coming up any time soon if you are angry the students don't have to pay upfront?

If people want to get a degree they should have to pay for it. If I want something I have to pay for it.

In any event everyone getting degrees devalues them which is why you end people applying for admin jobs who have degrees in everything from astro physics to thelogy. You then have people like me sorting out the cv's and bining all those with degrees because I know that they are not going to stick around long term and have only applied for the admib job to tided them over.

Further everyone I know who has a degree earns far less than I do, has masses of debt and does a job that has nothing in my eyes to do with their degree. Conculesion unless you do a career specifc degree ie law, medicance etc then I don't see the point!

Welcome back GFM!

Thanks :)

I've been lurking just not posting might change that...................

The skilled migrant workers I was referring to are the non EU educated individuals from the likes of the US/China/Japan who have a very positive impact on UK/International business.

The reason this population are being targeted is because our government haven't a clue on numbers of migrants coming from the EU.

Having been to an event recently with the UKBA... it's quite scary how they have failed to consider so many factors when implementing this ludicrous policy.

Seriously I hope he does, really, I'll cover for you

The best way to get people to pay for their degree is through taxes and taxes alone.

The main reason for someone getting a degree is to help them get a better job. If they get a better job they'll earn more money and pay more taxes. If they don't get a better job they won't earn more and won't pay more taxes. Plus a better educated population means more companies will be attracted to the UK, bringing investment and jobs. Everyone wins.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHG4lor8jTM&feature=related

7 mins in

Watching the news, it just looked like a bunch of great unwashed, anti-capitalist pricks to me, which is usually the case at such demos.

Haha, I was thinking of the exact same thing earlier Si.

"Why are you crying mate? Is it because you have no food, no money, no home?"
"It is none of those things, there are people in England who only get their wheelie bins collected once a fortnight!"

Section 60's anyone?

That's not right. For one they'd pay more tax and NI than a student on £15k. Also the SL repayments are not deducted before tax.

Yet when the EDL stand up for something they're called racist  :clap:

 that'll be because they are racists

I'm sure the students would be the first to admit to being Toryist.

Crispy fucking hell mate, stop talking about the EDL. Join the ginger equality brigade or something. You know what its like to be in that minority.

What the fuck does that have to do with anything?

Erm because they are??

Give it a rest ffs

I've tried to give you the benefit of the doubt...young, still working things out etc...but then clueless comments like that make it clear that you're confused and you just don't get it.

I know I've said this before, but most people will cut you some slack with all this because you're 16.  If you're still at it when you're 19 or 20, they won't.

Quite enjoyed watching Cameron on the news last night lecturing Chinese students on how Western democracy was the only way to guarantee stability and prosperity. While back home, our own students were rioting and trashing his party HQ in protests at cuts imposed because of a fucked economy :)

At least one group got their message home yesterday anyway:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11291616
And what more vivid demonstration of their point than Tory HQ being trashed in cuts-related disorder? The cynic in me might wonder why it took so long for the Met to get any kind of reinforcements there

Any student that has attacked a police officer, or caused criminal damage needs the book thrown at them.

If this was a football protest there would be no excuses...

Or possibly a loose-leaf ring binder

The NUS leaders are pathetic,they are blaming anarchists its making them look pathetic.They should back the violent reaction.Im going to Smash up Tomlinsons house later.

I was fucking about, hence the  :clap: .

And before you lot tell me to stop talking about it, prehaps all you fuckers should stop bumping and posting on the EDL thread.

Quite right.  In fact, I wouldn't mind seeing the thread locked.  Agree?

Yes.

I wish I'd gone really... but was far too hungover to get up and make the bus from bristol.

And while his party was giving even more powers away to the EU last night as well. He has some front talking about democracy

Apparently he's whinging about the lack of Police response, yeah well Cameron welcome to the world the rest of us live in.

Gotta laugh...

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/britain-backs-middle-class-children-who-want-the-moon-on-a-stick-201011103243/

No, because if that happens someone else will throw a hissy fit. It's not exactly offensive, just a lot of pointless debate. You don't have to read it.

I've not read all the thread but for me there can't be too strong a reaction to fees. This is not an isue that only affects student, but future generations (and their parents) too.

Talented students should not be priced out of University education. Its hard enough paying for housing and food while studying, let alone scandalous tuition fees.

Problem is that it was sustainable when only the academically gifted 3% went to university, but now its all inlclusive the simple fact is there isn't a way the government can afford to sustain the cash outlay.

Its all F'd up.

I totally agree. Labour's drive to get 50% of people going into university was well intentioned in that it sought to bring a great education to many more people. Unfortunately, they way it was done was to relabel pointless waste-of-time courses as degrees, as well as turning people away from things like apprenticeships which would have been much more beneficial to them.

when democracy fails this is what happens, wont be long before its nurses, teachers and even the police joining in. Fucking liars and cunts. fair play to the students. fight the greed of the the bankers not take away a persons right to education.

Big fire brigade march on parliament next week over pensions etc

are you going? get down millbank and fuck it up again :)

Hope we can rely on the fire brigade to start a better fire than that pathetic effort the students came up with :)

No i cant go, im on nights that day which is a bit of a fucker.

I think there will be a very large turnout though.

I wonder if barnard from off here is, hes in the job too

Send jose down.

If you want some background on it look at

www.fbu.org.uk

No doubt someone will give it the old 'striking cunts' or what not

striking cunts.

Or what not

Cunt :D

Mr Cameron will have his own little armed 24/7/365 police guard, for the rest of his natural.

24/7/52

On duty. Likely to be quite a big turnout, but can't see any trouble occurring.

That your birthday?

That kid pictured putting an office chair through a the window of the building?

Son of a government researcher and University professor. hawhaw...

Don't know what they teach these kids these days. Some of them you could see the expressions of joy/hatred on their faces as they kicked through the windows. Did no-one ever tell them to mask up when there's cameras about?

It's all kicking off again.

Fucking scum bags.

I dont get it. Most people are trying to get their point across in a peaceful way but the minority are ruining it.

