Sorry Tyron, but saying that a great big massive 27K debt millstone around my neck for the rest of my life is nothing to worry about because you'll be earning too little to ever have to pay it back, is absolute bollocks quite frankly.

Of course it's nothing to worry about. It's not exactly much of a millstone if you don't have to carry it - and if you do earn enough to be repaying it, it makes little difference whether you're on 3k or 9k if you're in the situation where the basic act of repayment is apparently a millstone (which it isn't exactly. I'm earning less than the median salary at the moment, and I can't say £20 a month is much of a struggle). There are no additional consequences for not repaying it - it isn't like bankruptcy where it's a black mark on your record or where your assets are pulverised to try and get repayment, the debt is just written off.

 

Nobody will ever deny you a mortgage or a loan on the basis of having a student loan which you might be paying £100 a month towards if you're at the type of salary (~£30k) where you could consider getting a mortgage - which brings me back to the point where if you're well off enough to be at the stage where that could ever potentially be a worry, I'm not really sure why so many left-wing activists think you should apparently be the priority in society for what would effectively be a tax cut.

 

This is all before getting to the point that the above is for the £3k repayment system and that it's even less for the £9k lot who don't have to repay until they're at £21k+...as it goes, I'd have much rather had a more generous maintenance and bursary scheme at university than reduced fees. It says it all that it isn't proper debt in the bank loan sense of the word in that I know absolutely nobody who lays awake at night shitting themselves about how they're going to repay their tuition loan (in contrast to the many students I knew who laid awake at night shitting themselves about how they'd be able to afford to live until the next maintenance loan installment, myself included). It isn't a debt with any consequences. That has pretty bad ramifications for government funding policy, but none for less well-off students.

Oooo I never knew that unless you earned more than £21k post 2012 you didn't have to start paying back your loan?? Reality is really, that unless you get a Graduate Scheme or live in South East London, most graduates are unlikely to be earning that figure post University.

 

I am certainly over-paying my Student Loan at the moment - for the only reason that everyone likes to take my money!

Oooo I never knew that unless you earned more than £21k post 2012 you didn't have to start paying back your loan?? Reality is really, that unless you get a Graduate Scheme or live in South East London, most graduates are unlikely to be earning that figure post University.

 

I am certainly over-paying my Student Loan at the moment - for the only reason that everyone likes to take my money!

A lot probably will earn it post-university, it just might take them a couple of years before they start repaying.

Of course it's nothing to worry about. It's not exactly much of a millstone if you don't have to carry it - and if you do earn enough to be repaying it, it makes little difference whether you're on 3k or 9k if you're in the situation where the basic act of repayment is apparently a millstone (which it isn't exactly. I'm earning less than the median salary at the moment, and I can't say £20 a month is much of a struggle). There are no additional consequences for not repaying it - it isn't like bankruptcy where it's a black mark on your record or where your assets are pulverised to try and get repayment, the debt is just written off.

 

Nobody will ever deny you a mortgage or a loan on the basis of having a student loan which you might be paying £100 a month towards if you're at the type of salary (~£30k) where you could consider getting a mortgage - which brings me back to the point where if you're well off enough to be at the stage where that could ever potentially be a worry, I'm not really sure why so many left-wing activists think you should apparently be the priority in society for what would effectively be a tax cut.

 

This is all before getting to the point that the above is for the £3k repayment system and that it's even less for the £9k lot who don't have to repay until they're at £21k+...as it goes, I'd have much rather had a more generous maintenance and bursary scheme at university than reduced fees. It says it all that it isn't proper debt in the bank loan sense of the word in that I know absolutely nobody who lays awake at night shitting themselves about how they're going to repay their tuition loan (in contrast to the many students I knew who laid awake at night shitting themselves about how they'd be able to afford to live until the next maintenance loan installment, myself included). It isn't a debt with any consequences. That has pretty bad ramifications for government funding policy, but none for less well-off students.

 

all good points. The alternative is to not do a degree and take a chance it wont lessen your salary over the long run. Given the competition for jobs that may not be wise...

 

Ive had my salary reduced more than 100 a month, despite a contract with the local government, and it hasnt really affected my lifestyle being below the average wage - student loans shouldnt be that destructive once earning a decent wage. I'm still in favour of free education, of course, though, but there are more important things to concentrate on right now. Which is why Labour won't do anything much to change the situation, I predict.

