Rioting students

[ralphchadkirk]

Ralph, you're attempting to turn it into yet another rich v poor debate when it's nothing of the sort.

Yes, people don't want to pay more for anything - that's human nature. However, Yorkie's post earlier sums things up perfectly - I'm not going to be repeating what he said but I suggest you read it, digest it, and then come back with a more sensible line of argument.

It is everything about that. I think Pumbaa covered it quite well earlier:

And of course if you have a well-paid job, you can afford to repay the entire thing. But under the current proposals, you will be able to do so, and pay less for the privilege of it! Again, the top costing courses will end up paying less. And if Daddy can afford to pay for your fees anyway, he can do so and pay even less. That is not fair, it is not progressive and is heralding back to the good old Tory ideal that if you're born rich enough, you can have it for the cheapest. Poor old lower middle class boy has no finance to draw on, takes out massive loans for his History or Biology degree, has a tremendous amount of debt to get through, doesn't have a salary high enough to repay it quickly and pays through the nose in interest on 36k debt.

That is not fair at all.

Why not read it, digest it, and then come back with a more sensible argument I would say, but it's the line of someone who cannot think of a better argument.

 

[theblackwatch]

Really? Having spoken to many students about this the consensus from people that were going to go to university (and not to study pointless degrees) was that they didn't want to anymore as they would end up paying twice for the privilege. They would pay the interest, and then end up paying higher taxes to write off the debt that was accrued from people who end up not getting a job.
Let's remember I spend my time with people applying, and looking to apply. I doubt you do.

Maybe they should get a job rather than go to uni then if they don;t think it's cost effective? Or are they too workshy to do that? Remember there's no such thing as a free lunch!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Maybe they should get a job rather than go to uni then if they don;t think it's cost effective? Or are they too workshy to do that? Remember there's no such thing as a free lunch!

That's a pretty big tar brush you've got there. The only alternative to them to university is to get a job, and I happen to find your workshy comments quite offensive.

 

[GB]

Is there any sort of Scholarship programme like in the US? Maybe that is part of the answer for those that can't afford it?

 

[Ferret]

That's a pretty big tar brush you've got there. The only alternative to them to university is to get a job, and I happen to find your workshy comments quite offensive.

That's just it though Ralph, the idea that people should be handed everything on a plate is also quite offensive, be they students or otherwise. It's offensive to your average taxpayer, the bloke who's been paying through the nose for far too many years and not getting a great deal in return.

Please tell me you aren't one of the people advising these students on their future?! If so, they have my utmost condolences.

It's sod all to do with rich v poor - it's to do with making those that use the University system pay for it. As Yorkie says - if you don't earn £21000, you pay nothing. And if you are lucky enough for Mummy and Daddy to be able to pay your fees then that same situation still exists now.

Now, if somebody from a poorer background wants to go to Uni, they still can - they'll just have to pay more for the privelege - because the reality of today is that if they don't then nobody else is going to.

I'm sorry Ralph, harsh realities do have a tendency to offend people. They aren't nice. But the era of something for nothing seems to be passing, and it's long overdue. If the coalition lead us to a world where people have to take responsibility for their own lives, and make it on their own in the world, then so be it. And *if* you're advising people not to go to Uni based on the rise in fees then shame on you.

 

[imagination]

Is there any sort of Scholarship programme like in the US? Maybe that is part of the answer for those that can't afford it?

Most universities have scholarships and have done for a long time (my grandad got a scholarship to Oxford), although it is down to the university to decide how they determine eligibility, how many they offer, and what courses they offer them in.

 

[mumrar]

Ralphchadkirk, why is it so offensive that people either have a choice to educate further or work? That is life, I've had enough time helping fund people's gap years whilst they go off back-packing across the globe, how is that fair on the taxpayers?

People need to get self-responsibility back and realise that the benefits and support system we have in place are a safety net, not an option or a choice. By all means if you've tried all else then you're welcome to what you need, but there are far too many ****-takers in life. Of students really are as hard up as they collectively imply, why can I find you an endless supply of them, any night of the week, ripped up on drink and sometimes other substances and wearing the price of clothes I could only dream of buying? For the record, I'd spend that clothing money on other things if I could afford it.