They are not going to get their point across that way and are just bringing even more bad publicity on young people and our point gets lost in the process. The offenders have only gone with the intention of causing trouble and the bad publicity makes it less likley for the government to take action.

Wankers.

Throwing fire works of some sort on a open fire which could endager lifes isn't a peaceful protest.

As long as nobody gets hurt smashing up stuff is a legitimate form of protest.

Yes, i'm very well aware of that.

The point i'm trying to make that it is a minority and that they will get all the publicity yet the majority who have gone to peacefully protest will have their message lost due to the publicity that has been created by the minority.

I don't think it's quite that simple.  If 10,000 students turn up and protest peacefully against budget cuts, they will get a picture and a ¼ page article on page 4 of tomorrow's papers.  If 500 of those students also smash up a few branches of McDonald's (for example), the article becomes a full page article and moves to the front page.  The disorder is actually quite a clever way of getting the issue in the news.  Winds a lot of people up in the process, I'll grant you, but raises the profile of the protest no end.  Not condoning it...just an observation.

Whilst I agree with you Ardiles, it will give the cause some publicity however the government are less likley to act on the protests if they are violent and will stop future protests from hapening if they believe it will turn violent again, so it gets us nowhere in the end.

Recent history suggests otherwise: compare and contrast the effect of the hugely well attended but peaceful anti-war demos vs the smaller but much more violent anti-Poll Tax riots. Not condoning the violence then or now, but it would appear it does work sometimes whereas peaceful protest increasingly seems to get just brushed aside and ignored

[url width=303 height=436]http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs1150.snc4/149272_456575151138_538891138_5639255_7361367_n.jpg[/url]

It's amazing how the usually apathetic modern-day students can get worked up when policies directly affect them.

Is that not the same for near enough most of the population?

If someome offered me the chance to improve my career...and pay the training fee back at £7 a week at £21,000 a year i wouldn,t grumble...chance would be a fine thing.
Untill that situation arrives i will continue driving lorries....being offered a place at University is a privelidge i would have dreamed off....paying the fees after the course and when i am earning good money would have been a dream to far.

Students in the past protested about everything, not just when something was gonna cost them a few quid.

Grasping cunts.

Now why didnt i say that.

spot on leefer

That's assuming the poll tax riots actually achieved anything - which they didn't. No they didn't bring down Thatcher - the Europe issue did, and it was the disastrous poll ratings in Tory safe seats that ended the poll tax not the riots.

It's not that black & white though.  Most commentators agree that the poll tax riots were a certainly a contributing factor to her downfall (as was Europe).  The beginning of the end, maybe.

I totally agree

You would be paying off your student loan until retirement at those rates! and that is without considering the interest, which is compound

student finance allows loads of people who wouldn't otherwise be able to afford further education to go to uni, but its also burdening them, and many others, with debt for decades

Thats life...pay up front and there is no interest..
Fact is you are better off now than you were under labour for 12 years.....no protests then.
Just shows how selfish people are....voting for a party on just one principle..that being no fees,or so they thought.

Not black & white issue I agree but the riots' contribution was overrated. Mainly because riots usually end up galvanising the ruling classes unless you have the army and Police onside, and by John Major's admission what panicked the Tories the most was the effect of the poll tax on their own supporters.

Thatcher would have survived the riots on their own, but she couldn't survive the massive europe splits in her party.

Sorry if I'm being thick here, but who is better off and how?

People keep making it seem like those who don't go to Uni manage to stay debt free!!!!  Most people these days will be paying some sort of debt off until retirement, at least this is controlled debt and acts a trade off.

I think the states responsibility for eduction must be to provide a bsaic level for all to ensure the country has the basic skills to build on.  Anything beyond that has to be based on both apptitiude and desire - and paid for individually.  If it was upfront fees I could see the problem if you want all in society to be equally able to access education.

What I don't get with all this though, is that we expect people who have gone to work to fund any extra education but get worked up if people who go from one education establishment to another have to do the same?  I have to spend upwards of £4k per course to progress my own qualifications, which I can do myself or convince a company to sponsor it by showing what future benefit they can get from me.

universal education rights fought and bought by the working classes and sold out by a bunch of fucktard "midle class" wankers - I love a good riot - fair play to the students I'm happy to pay for them now - at least they got some bollocks.

Higher Education should not price people out, an I include deterring the gifted through the prospect of long term debt.  The country needs educated people but are unwilling and unable to pay for them.

Its not an option now though. Ever since Labour decided that my local nursery could gain independent university status and award degrees to any Forest Gump that turned up to study the history of basket weaving it became obvious that the Country couldn't sustain paying for it.

I don't see what is wrong with proper apprenticeships for those not academically able. They will not benefit from reading for a degree but will have learnt useful skills.

Unfortunately the current state of the nation means nobody will get a job anyway.

And that's the problem Batch. How can anyone expect the country to continue paying for students to study for pointless degrees that offer very little to society?

Yup.

I don't like it one little bit, but its a fact of life unless the current government undo what Labour did. And that ain't going to happen.

I still support the protest attempts to try though.

Fucking freeloaders,

Give the old bill free rein to crack a few skulls and use the old pepper spray and most of these unwashed cowardly cunts who have never done an honest days work in their lives will run a fucking mile.

Wankers

Hahaha, 'mon the stooodents!

Presumably with the coppers shouting "Ello, ello, ello, ello, what's all this then?" as they crack said heads?

Think that's about the only stereotype you missed out

I'm bored tbh with student protests, it's like they're the only people in the world with a grievance. If Labour had instead passed exactly the same findings of the report which itself had commissioned (http://hereview.independent.gov.uk/hereview/report/) there wouldn't be half this hoo haa. Yeah but 'cos it's Tories let's smash stuff up.

Where were the protests when Labour introduced fees in the first place? I'm with steptoe41, let's crack a few students' skulls.

It is indeed remarkable the extent to which Labour have got off more or less scot-free from a situation that is as much, if not more, their making than the coalition's. Doesn't make the overall thing right though

I demonstrated when the fees were first introduced actually. Mind you I got bored and went to the pub after an hour or two.