Of course it's nothing to worry about. It's not exactly much of a millstone if you don't have to carry it - and if you do earn enough to be repaying it, it makes little difference whether you're on 3k or 9k if you're in the situation where the basic act of repayment is apparently a millstone (which it isn't exactly. I'm earning less than the median salary at the moment, and I can't say £20 a month is much of a struggle). There are no additional consequences for not repaying it - it isn't like bankruptcy where it's a black mark on your record or where your assets are pulverised to try and get repayment, the debt is just written off.

 

Nobody will ever deny you a mortgage or a loan on the basis of having a student loan which you might be paying £100 a month towards if you're at the type of salary (~£30k) where you could consider getting a mortgage - which brings me back to the point where if you're well off enough to be at the stage where that could ever potentially be a worry, I'm not really sure why so many left-wing activists think you should apparently be the priority in society for what would effectively be a tax cut.

 

This is all before getting to the point that the above is for the £3k repayment system and that it's even less for the £9k lot who don't have to repay until they're at £21k+...as it goes, I'd have much rather had a more generous maintenance and bursary scheme at university than reduced fees. It says it all that it isn't proper debt in the bank loan sense of the word in that I know absolutely nobody who lays awake at night shitting themselves about how they're going to repay their tuition loan (in contrast to the many students I knew who laid awake at night shitting themselves about how they'd be able to afford to live until the next maintenance loan installment, myself included). It isn't a debt with any consequences. That has pretty bad ramifications for government funding policy, but none for less well-off students.

The Lib Dem press office made a complete mess of this. Because they could see that mess, the Tories just sat back and watched them suffer. The system isn't perfect, but it is a distinct improvement on the previous system. It is also a graduate tax in all but name. Until they saw it as a means of bashing a party that wasn't Labour, the NUS were in favour of a graduate tax (even if it was as a least-worst option).

Labour will probably come out with a 6k fees policy, which would be an absolute disaster - in practice it'd just be a tax cut for the most well off graduates later on in life, as they're the only ones it would make a difference to.

Why is it rich and elitist? Most universities in England actually set about providing more access schemes and more generous bursaries as part of sweetening the higher fees package, so there is actually an argument there. And the biggest lie the left has told for the last five years is that higher fees do a thing to make you worse off if you're less well off - you only start repaying if you're earning over £21k (indeed, £9k kids are better off than £3k kids in the short term - ours starts at £15k), the sunset clauses mean if you haven't repaid in full after 25 years then it's all written off, and even if you are repaying the whole 9 grand you're earning so much that frankly I don't understand why you should be a priority for a left-wing government.

 

There's a LOT to criticise £9k fees for - ramping up the amount students pay for with relatively little difference in teaching quality, cooking the books by pretending it's shifting the burden of higher education spending onto wealthier students when in practice the government is going to have to pick up a lot of those bills in 25 years, you name it. Disadvantaging less well-off students absolutely isn't one of the things £9k fees can be criticised for.

I haven't made a direct comparison with English universities (neither did that article!) but these bursaries, grants and scholarships exist in Scottish universities too, for both rUK and Scottish students. Of course you will find more schemes that lower tuition fees in England but that's only because you can't reduce fees in Scotland below £0.

Harve is right. I've seen the sheer volume, in monetary terms, of the bursaries St Andrews gives out. This is over and above the fact that the least well off get massive bursaries from the Government in addition to free tuition fees.

 

I would disagree that its better to go to Uni in England if you're less well off. If you do Advanced Highers you can get second year entry to a Scottish Uni which drops the length down to that of the English Uni's, it also means you're earning a full year's more salary than people born the same year as you south of the border (We spend one more year at uni, you spend one more year at school - so it evens out). If you work 10-15hrs/week you can cover your living costs without a loan, for quite a few of Scotland's Uni's thanks to lower living costs in Scotland outside of Aberdeen.

 

It's possible to graduate debt free in Scotland without even trying that hard. I very nearly did it. I caved in 3rd year because I lost 5months wages when I was in Australia and then a whole summer of wages when I couldn't get hired anywhere because work f***ed me about.

I haven't made a direct comparison with English universities (neither did that article!) but these bursaries, grants and scholarships exist in Scottish universities too, for both rUK and Scottish students. Of course you will find more schemes that lower tuition fees in England but that's only because you can't reduce fees in Scotland below £0.

Of course they do - they existed in England before fees came in and before fees were upped to 9k. The point I was making was that they've been increased hugely in English universities since fees have gone up as a kind of compensatory thing.

 

I'm not even that keen on schemes that reduce tuition fees either unless it's postgrad!

If Labour's going to do anything on tuition fees, instead of cutting the existing fees and essentially just giving high-earners a tax cut (I agree with Tyron on something :drama: ), I'd rather they started offering loans to people doing masters degrees and further qualifications.