 

[yorkie]

Many of the people who are against the increase in tuition fees (and associated changes such as increasing the threshold before you have to repay, meaning someone earning £20,500 won't repay fees in future, while at present someone earning £15,500 does!) on this topic seem to be not yet at University (e.g. Ralph). So they may not yet have seen for themselves the fact that some of the people who go there are wasters, cheaters, plagiarisers, expect everything on a plate and have a generally lazy lifestyle. No, not all students are like that (I'm not saying they are by any means, after all I was one myself), but there were enough of them to make me be glad to get out of it!

Today's education system seems to be about raising expectations to such an extent that people expect everything to be done for them, they expect to get a highly paid job where they don't particularly work hard for it and until that highly paid job comes along they are NOT going to do cleaning or other so-called 'menial' jobs.

I know of people who at the age of 18 are more employable than some of these degree students will ever be, and because they didn't go to Uni and did Summer jobs and work after school, they are sufficiently experienced. Now they are paying tax, should they subsidise the layabouts?

When I apply for a job the matter of my degree hardly comes into it. What employers are interested in is experience and personal skills.

Vocational courses are the way forward.

By the way, there really should be a degree in railway ticketing. It would be far more useful than some of the degrees out there. Seriously! And, at least it would actually give you a good chance at getting a job, unlike a media degree.

On the wider issue of cuts and making work pay, there are people who refuse to do cleaning jobs, and get dole money and then go bashing up and down the country. Is that right?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Ralphchadkirk, why is it so offensive that people either have a choice to educate further or work? That is life, I've had enough time helping fund people's gap years whilst they go off back-packing across the globe, how is that fair on the taxpayers?

That was not what I found offensive - I found it offensive that theblackwatch was implying that all students were too lazy to find a job.

For the record I would support free tutition fees, but also a dramatic cutdown on the degrees which have no meaning (Golf Course Management anyone?), and also far stricter admissions policies.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Today's education system seems to be about raising expectations to such an extent that people expect everything to be done for them, they expect to get a highly paid job where they don't particularly work hard for it and until that highly paid job comes along they are NOT going to do cleaning or other so-called 'menial' jobs.

Some people may be like that, others do not. I have a cleaning job at the moment to support my lifestyle.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

When I apply for a job the matter of my degree hardly comes into it. What employers are interested in is experience and personal skills.

What degree did you do then? It depends on what degree as to how much the degree and experience/personal skills balance up to each other.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

On the wider issue of cuts and making work pay, there are people who refuse to do cleaning jobs, and get dole money and then go bashing up and down the country. Is that right?

Certainly not.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm sorry Ralph, harsh realities do have a tendency to offend people. They aren't nice. But the era of something for nothing seems to be passing, and it's long overdue. If the coalition lead us to a world where people have to take responsibility for their own lives, and make it on their own in the world, then so be it. And *if* you're advising people not to go to Uni based on the rise in fees then shame on you.

I am in no way advising anyone anything. I made my post perfectly clear that this is what students applying for university in 2011 have told me.

 

[Ferret]

Ralph, I'm glad to hear it!!! I would also agree that some of the more outlandish degrees should be chopped. And again, the admissions policy should be stricter - standard interview question ought to be 'why do you want this degree?' Those unable to find an answer or who are daft enough to answer 'because I can't be arsed to get a job' should be shown the door!

I've been reading the newspapers of this week with interest - and one idea that struck me as having merit was chopping degrees down from 3 years to 2 years. This would of course mean more intensive work and less long holidays for students to arse around in, but should also decrease the amount of debt students build up. In short, I'm not seeing much of a downside to the suggestion.

I've got to say though, if you think that tuition fees shouldn't exist then you really are living in a dreamworld on that score! It just isn't going to happen and nor should it.

Final point - a degree is not the be all and end all, as Yorkie alluded to. There are many people I know who earn a damn good wage and have never bothered with University. I've also seen first hand how graduates get a rude awakening when they get into the world of work - no experience of how a business operates, and finding themselves way out of their depth. I've seen them make cock ups which have cost their employers a lot of money - cock ups that the bloke who's worked his way up from the bottom would never have made. As much as I'd say to anyone who really wanted to go that a University education has lots of merits, it is not the only way to skin the cat.