True Paul.....but they didn't pledge..ala promise no fees.
Both the Tories and Labour will be very happy...........no hung parliament next time up...thats a certainty.

Good on them for a bit of protest... All this "why didn't they do this and that when Labour did this and that..." It's a generation thing with students isn't it? My student years were void of major protests apart from the war in Iraq and a lecturer strike which potentially effected our degrees.

I marched in London because I believe the war was wrong, I didn't for one moment believe it would make one bit of difference. I went because it was an active gesture of disapproval.

If these kids are unhappy then good on them for showing it. I would imagine this is less about the Tories and more about the scores of people buying into Clegg as many of us did until we went to the Poll Station... I'm glad I decided against it in the end.

Also, I love student bashing, it always sounds so bitter and for what? Nothing :)

PGCE out the window now, no way i'll pay potentially £9k plus interest for that. So out goes teaching, in comes plan B (hint, there was/is no plan B. oh dear.)

Isn't it different for teaching?  I was going to do a PGCE last year and the fees were much less than a degree, and there were grants available even if you weren't poor...

Participated in a protest in Ciren today. Nothing compared to what happened in London though.

I was under the impression it wasn't coming in for teaching until 2012.  Ill be right tits off if thats not the case. 

They're pretty desperate for new teachers in certain areas and subjects....the government's White Paper on Education t'other week, wants to make teacher training in school, cutting out the academic stuff.  Also to recruit ex police and forces personnel, better suited to the needs of maintaining order.

Government want to cut down the number of PGCE taught teachers and want to increase the number of teachers qualified through schools - i.e hands on learning instead of university based. Apparently they are going to shove money into schools so they can employ trainees through them because 'it's better that way and it'll be worth more in the long term'. So, instead of paying the PGCE fee you'll get a training salary - similar to the GTP route the TDA currently offer.

edit: (what Reg said)

Kind of gives you a flavour of their concept of education doesn't it.

Do one, preferably back to your council house x

I presume trolling like that comes with a free rickety bridge?

I might have missed something, but I don't full understand why the debate (not the vote today, I understand that, but the wider debate) was limited to "how can we fund the current University intake levels"

Personally, two more important questions would be:

1) Do we really want 50% of people to go to University as the previously stated target was, and if so, do we want them doing some of the flowerier arts courses that are available?

2) If we are going to have that level of people going to University, why does it seem to be an even funding solution between courses? Personally, I'd happily subsidise people doing Maths and particularly pure Science courses, while buggers like me doing business will probably earn enough in their life time to be alright without excessive subsidy (and those doing 17th century pottery can pay back the lot, thanks)

Er, what?

True dat, leefer. And the Lib Dems have got fuck all chance of persuading anyone to vote for PR/AV in the referendum on reforming the voting system - why would anyone believe a single word that comes out of of their mouths after this? The Tories have done Clegg like a kipper, the naive little twat

They just had a bloke on BBC News 24 saying it was a "serious breach of royal protocol". I think it was a bit more than that, mate. Although I love the idea of there being a section in Debretts on the correct way of approaching royals arriving at the theatre. "On no account must one mob up and cover the royals' vehicle in white paint, have a go at their outriders and smash their windows. To do so would be a serious breach of royal protocol. Or if you must do so, at least have the dignity to curtsey first"

True, which is a shame as the AV election is something I'd actually be vaguely positive about. Sadly, if it's sold as a referendum on Nick Clegg then "Yes" will be lucky to make it into double figures.

I just don't understand why the Lib Dems would allow such a divisive issue to happen so soon on the legislative agenda, surely they'd spend the first year on issues where they agree with the bloody Tories at least?

And also, I'd love to have heard what Charles was saying when that happenned.

Erghh agh......ummm couldn't the blighters have used a darker shade of grey....darned daimler could do with a new coat of paint.

Surely "I do hope those are organic tomatoes" ?

Bunch of tossers.

Not the Tories, Clegg's done himself up like a kipper, the Lib Dems have always promised the world knowing they won't be in a position to ever deliver...then ooops they found themselves precisely in that position.

Anyone who followed the utter fucking farce that was the Lib Dem's policy on a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty knows that recent events are no surprise at all. They've always been two-faced duplicitous bastards.

Yes, I didn't put it very well. All the Tories have done is given him enough rope - he's been undone by his own naivety and desparation for any kind of sniff at power. The irony is that the Lib Dems were supposedly sold on the coalition with the promise of finally getting a crack at their beloved referendum on voting reform. Which thanks to the trade-offs they've had to make to get it, and as you say the duplicitousness they've shown in doing so, will sink without trace. As will they at the next set of by-elections, local elections and general elections. And of course any time the issue's raised for the next couple of decades, it will be "Well, we had a referendum on that and you got whupped" when in practice it will be a referendum on Clegg and their performance in the coalition. They've shot their own sacred cow for a generation at least.

These protestors are still scum in my eyes. I'm not a big fan of the royal family, but attacking them is just wrong.

At the end of the day, further education is an option. If you don't want to pay for it, then don't go. You don't have to pay anything until you earn over £21k pa. If you have a year out, or start a family then you don't have to pay anything. Just fucking grow up. The country is struggling financially, and things need to be done. It's affecting us all.

I do have a lot of sympathy for the Lib Dems.  They were faced with three choices in May...coalition with the Tories, coalition with Labour or continue to exist as a principled but permanently powerless campaigning organisation.

If they had opted for the latter, I don't think they would ever have been taken seriously again.  I don't buy the 'thirst for power' argument put forward by some.  Clegg and Cable just don't seem that way inclined to me.  But they did clearly want to do something other than shout from the sidelines...which means they had to choose who to get in to bed with.  And I can completely understand why the Labour option was not attractive to them.  Had they done so, they would have been savaged by the Tories, accused of propping up a discredited 4th term Labour party who were offering very little in the way of fresh ideas.  And we'd still have had Brown at the helm.

So coalition with the Tories it had to be.  Yes...they've been shafted there too.  But to my mind, they have at least now demonstrate that are prepared to get their hands dirty and move on from being a simple party of protest.  It does not look good for them in the short term, but people will move on after a while.  OK - they broke an election pledge.  I don't think that's a first in politics.