If Labour's going to do anything on tuition fees, instead of cutting the existing fees and essentially just giving high-earners a tax cut (I agree with Tyron on something :drama: ), I'd rather they started offering loans to people doing masters degrees and further qualifications.

THIS. Though I'm worried at the possibility of that leading to Masters just becoming another step on 'requisites' for graduate jobs...I really hope we wouldn't get to that stage.

(I agree with Tyron on something :drama:)

Also http://www.moopy.org.uk/forums/images/smilies/grin.gif

 

How we NEED to get Craig back in time for the election...

 

'Cameron was really impressive in his photo in a factory today and Osborne told a really good joke in an interview, and Ed Miliband just looked weird today

 

House prices are up 4% in Epsom

 

Making Britain Great again

 

Majority of 50 guaranteed IMO'

Also http://www.moopy.org.uk/forums/images/smilies/grin.gif

 

How we NEED to get Craig back in time for the election...

 

'Cameron was really impressive in his photo in a factory today and Osborne told a really good joke in an interview, and Ed Miliband just looked weird today

 

House prices are up 4% in Epsom

 

Making Britain Great again

 

Majority of 50 guaranteed IMO'

No doubt he would also claim that the Tories would win at least 30 seats in Scotland as well as ousting Ed Miliband, Harriet Harman and Nick Clegg.

Of course they do - they existed in England before fees came in and before fees were upped to 9k. The point I was making was that they've been increased hugely in English universities since fees have gone up as a kind of compensatory thing.

 

I'm not even that keen on schemes that reduce tuition fees either unless it's postgrad!

I'm just one student, but I pay reduced fees of £4750 (from £9k) through a combination of scholarship, household income bursary and most of all a reduction for BEING ENGLISH. This was on the first year of tripled fees but they're all still available. I don't think any university in England offers that.

 

I'm not really trying to make a political point, I'm just saying that studying in Scotland seems to have been a financially sound decision to have taken and I recommend any English teenagers reading this to do the same if fees are a concern.

Also http://www.moopy.org.uk/forums/images/smilies/grin.gif

 

How we NEED to get Craig back in time for the election...

 

'Cameron was really impressive in his photo in a factory today and Osborne told a really good joke in an interview, and Ed Miliband just looked weird today

 

House prices are up 4% in Epsom

 

Making Britain Great again

 

Majority of 50 guaranteed IMO'

 

 

LMAO. :dance:

The Lib Dem press office made a complete mess of this. Because they could see that mess, the Tories just sat back and watched them suffer. The system isn't perfect, but it is a distinct improvement on the previous system. It is also a graduate tax in all but name. Until they saw it as a means of bashing a party that wasn't Labour, the NUS were in favour of a graduate tax (even if it was as a least-worst option).

It's the psychological effect. The trouble with £9k fees is that if you don't do your research then you'll assume (understandably) that it'll be a massive burden later in life - I would have expected the number of disadvantaged people enrolling in university to have fallen in the last three years just because of that.

 

A graduate tax that actually goes by that name would do a lot to remedy the situation, even if it makes little financial difference.

Ed Miliband's trying for another one of his 'defining battle against the establishment' moments with the whole banning MPs from having second jobs thing going on at the moment after the Rifkind/Straw scandal. All very commendable - I'm interested to see whether or not it works.

 

He had a pretty rare win over Cameron at PMQs today over calls to ban MPs from having second jobs (with Cameron reduced to doing non sequiturs about Labour being supported by the trade unions) - not that it'll make a difference as nobody really pays much attention to PMQs 'wins', but it'll be good for morale among Labour MPs and activists at least, along with that *appalling* Natalie Bennett interview yesterday.

 

 

Bring on the debates! *.*

MP's are there to serve their country, and the wages should reflect that importance - BUT they should have absolutely NO time for any other jobs, it's ridiculous to think that running a country is a part-time job. Or at least if it is, then they should all be on bloody zero-hours contracts where they only get paid when they bother to turn up, at the convenience of the electorate and on an hourly rate, it would be so much more flexible for the taxpayer, and that's what taxpayers want and it would much more profitable for the country. Or at least that's the usual zero-hours argument. W*n*er hypocrites.

 

They can all make sh-loads of cash with their memoirs after the event, after they have ceased to be politicians.

 

 

They can all make sh-loads of cash with their memoirs after the event, after they have ceased to be politicians.

I agree with the rest of the argument - but :lol: at the thought that every so-and-so MP for Bramley and Froglington Stroon would be able to RAKE IN THE CASH from their memoirs!