 

[yorkie]

That was not what I found offensive - I found it offensive that theblackwatch was implying that all students were too lazy to find a job.

He wasn't. theblackwatch is a regular at various forum meets, and many of those who attend meets are students, there's no way he was saying anything to offend these people, many of whom would consider him a friend. I think you are interpreting things that are not there.

Nevertheless, some students are too lazy to find a job, and anyone who is/was a student knows that!

 

[yorksrob]

That's the thing though - 90019 says (with some merit) that some degree-holders choose lower paid jobs, so if we went through income tax alone then they'd not really be paying for the education which some would argue they are wasting.

I have to admit that in my day, if you went and dropped out of your degree, you had to pay back your maintenance grant - note the term maintenance grant - not tuition fees. This acted as an incentive not to **** your grant up the wall, and kept the majority of us on the straight and narrow.

Nowadays students are given sod all, and yet they're expected to pay thousands upfront for maintenance and tuition fees, regardless of whether this results in work or not. Bugger anyone tallented who can't afford thousands of pounds up front.

This is the country going down the toilet as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Eng274]

Nevertheless, some students are too lazy to find a job, and anyone who is/was a student knows that!

Amen! On my course there are lacklustre students who seldom turn up to lectures, and despite some lecturers claiming to take a hardline on non-attendees, little is done about non-attendance. Though it is hard to mollycoddle an alleged 'adult' into turning up for classes; if they don't want to get their moneysworth out of the course, thats their own fault imo. When they drop out with 2 or 3 years worth of tuition fee debt and nothing to show for it, that will be a downer when they see their next Tesco payslip.

Re the argument going on further up that I'm too half-cut to commitedly read, there are a fantastic amount of students who do nothing but drink, trash their flat and make a pen15 of themselves. I can proudly say that aside from my student bursary, I am totally self sufficient, I get nothing from my parents (nor would I want/expect to) and I work part-time to pay my living costs. I get by, but it astounds me the attitude of some students who MUST have their rent paid for by mumsy given their wanton frittering of money on X boxes and the like. I knew one chap who even had his laundry collected and done for him by his mother.

The point I am making is that its all well slacking one's way through university and getting a degree, but if you do not have the maturity and basic personal skills (even turning up on time is a challenge to some) then a miracle or a highly placed relative is the only hope. I quit bar work for good in march after getting an industrial placement, which i now do part time, and I cannot stress how good it is to say "I have 8 months work experience at my chosen subject" on the CV, plus a glaring reference from the boss

a good attitude goes a long way.

 

[theblackwatch]

That was not what I found offensive - I found it offensive that theblackwatch was implying that all students were too lazy to find a job.

I don't think that at all, but there do seem to be a not insignificant number of students who see university as a way of not having to go to work for a few years. As Yorkie pointed out, I do have friends who are students themselves who do work hard but there are others who you will find out drinking every night (then complaning about their debts - I'd be in debt if I went out each night too and I have a full time job!) and generally having a 3 year holiday.

I do believe there has been far too much emphasis put on going to university, and that now people need to look and see if it is actually worthwhile and consider the alternatives. The country is in a mess financially, and we are all having to make sacrifices (pay freezes, job cuts, increased pension contributions etc) - I don't think students can expect to be immune from these.

For the record I would support free tutition fees, but also a dramatic cutdown on the degrees which have no meaning (Golf Course Management anyone?), and also far stricter admissions policies.

Whilst I don't think tuition fees should be totally free, I do agree with you on the other points - I cited the degree in Dance in one of the early posts in this thread. If we got rid of all the pointless degrees (or perhaps those where apprenticeships/on the job training would be best suited - make the employers pay for their staff's training instead of them expecting the taxpayer to find it) it would free up more money to be spent on students studying more deserving qualifications. Unfortunately though, I suspect the universities have already spent huge amounts of cash on equipping themselves for all these modern trendy degrees which offer little value to the country as a whole.

