Goverment 1 - 0 Students

[aidanjt]

Hm pocket hypocrisy meter is tingling.

Pocket you're confused meter, more like.

I mean they could have left it worse!

Oh, you're right, of course, although, the only way they could have mismanaged any further, is if they started WWIII against the USSR and China.

We're not speaking german

Thanks to their parents, not them.

the dail mail is only published once a day

One day too many. And the baby boomers are the biggest readers of said neo-con drivel.

We have been born into debt. But we have no birth given right to anything.

Wrong. Humans have quite a number of rights.

We've been given free food, housing etc from our parents.

Free? Hardly. Just money and effort to be repaid at a later date.

But no, thats not enough is it? You should have more, you MUST be entitled to more.

In what part of your thought process, did 'I should have the same opportunity they got', become 'I want more than they got! I'm entitled damnit!'?

And obviously that should be paid for by someone other than you, because you know, your not a selfish prick are you, so obviously you don't have to pay, because its only the selfish pricks who should have to pay.

Again, here's where the baby boomer hypocracy comes in, that has clearly escaped you entirely (I'm wondering if you're one, actually), they got all it all from the public purse, paid for by their parents, when it came time for their generation to pay for the future of my generation, they threw us under a bus, plundered everything they could for their own personal profit, left the finances a complete disaster, and left us having to clean up their mess, AND pay for their retirement.

Again. Screw that! Free-riding selfish pricks.

[usxhe190]

I think we can't really blame previous generation. Economic cycles happen and go (whether it is famine, povety, war, prosperity) and people are just landed into the part of the economic cycle based on the time you are born unfortunately.

Unless what you are saying is that we should increase taxes generally and allocate the increases to the universities rather than doing a user pay system?

Unless I am wrong, I don't think these recommendations are because of the credit crisis but more on how to go to fund the education system properly.

[aidanjt]

Economic cycles are a result of (mis)management.

[SeriousSam]

To all those bemoaning the fact that these changes are unfair to the to current generation I would point out that the very things they are after WILL put future generations in the position of having to pay off even more debt... is that fair? The simple fact of the matter is that unless we all get of our collective behinds and start doing something it is going to get worse financially. That's before we get into the far greater issues of dwindling resources, overpopulation, loss of natural land etc.

I could go on but as the attitude of some people posting here makes me question whether we should actually survive as a species, I'll keep my mouth shut before posting anything "offensive".

[TheAnimus]

It might be technically possible, but it doesn't really work out like that, does it. The Scottish government had their budget cut by £1bn this year.

And how much have tax return projections in England or Scotland fallen by....

For many people it depends which side of the line they sit as to who has greater say in what. However it has to be accepted that it could happen. So that means it really shouldn't be allowed too happen.

[TheAnimus]

Again, here's where the baby boomer hypocracy comes in, that has clearly escaped you entirely (I'm wondering if you're one, actually), they got all it all from the public purse, paid for by their parents, when it came time for their generation to pay for the future of my generation, they threw us under a bus, plundered everything they could for their own personal profit, left the finances a complete disaster, and left us having to clean up their mess, AND pay for their retirement.

Again. Screw that! Free-riding selfish pricks.

Right, what about the generation before them? Or the one before them?

The baby boomers also inherited a mass of debt in the UK as economically speaking we didn't really win the war.

Ok, they rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbishrubbished more away, demanded to be paid stupid amounts of money to dig coal and build cars no one would buy etc.

But FAR FEWER of them went to uni. As I said before if you looked at the cost of funding a degree by the general taxation its probably the same, just spread out between 5 times as many people.

So do we just radically decrease the number going to uni, or make them pay a little bit directly towards it. Remember its not as if the BBers weren't taxed at all, they have been.

And its very selfish to critise them for the amount of debt they are leaving us, when the only option is for someone else to pay it (and make it worse). This is the epitomy of selfishness.

[planet436]

I wouldn't be that opposed to the tuition fee rise apart from the fact that is not going to increase the quality of universities, just move the cost from the taxpayer to almost entirely the student, with local universities who aren't internationally recognised under severe risk of folding. Tuition fee rises as a means to increase the quality of our FE system makes good sense and is being pursued by the US and Germany for example.

Another potential problem is that surely a notion of a 'good' degree is that there are many degrees which aren't. When you are paying up to £27k for a degree are you going to accept anything less than a 2.1 whether you deserve it or not? There will be extreme pressure on universities to give students what they want, and weaken academic integrity of their degree grading system as a result.