Totally agree with all those points.

Not quite all of us, though, is it? Not the bankers who caused the crash who'll be trousering £7bn in bonuses this Christmas. Not the wealthy tax-dodgers like Philip Green (adviser to the government) or Lord Ashcroft or Viscount Rothermere. And not the Camerons, Cleggs, or Osbournes who are all nicely cushioned from the recession by their inherited millions. Some of us are more "all in this together" than others

Paul, all as in us commoners. The hard workers of this country. The 'normal' folk.

No one should be made to feel excluded from education by prohibitively high costs.

If only the Government had considered alternative ways to fund education, like a more progressive taxation system.

For example, a business education tax levied on the top 4% of UK companies, as proposed by the University and Colleges Union, would require business to pay its fair share for the substantial benefits it receives from higher education.

Raising corporation tax to the G7 average would generate enough annually to abolish tuition fees, and increase UK investment in higher education to the average for other comparable countries, while leaving 96% of companies in the UK unaffected by the change, and still leaving the UK's main corporation tax below that of France, Japan and the US.

Unfortunately, such alternatives remain unexplored.

The 'you don't pay anything until you earn 21k' argument is weak in my opinion.

But didn't it used to be £14k?

Quite. But the "We're all in this together" quote is from Eton-educated, trust-fund-paid-for-his-every-need-when-he-was-at-uni-for-free-and-getting-a-grant, inherited-millions-himself-and-so-did-his-wife, smug-bastard Cameron. No you're fucking not. We are.

Actually fucking collecting the tax might help as well. I'm looking at you Vodafone, Arcadia Group, Marks and Sparks etc etc

Perhaps we should re-focus and re-direct the protestors in to finding the secret lair of the Bullingdon Club? Lynch them now, save our future  :bye:

It's not the point. Who leaves university wanting to earn less than 21k? Then you end up paying more when you do earn that.

If Cameron had said to the country he was raising taxes but not until you earn 21k everyone would be moaning.

Agreed. Sadly I know many people that currently are more than happy to remain under the 21k wage.

Less people earn over 21k than you would initially anticipate. According to the ONS this year, the median ("exact middle" earnings are as follows...
Men:     27976
Women: 22828

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_in_the_United_Kingdom
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=285

Good point Mex. The whole debate has been centred on "do students pay or does the government pay?" Too many people seem to think the individual graduate is the only person to benefit from their education. If people think big companies don't benefit from scientists, financial analysts, actuaries etc, and that the wider society doesn't benefit from people graduating as lawyers and (dare I say it) economists, then they are incredibly blinkered.

The thing is that when my generation had free higher education quite a small % actually went to university. Most people left school & got a job or an apprenticeship. I still don't undersatnd why we need to have 50% going on to university, particularly for degrees in meaningless subjects . What we need are more apprenticeships to give the young an opportunity to learn a trade.

On the funding issue, why should someone who goes to work have to pay taxes to fund someone who goes to uni to study. There is no such thing as free education & there never was. We all pay taxes, & this is just if you like an education income tax. Those who go to uni are either going to earn a lot more in the future as a result. why the hell shouldn't they pay for it. Why should a plumber be descriminated against because he wasn't able to or didn't want to become doctor. The big question for me is who benefits from a higher education. First & foremost it is the student, therefore they should pay for it. Second the country, which is why a scheme such as the one we have is put in place.

To me the fairest way would be to abolish all funding for higher education & give an education credit to all school leavers. This would be able to be used to help fund further education or an epprenticeship (hopefully encoraging more) & would be available on a long term basis for those who didn't use it immediately.
I think the point that many miss is that the "debt" is not like most loans. You don't pay nothing if you earn less than the 21k, & after a while I understand it is written off any way.

Finally on the politics of it all, in my view the Labour party are the worst offenders of the lot. They introduced the sceme in the first place, a surprising non socialist type policy. They then left this country broke, which came to a head because they had to bail out the banks. Even then they still carried on increasing spending (the recently announced cuts deep as they are, are only reducing the spending levels of the goverment to 2008 levels).

Finally, given that everybody I guess would want a better funded higher education system who if not the major beneficiaries would you have pay for it. ?
The common answer is the banks & fat cats but that is easy in theory but not in practise. Aren't some of todays graduates some of tomorrows fat cats any way ?

The 4% tax on the biggest companies is a good idea, but haven't we got enough companies moving else where as it is ?

Good morning Mr Pot, You are looking black says Mr Kettle

Are we in charge of them? Ace. I can see the Daily Mail headlines now "Sinister football forum masterminded student riots" with a 4-page expose of Si Pie, Whits and fB. Dazzza will escape unexposed as like all the best evil geniuses, he lets his boiler suited henchmen take the flak while he escapes in a helicopter.

Woaahh, don't call him black, he'll kick off again.

I was a student up until until 4 years ago and racked up some debt ~£13k, but 4 years later my student loan is pretty much gone and tbh it aint exactly been a burden to me as it was just an extra tax and as I never had it I never missed it. Once I have paid it back it'll feel like a pay rise .......
I went to Uni and had fun but I worked hard and have got my rewards from doing that, if it wasn't for all the freeloaders who just want to go there for the drink & sex there would be more money available for the people who actually have some ambition in life and aren't just going to avoid working for a few more years.

I don't mind a peaceful protest but the people who caused the trouble should be fucking embarrassed especially the ones who attacked the Royal's car as this will be all over the world today and is just gonna drag the image of this country further through the mud. Fuck it raise fee's even further now to pay for all the damage they have caused.

Hopefully these fees will stop the time wasters from going now and will eventually mean there is more money for students in few years, it's just unfortunate for the genuine students at this moment in time.

There you go:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11967098

You've left out the drugs....or don't students do that anymore?  There's more to life than job...job...retire... die.

Being young...ie <90 should be about having a good time....

Sounds a like plan to me. First thing I've understood within this whole thread.

Regards,

Rich Pullen BA (Hons)

Fucking hooligan

Graduation on Union Street was fun.