 

[Oswyntail]

.... If we got rid of all the pointless degrees (or perhaps those where apprenticeships/on the job training would be best suited - make the employers pay for their staff's training instead of them expecting the taxpayer to find it) it would free up more money to be spent on students studying more deserving qualifications. ...

I agree (almost) totally. There are some "degrees" - such as nursing - where the training is best and most effectively carried out in post. Where I have misgivings is when anyone has to decide what is "pointless". Most commentators seem to agree that degrees in science and engineering are worthwhile - but that is not really true, as only a very small minority will use their degree-level knowledge at any time during their career. Commentators also seem to agree that Arts and Humanities degrees are less worthwhile - but I (as a Classics graduate!) have had a long and successful career in IT, and used the understanding gained in my studies to excel as a manager. I would say that a degree is worthwhile so long as it trains students to think - not just learn skills - and it doesn't really matter what subject it is in. But not all subjects are suited to training people to think, and not all students are capable of learning to.

 

[Greenback]

One thing that doesnt seem to be being brought up much - what happens to people who have already started their higher education? If they end up having to pay more than they thought they would then they've made a choice based on false information which could cost them a lot - particularly in areas where people need to spend a long time in university before they qualify.

That's a good point. I would hope that the changes only affect new students?

I have to admit that in my day, if you went and dropped out of your degree, you had to pay back your maintenance grant - note the term maintenance grant - not tuition fees. This acted as an incentive not to **** your grant up the wall, and kept the majority of us on the straight and narrow.

Nowadays students are given sod all, and yet they're expected to pay thousands upfront for maintenance and tuition fees, regardless of whether this results in work or not. Bugger anyone tallented who can't afford thousands of pounds up front.

This is the country going down the toilet as far as I'm concerned.

That is my coincern - there may be academically brilliant people who cannot afford to pay fees up front and don't want to incur large debts. Society may miss out on the best doctors or scientists as a result.

In contrast, there may be children of the very rich getting the best education money can but whilst being, shall we say, academically challenged! Still, that happens at the moment so there's no change there!

I don't think that at all, but there do seem to be a not insignificant number of students who see university as a way of not having to go to work for a few years. As Yorkie pointed out, I do have friends who are students themselves who do work hard but there are others who you will find out drinking every night (then complaning about their debts - I'd be in debt if I went out each night too and I have a full time job!) and generally having a 3 year holiday.

I do believe there has been far too much emphasis put on going to university, and that now people need to look and see if it is actually worthwhile and consider the alternatives. The country is in a mess financially, and we are all having to make sacrifices (pay freezes, job cuts, increased pension contributions etc) - I don't think students can expect to be immune from these.

Whilst I don't think tuition fees should be totally free, I do agree with you on the other points - I cited the degree in Dance in one of the early posts in this thread. If we got rid of all the pointless degrees (or perhaps those where apprenticeships/on the job training would be best suited - make the employers pay for their staff's training instead of them expecting the taxpayer to find it) it would free up more money to be spent on students studying more deserving qualifications. Unfortunately though, I suspect the universities have already spent huge amounts of cash on equipping themselves for all these modern trendy degrees which offer little value to the country as a whole.

Fair points there. I'd quite like to see business and industry take a more active role in undergraduate funding. On the subject of pointless degrees, the local paper highlighted some courses the other day, including photography and music technology. I question how relevant these are, although I accept that a degree is mor ethan just the subject, as it does (or should) teach the student about research, learning and challenging accepted thinking as well.

 

[Mojo]

As far as I'm concerned, nobody is or could be too poor for University. At my University the charge for cheap accommodation is £3,822 pa and £4,641 pa for the new accommodation (based on a standard 39 week contract for UK students). If you do not qualify for any grant, students living away, outside London, are allowed a £4,950 loan if you're not in your final year. Grants are here. Obviously I'd expect living somewhere like London might be hard if you're at University. I'm on placement in London and half my wages go on rent and I'm not even paying the market value for this place!

Given that, someone with a grant and the loan needs pay nothing up-front, I believe though that what you pay for University should surely be based on what you earn after, not what you earn before, otherwise where is the incentive to improve yourself? If we're talking about fairness, then why is it fair that a multimillionaire who grew up in a council estate would pay back less than a teacher who grew up on Acacia Avenue?