Am waiting for the first court case involving a student suing a professor for a badly graded essay.

[mcmiller]

Hm pocket hypocrisy meter is tingling.

I mean they could have left it worse! We're not speaking german, the dail mail is only published once a day, and Shorditch keeps most of the pricks out of the rest of London. We have been born into debt. But we have no birth given right to anything. We've been given free food, housing etc from our parents.

But no, thats not enough is it? You should have more, you MUST be entitled to more.

And obviously that should be paid for by someone other than you, because you know, your not a selfish prick are you, so obviously you don't have to pay, because its only the selfish pricks who should have to pay.

What is unfair about these proposals? More people are going to uni than before by a large magnitude, the same pot of grant money probably wouldn't even cover a fraction of the course costs.

It will only cost people money once they are erning £21k, so ultimately its a free ride until you can start paying money back. Its fairer than a graduate tax, because why the hell should I pay for lots of people to study something like Media just because I studied a science subject which industry is chronically short off!

Its even less fair to tax everyone via income tax because what about those who never went to uni!

The problem with these proposals are that top rate institutes will start charging more than bottom rate ones which even thou all payment is deffered is the first step to making it not a metirocratic.

But no, the children are rioting because they might have to pay more themselves, nuts to the slow march to taking ability out of the equation, it might cost me more. Selfish little sh!ts.

arent you being selfish because you dont want to pay?

How old are you and did you pay for uni?

And I presume that you use the London Underground and we all know that it is funded by the government. Why should I or anyone else that doesn't live in London contribute to towards something that I barely use? perhaps Londoners should pick up the cost a lot more...

[samcross]

arent you being selfish because you dont want to pay?

How old are you and did you pay for uni?

I think the point he was making is that he doesn't want to fund some idiot to go to a **** university to study a **** degree?

[mcmiller]

I think the point he was making is that he doesn't want to fund some idiot to go to a **** university to study a **** degree?

whats the definition of a **** degree? You mean like all the people who have been a top 10 school get pressured into uni and then drop out half way through doing a science or engineering degree? Or someone who genuinely wants to go into marketing so they decide to do a media studies degrees...

Seems to me that both arguments aren't as clear cut as animus tries to make it out to be...

[jim]

Labelling is certainly far too easy, I'll agree with you on that point.

[cleaverlch]

whats the definition of a **** degree?

Mickey Mouse degree. Apparently psychology, arts and other things that people don't look highly upon fall into that category.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The problem is that many jobs which did not require a degree before in the last twenty years seem to need one now. At least with something like biochemistry or maths you would need to get a degree in most cases even forty years ago if you want to get a job in such fields.

If this is the case perhaps companies should foot some of this unncessary extra burden on the country.

It already happens in biosciences where bio-tech companies fund many labs and provide post-graduate studentships and graduate bursaries.

The other alternative is to drop the need for a degree for many jobs and provide more in-job training.

[jim]

The problem is that many jobs which did not require a degree before in the last twenty years seem to need one now. At least with something like biochemistry or maths you would need to get a degree in most cases even forty years ago if you want to get a job in such fields.

On the flipside, if 50% of people are meant to have degrees these days, then what does it say about the 50% who don't? You can see why a lot of employers want degrees, where 30 years ago they wouldn't have done.

[samcross]

whats the definition of a **** degree? You mean like all the people who have been a top 10 school get pressured into uni and then drop out half way through doing a science or engineering degree? Or someone who genuinely wants to go into marketing so they decide to do a media studies degrees...

Seems to me that both arguments aren't as clear cut as animus tries to make it out to be...

I too am getting a bit tired of media degrees being a scapegoat for all the poor degree choices out there, but believe me there are plenty of stupid degrees out there. Just go on the website of any ex-polytechnic.

But **** degrees aside, why should TA be funding anyone else's degree through a graduate tax when there is nothing majorly wrong with the current system?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

On the flipside, if 50% of people are meant to have degrees these days, then what does it say about the 50% who don't? You can see why a lot of employers want degrees, where 30 years ago they wouldn't have done.

The whole point is that companies and institutions wanted such qualifications in the first place so this is why all these degrees sprung up.

It is good for them as they shift more of the cost training onto the individuals rather than them having to do it themselves.