[url width=460 height=276]http://www.boxofficefootball.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/football-hooligans.jpg[/url]

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/12/london_tuition_fee_protest.html?camp=localsearch:on:twit:rtbutton

[url width=900 height=584]http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/londonprotest_12_10/l24_26268619.jpg[/url]

There's always on that holds the shield upside down.

Pic. 14 I'd have thought Frankie Boyle would be on the protesters side ?

Some cracking images on that site. Thanks Juddie;-)

Have to say that I'm right with those protesting against the increases. Anyone who demo's against a corrupt, bent, self-interested, self-appointed elite will always get my support - despite most students being lazy, opinionated cunts most of the time.

Shame more sheeple dont wake up and take to the streets like the students have done though, rather than just routinely accepting the shit doled out to them by the government, then dying. What sort of fucking life is that??

BTW, fair play to that big white horse who immediately gave his rider a good fucking shoeing when he got dragged off his back during the protests yesterday. Made my day that did!

BA? Pffft.

Regards,

axs BSc Hons (III)

Yawn.

I concur, hence the third degree.

Oh. Well, very good :)

I'm ashamed at what happened yesterday. There appear to have been lots of dickheads there just for a fight. The protests are fair enough (although I agree with some of the other posts that we put far too many people through further education when we need apprenticeships and people actually making stuff)

I'm no royalist, but attacking Charles was wrong. Violence, smashing stuff, spray painting and defacing memorials and stuff, chucking paint is wrong. It just costs the country more - Not just for repairs, but in foreign investment and tourism etc. Amazing how this stuff is potrayed overseas. From what I've seen in the past, the foreign media will most likely make it look as if there is violence on every street corner.

It's not just apprenticeships in my opinion, there are a lot of professional qualifications and pathways to get them but the majority of employers only offer these as part of graduate programs.

I'm shocked after seeing that photo of Charles and Camila's car being attacked. I can't believe the royals haven't learnt their lesson - wear your seatbelt!

So all the violence and vandalism is ok then?

I back the police all the way. Any protester that gets a whack deserves it. All these scumbags that are causing all this damage, aren't helping themselves. They are attacking the police, the royals, everything.

I hope hundreds of arrests are made.

Vandalism is fine, as long as it's directed. Violence not so much.

Why does any protester who gets a whack deserve it? There are plenty of people who weren't throwing things, or damaging anything, or attacking anyone, but were caught in the crowd

It would be the majority of people at the front that get a whack. All non-violent intent protestors would be at the back (common sense). The police would be telling them to get back. And then you'd get one or two thinking they are superman etc...

Don't get me wrong, violence isn't the key but at the end of the day the police need to control the thugs.

Just like football fans really. whack em all. if they're in the way they must be guilty.

I'd say the same whoever was protesting like the 'students' have. Some times needs must, if the old bill think it's getting out of hand then things need to be done. In the first instance it would be civil, and the coppers would only react if they were felt threatened by the situation.

Any decent person knows that the scenes from the other day were damn disgusting and bang out of order. Brings this country to shame.

I think it's the apathy, the 'fuck everyone else unless it affects me' attitude which puts this country to shame.

Got to disagree with you on this Ben.
Most of those idiots protesting have never had it so good....all pissed up,all got mobile phones costing a month what there education would cost a month.
Fact is nothing in life is free these days....get used to it.
Why should the likes of me working 50 hours per week have my taxes go towards there education...i had to pay nearly two grand for my lorry training/licence....should i go and protest,wouldn't put myself down to that level.
Personally i would prefer to pay for my own education...not get it free from somebody else..call me old fashioned.
As for the scenes at the memorial etc...in an instance they have isolated themselfs from any little sympathy they did have..especially from the older generation.

On a selfish note i am glad the Libs have taken this stance...it means we wont be seeing this joke of a party fuck around in the voting system for many years ahead...if ever.

It's easy to say that. But I recently graduated with debts over £25k, and under the new system I'd have had debts of around £43k. And as long as I get a decent job at some point then obviously I'm going to have to pay it back.

And then what about people who go through four, five, six or seven year courses to become lawyers, doctors or vets? The country needs people with these sorts of qualifications.

As for comments various people have made about students having loads of money and not knowing what to do with it, I'm sure that's true in some cases, but for me I struggled to even cover my rent with my loan in London.

I had to work throughout my university years and it didn't bother me one bit.

Without doubt students are generally lumped into the same old stereotype. This also doesn't bother me because I loved university, I love learning and enjoyed having a great time in my early 20's.

I pay taxes, I get on with it. If I'm giving the opportunity for someone to become a doctor and save my life one day then it's money well spent!

Not necessarily. Perhaps if it had been two static fronts, but it wasn't the other day. A lot of the injuries were sustained when the police horses charged into the crowd, which parts the crowd down the middle and pushes some of those at the front to the sides. So you might be safely in the middle (as for much of the time there was no "back" in that there were clusters of protesters and coppers in front and behind each other), trying to stay away from the front line bits and then the coppers come charging down the middle of it and suddenly you're in "the front line". Some of those who got injured probably did so when attacking coppers and so probably did "deserve a whack" (or at least put themselves in a position where they had to expect they'd get one) but a lot were just in the wrong place trying to stay out of trouble or at least not directly causing it. That's the problem with fluid volatile situations like that, there isn't really a safe area. And no, I'm not having a go at the coppers - they were frequently under attack from several sides and faced with large hostile crowds. One of the tactics they're going to use to deal with that is to try to break the crowd up and inevitably some of the force used will be a little indiscriminate and people will get hurt. Some of them will probably "deserve it", many won't.

Which ever way you look at it there is no easy answer....personally i think the police have been fairly tolerant given the situation...thats not to say you will get a few police abusing there powers.
I do feel sorry for the protesters who genuinly wanted to march on London and VOICE there disaproval...and have been tarnished by fringe loony groups.

Not defending any actions but the police have a difficult job when faced with the levels of violent protest seen recently. It's easy for people to criticise their actions from afar, but what would we do if faced with hundreds of unruly cunts, hellbent on chaos?

Speaking personally, I'd run away :)

Me too.

We could skip away, hand in hand

Singing..bring me sunshine

If I were a police man there and saw you two hand in hand skipping i'd fucking go for you. In fact, I'd get my truncheon out....

Steady ..... we're in "Dutch art film" territory here.

More importantly...Leefer joke territory.

That's not a good place to be.

 :gay:

Nick Clegg: Use my arsehole as a cunt

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mv1OigmYcvQ&has_verified=1

Ol' Kunt & The Gang are gathering some momentum.

That's the individuals decision though isn't it surely? You decided to go to uni you knew it was a struggle to get buy but still did it you knew you would leave and be in debt but still decided to do it.

End of the day if you want to better yourself and go to uni fucking fair  play to you and i take my hat off to anyone who does it ythey have my respect but if they want a better life better jobs and better prospects than anyone else then they should have to pay whatever it's going to cost to get it.

I am a qualified Mortgage advisor now and paid alot of money to do that i didn't get no help but realised to do that i had to pay what i had to pay.

I presume then that as a country we don't want teachers or nurses?

Um no as you quoted and as it say's they should have to pay for it.

Yeah, if those fuckers want to heal the sick and educate our children for crap wages they should fucking pay for it.

And midwives. Greedy fuckers

I might need some advice soon...

So, how is it that the kids getting busted for violence and rioting and getting their pictures in the paper are all privately educated with extremely wealthy parents?

Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of this?

I love the way when you disagree you go all grown up. To be honest Paul i'm not going to get into a big debate about it for you to get your high horse out the attic as per usual.

We have different opinions on it. That's fine.

Eh?

I think DRS is referring to the way you sometimes go 'All Guardian reading, sandal wearing, lentil eating' Paul, although I may be wrong.

Didn't think I did tbh. Is it only sandal wearers who think we should have teachers and nurses then?

Don't involve me in this discussion! Fucking hell, you try and help some people......

Police: "Protesters have failed to stick to the agreed route."

To be fair, so have the Lib Dems

Yeah but at least the protesters were honest in their aim of not sticking to agreed route

Sorry, wasn't having a pop. I'm genuinely confused. But then I often am.

agreed

I say bring on the water cannons! If football hooligans have to face the wrath of them, then so should the 'stoodents'.

Don't you work in a school? Should you not be a teeny bit concerned over these cuts?

I'm support staff. I've had two colleagues leave and not replaced.

Maybe that's where my anger has come from...

Paul - I personally think if you want to go and enjoy Uni/get a degree then as an individual you should pay for that privilege - I know I am going to be shot down in flames a little for that but I honestly believe that...

All this talk about "helping the country" - "the country benefits" is true to a degree - but lets be honest the vast majority of people are doing it to better their individual chances of more money over their career....

In that respect it seems right and proper to contribute towards that

It also seems unfair to me that people leaving school and getting jobs (builders, plumbers etc) should be funding someone who wants to spend another 3 years studying - I guess that's the "tory" in me coming out....

As for your comments on midwives etc... - I just looked it up.  A midwife in a UK hospital emplyed by the NHS has a salary band of between £25,500 and £34,000 !!

That doesn't seem like peanuts to me !

Well football "hooligans"* don't - at least not yet - water cannon have never been used in mainland Britain.

* Quotes are because in a public order context the term "football hooligan" usually means "anyone connected to football fans that has been arrested/hit by the police". If they do start using water cannon on whoever they deem to be hooligans, we're all quite likely to get a soaking

I'm sorry if I'm being overly simplistic but aren't we in a recession? and haven't we got a huge fucking deficit? So doesn't that mean the Country's basically skint?

People don't want to pay more taxes, so where is all the money going to come from to continue the level of public spending we have seen over the last 10 years? There are cuts going on everywhere, not just in education.

Ever get the feeling that this thread is going round in spectacular circles?

I know I'm dizzy.

http://thetownend.com/index.php/topic,41550.0.html

£25-34k may not be peanuts but it's hardly raking it in, is it? Bearing in mind that's £34k top whack (ie after 20 years or whatever). I was just trying to provide some counter to the idea that everyone going to uni would be automatically earning shitloads after a few years of getting their degrees and that it was solely to their own benefit. Quite a lot don't and they're in occupations we need people to want to work in, more as a vocation than because they're going to get paid shitloads because they're not.

Don't they all?

Make those rich cunts at the top pay the tax they should pay, and not avoid it through a series of 'interesting' schemes and declarations.  The fucking MPs can start too.  Then the government can come to rest of us, those that pay our taxes as we should and ask us for more.

Well now you're just being silly. (As if those at the top would ever pay what they should!)

Get the watercannon on the rich aswell.

We are in a recession, correct. However, if you think about the tuition fee changes (not the proposals as a whole, which I can't honestly say I'd know enough about to judge) then it becomes clear that in the short term this will cost the country more- certainly for 5-6 years.

The system will obviously involve much higher loans, which the Government pays, but also involves increased bursaries for the poorest. So the Government has more going out up front, which will no doubt be made up by the increased repayments from these students but for obvious reasons, the incoming students taking these are not going to earning over the 21k limit for at least 4 years, probably closer to 6 on average I'd suspect.

Sure, it'll probably cost the country less eventually, but this cannot be sold as a short term measure to protect against the recession.

I'd suggest it is a short term measure in terms of producing future minds.

Trouble is Paul that is not the whole story.  A Senior Midwife will earn up to £40k, and if they work their way to consultant midwife (unlikely perhaps ??) then they can earn up to £67k

I would suggest that is exactly why people would want to go to Uni - to advance themselves and to eventually earn more.

Maybe I'm wrong but we are in the shit and there is nothing we can do about it apart from all tightening our belts - this includes contributing more if necessary.......

If you dont think you can earn a good...better wage than normal...dont go to University...simple solution.
If you think you can or will earn a better than average wage...at least be prepared to pay for the training/tuition that will help you earn it..like all the lower earners who have to dig deep and dont get any help...you know Plumbers,Brickies.Scaffolders Taxi drivers etc....in the words of a furry rodent...SIMPLES!

Everything you said leefer is null and void because you ended your statement with 'SIMPLES'.

[url width=552 height=384]http://www.l402audio.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/shame-on-you.jpg[/url]

Fair enough :D....though i strongly disagree that the £30 EMA has been taken away from family's over £21,000......one parent earning family's on this or slightly more will be hard hit.

That was kind of the point I was making actually. That many people will do precisely this. And we kind of need them to become teachers, nurses (not midwives obviously as it turns out they're proper fat cats :) ) etc.

To be honest Paul its blatantly obvious that the majority of the protesting students have been caught up with idiots who have other agenda's.
Why not protest outside the lib dems offices...it was them who stirred all this up ::)

Ha ha - thing is Paul that Nurses are basically on the same pay grades as Midwives - so they are fat cats too :)

Teachers pay starts at £21k and rises up to £32k - and this is without becoming head, deputy, head of house etc......

All in all for working half a year it seems bloody loads :)

Pay and stop moaning !!

The Government should be chuffed I did go - because I'm paying them a guaranteed few grand extra a year in tax, NI contributions and of course student loan repayments. In ten years time I would have paid what I loaned back at least four fold. Over my lifetime the extras they'll deduct from my salary will be massive and far more useful than pumping what I loaned into the public sector as a one off cost.

As others have said though, the amount of people who do does not lend itself to excellence and therein lies the problem. I'm convinced there is more to this than just grabbing short-term money, the Tories are probably trying to discourage people from going without a clearer career path who will still weigh up the costs and land in favour of going to get a better paid job.

Good point. And, as I keep saying, how come Labour are getting off so lightly? They brought the things in in the first place. And swamped the unis with students who probably shouldn't be there

If you're seriously trying to argue nurses are coining it in, well, just blimey.

Incidentally, I assume by the same logic you also think 6th formers should pay for their education via loans as well?

I'm not a student, I'm not particularly fond of student types and don't want to defend them. But, the value of a degree today is a mere fraction of its worth say 10 years ago.

Has anybody (without a degree) tried looking a job lately? So many employers are asking for a degree as the most basic of requirements for even the simplest roles. Seems like if you haven't got a degree these days you're only fit to scrub toilets and flip burgers... well maybe not to that extent, but you get the picture.

Add to that the massive hike in fees and I'd be pretty miffed too.

Not really understanding your logic Paul ?

A nurse follows exactly the same pay scale as a Midwife - they start on £21k and can go up a lot....

No, 6th form should be free.  After all the plumbers and electricians of this world will also need some time at college when they leave school. So as they are all in together us oldies can pay for them until they are 18 (i.e. left school for 2 years).  After that it becomes a pure choice thing for me - therefore they should pay for the privilege.....

How the fuck would you know? Are you a recruitment consultant?

Your first point is completely contradictory to your second one. Make your mind up.

It's a bit of a contradiction to say plumbers and electricians need free education when they earn more than most people.

Most of the jobs I were looking at asked for more specific qualifications (i.e. MCSE/CCNA etc) rather than a degree.

How the fuck is that contradictory?

And it doesn't take a genius (discounting you obviously, Dave) to realise a degree isn't worth as much these days.

You said a degree's not worth much... but you can't get a look in anywhere without one. So yes, that's quite the contradiction.

I don't really care what you think tbh Sam, you're clearly pretty one-eyed in your view towards students and Uni etc, each to their own but it doesn't half make you sound bitter.

Give me 5 years and I'll give you a job, don't worry.

Not at all Si - I said ALL kids should get the first 2 years after they leave school for free - regardless of whether they want to become Plumbers, Sparks, Teachers, Nurses or Brain Surgeons !

Aww, is ickle David a little upset that I said bad things about you and your student chums? Diddums.

I said a degree is not worth as much. I'm generalising, but I'm pretty sure that 10 years ago a degree in business or something similar would've got you a fairly nice job in a junior management position or something similar. Take that same degree today and you're looking at trainee pencil pushing.

Bit of a generalisation Sam (although this whole thread is full of little else), I can see where you're coming from but all degrees are not exactly equal, even in the same subject. Graduate from a top Uni and you're still pretty much set, but a Swimming Pool, less so.

What's the difference with degrees? Not arguing, I'm just struggling to see the point other than what you're happy to fund as a tax payer. Though like my prior post puts it, I'm paying back far more than took from the Government and I wouldn't consider my salary to be near the top of the pay scale for someone who got their degree 4 years ago.

If you think that a salary scale of £21k to £32k makes you a "fat cat" you're seriously out of touch. The average salary at the beginning of the year was about £28k, and is now about £26k. So most of the people on that scale will earn an average salary.

If you take as much care writing CV's as you do on here it's no fucking surprise you struggled.

What's wrong there? He's using the present subjunctive were.

I'm devastated tbh, I dote on your every word x

No, I were just careless.

Bad grammar costs lives.

It's a choice at 16. Plumbers/electricians etc are choosing to stay in education/training so they can gain a skill and eventually earn considerably more than those feather-bedded nurses. To use your own standards, why should I pay for that? And why should Crispy and his fellow trolley-pushers who've chosen to get stuck straight into work instead of faffing about for a further two years subsidise these workshy future fatcats?

This is obviously where it is subjective....

All I said was my personal opinion is that we should have the same rules for all - first 2 years regardless what you do at "college" after leaving school should be free - as I said my opinion.

After that if you want more qualifications then pay towards it - it really is as simple as that for me.

I don't think that is too controversial - it's just my opinion

I think all education should be free up to and including A level standard (or equivalent). 

Lumps - I don't think they are Fat Cats at all !!  I was "quoting" Paul as it was actually him who made that statement, not me !!

I was taking the piss!

Fair enough, SS, it's a coherent opinion and well set out. Guess we just draw the line differently as to where the benefit to society stops and becomes more benefit to individual. Although I keep coming back to the point made by I think pretty much everyone in this thread that it might all be a bit less of a debate if Blair hadn't stuffed the universities with his "everyone should have a degree, no matter how pointless" approach as the whole thing would be a lot more affordable.

Totally agree Paul - Blair has an awful lot to answer for - not just fucking up the education system :)

I am finding myself getting more conservative as I get older - I'm not sure it's a good thing but my tolerance levels have almost gone altogether :)

I'm finding the same with my bladder :)

My tolerance levels are also taking a bit of a hammering.  (Bladder's OK for now though, thankfully.)  Is a normal thing...youthful idealism starting to drain away when you're confronted with the realities of middle age?  I think I'm still more liberal than most, but I've also noticed a shift.  Give it 10 years and we'll all be reading the Daily Mail, discussing house prices and noting how that Ironside fella was misunderstood all along.  It's a dark, distopian vision of the future, that's for sure.

Tell me about it !

Bladder's been on the way out for years to be honest - but I am finding myself wanting to have people hung drawn and quartered for some things !

I find the reverse....today's youth are more or less devoid of any political thought...other than the occasional Daily Mail knee jerk.

Whereas all the most committed lefties I know are well into middle age...

According to the stats, it's erectile dysfunction you need to worry about

Totally agree Paul.

Personally I won't let anyone without a degree cut my hair shine my head.

People without degrees have been proven to be genetically inferior.

Think that's dungarees isn't it?

Crocodile Dungaree ?

Funnily enough, I'm going in the opposite direction.  Quite happy about it to be honest.  I was politicised as a kid by Thatcher, going through her education system, and my mum working in her NHS, enough to put you off voting Tory for life (which it has done).  The thing is, to echo pauld's point, Labour started this mess and should also be held to account.

It really fucks me off the way all of a sudden, because working class kids are going to university, we suddenly have a load of arguments about the utility of the degree courses that students are taking, and everyone has swallowed the argument that the individual should "make a contribution" to the cost of their education.
Why did nobody give a fuck about this 30 years ago, when it was largely the kids of the upper and middle classes whose educations our taxes were paying for? Those upper class twits haven't only just started taking their "history of art" degrees you know.
I could more easily swallow the argument that it's "fair" for those that benefit from higher education to pay something towards it, if that argument wasn't being propogated largely by the children of millionaires, all of whom went to univeristy for free, with the benefit of full maintenance grants, most after leaving public schools that cost tens of thousands a year to attend.
If these people genuinely believed it was fair for everyone that went to university to pay something for their education, then what the fuck are they planning to pay?

And if I hear one more Tory cunt trot out that tired old line about some cleaning lady paying their taxes to pay for a student to go to university for three years I will fucking chin someone! If some cleaning lady's taxes are paying for that, then it's your fault as a government for having a woefully unprogressive tax regime you fucker!

Perhaps if Labour had managed to find a fucking backbone and introduced the 50% tax rate when it came to power rather than as a last desperate measure when the shit hit the wall we could have avoided top up fees altogether.

And, whilst I'm on the subject of that, if anyone was listening to Radio 4 on Sunday night, (I think), and heard the incredibly balanced debate around the 50% rate that was broadcast, could they explain to me what the fuck the panelists were talking about when thay described the "incredible disincentive" such a rate would be to high paid professionals? How does that work then? You get offered a new job that pays £10K more and it takes you over £150k. Do you turn it down because the income over £150k would be taxed more highly? I don't think so!

As someone whose recently got a new job that took me into the 40% tax band (a much higher jump than the 40% to 50%) I didn't even fucking consider it. And I've never met anyone that has!

Total bollocks the whole argument.

30 years ago I was 5, so my interest in politics was somewhat limited.  As someone who would be classified as working class (my dad was a caretaker of a school), I would be fine with paying towards any education beyond A Level, on a PAYE basis following the course.  As it is, I hit the middle ground and did a HND when I was 18, paid for myself to attend a year of ACCA study and exams, then went and got a full time job after woking part time through my HND and ACCA courses.  I seriously don't see the fuss and don't give a shit what happened 30 years ago in relation to what we should or shouldn't do now.  Kids went into the machinery less than 100 years ago.

It's not a fucking job interview Rob ;)

I'm definitely working class, & went to a polytechnic. Yes it was free, & I didn't really appreciate the opportunity. Then most if not all were working class.

I fail to see actaully what "class" has to do with it. Nobody pays up front, nobody has to repay until earning over £21 k & it's written off after 30 years.

And yes, I think it's a very valid arguement about the cleaning lady. I have a daughter working as an apprentice on £95 per week, struggling financially & doing extra work in the evenings to make ends meet. She is below the new tax threshold, but will in 4 months time get a pay rise upto the minimum wage. Then she will be paying tax. I want to know why students expect her to subsidise their education which will benefit them. Some will go on to earn mega bucks & those who don't will end up paying little if anything.
As for the 50% tax band I have no real problem with that, & I also don't have a problem with them not getting child benefit either !
What makes me mad is that governments spend money & some claim it's a good thing. In my view goverment spending is extremely wasteful. ( eg.How many people are taxed,  then claim it back in tax credits).
 Many of those who complain when that spending is cut are those that are not contributing but recieving. This was very evident when the poll tax was introduced which was essentially a lot fairer than the council tax system.

 The welfare state is in my view meant to be a safety net, not a meal ticket.

Why should anyone subsidize anyone else? Why should someone pay for my healthcare or vice versa? Why should I pay for someone else's pension? It's how our system works, everyone is entitled to the same thing when they need it.

The way I see it, the likes of a pension, healthcare & basic secondary education is something that all of us need. A university education is not needed by all & indeed not everyone is going to qualify for  it. 
I would also disqualify things like cosmetic surgery & sex cahnge operations from the NHS

That's a shame, I reckon you'd make a hot woman with enlargements :)

I was going to reply to this on a rational point by point basis, but then I got to the bit about the poll tax and realised I'd be wasting my fucking time.

So, you think a progressive tax system for central government taxation is a good thing, as you support the 50% rate, but you think there should be a flat rate tax for local government taxation?

Isn't that a bit confused?

I wonder how many students won't pay off their loans because they're either under the threshold or don't manage it before it's written off. That's also going to cost the tax payer.

No.

I think he was hoping for a more detailed exposition of what on the face of it are two contrary positions. I just want to see you in a dress