 

[Geezertronic]

So the Police get stick if they act too heavy handed and on this occasion they get stick for being "caught out".

Personally I would have taken a riot stick (or fire extinguisher) to the lot these idiot protestors.

 

[imagination]

There were about 50000 protestors. About 50 of these were causing problems. That's 1 in 1000.

 

[313103]

There were about 50000 protestors. About 50 of these were causing problems. That's 1 in 1000.

The problem is though once one has caused trouble 'ALL' are tarnished with the same brush! No matter how you put it.

 

[Greenback]

Most of the reports have concentrated on the trouble makers rather than the vast majority of epaceful protestors. There is an element, normally anarchists and various other types of extremists that turn out to any protest with the sole intention of winding up other marches and inciting them to violence againt people and property.

Just as we should not assume that all Muslims want to burn poppies, we should not assume that all students are violent troublemakers!

 

[Geezertronic]

Most of the reports have concentrated on the trouble makers rather than the vast majority of epaceful protestors. There is an element, normally anarchists and various other types of extremists that turn out to any protest with the sole intention of winding up other marches and inciting them to violence againt people and property.

Just as we should not assume that all Muslims want to burn poppies, we should not assume that all students are violent troublemakers!

It's always the minority that spoils it for the majority, no matter what the subject matter is

 

[Greenback]

Too true, and it's always the minority that grab the headlines!

 

[Geezertronic]

Seems like the kids are acting up in London again

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11829102

The Police should mace the lot of them, get it over and done with since this is obviously not a peaceful protest...

 

[yorkie]

Disgraceful scenes. The rioting students don't deserve to live in this country, quite frankly.

They're costing us taxpyayers £thousands in vandalism and policing costs, in addition to demanding unsustainable levels of taxpayers money to subsidise their education, including some ludicrous courses that, in certain cases (which are increasing in numbers all the time), are not going to lead to a job!

Meanwhile, while thousands are subsidised by us to the tune of several thousands of pounds each to do media degrees, we have to employ people from overseas because these lot refuse to do 'menial' jobs like cleaning. They need to get real, quite frankly.

They don't like the new system where repayments are only due on earnings over £21,000 per year, while the existing system has a threshold of only £15,000 per year.

The mindless rioters are not fit to be in jobs earning more than £21k per year anyway, so they shouldn't ever end up paying anything.

 

[scotsman]

Once again I hsten to add that it is very likely that someone with a can of special brew, a balaclava and a pole without a placard are unlikely to be students.

 

[jon0844]

That's what I thought last time, then it turned out that they WERE mostly students. I am sure they were mostly students today too.

 

[Pumbaa]

They don't like the new system where repayments are only due on earnings over £21,000 per year, while the existing system has a threshold of only £15,000 per year.

That's not the point though!! That is a fake olive branch that I think is fairly easy to see past!

Yes it gets raised, but it doesn't make a lot of people better off. The whole proposal makes all but the wealthiest students worse off, it's an entirely regressive scheme and in addition with cuts to EMA, research and further arts projects, it is going to to be detrimental to the country.

 

[yorkie]

Once again I hsten to add that it is very likely that someone with a can of special brew, a balaclava and a pole without a placard are unlikely to be students.

Oh yes, totally. None of them are students.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11829202 this guy isn't a student at all. He is a person being educated (badly) at great expense to taxpayers. So, totally not a student. He's a, err, something else. Right?

As someone who was a student, I do know what some students are like. And it aint good.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's not the point though!! That is a fake olive branch that I think is fairly easy to see past!

It's fundamental. The ones who are protesting the nost are least likely to be earning more than £21k. I'd bloody hope they don't get jobs of £21k when there are hardworking honest people who get paid a LOT less than that!

Yes it gets raised, but it doesn't make a lot of people better off. The whole proposal makes all but the wealthiest students worse off, it's an entirely regressive scheme and in addition with cuts to EMA, research and further arts projects, it is going to to be detrimental to the country.

Worse off? Many people in this country will NEVER earn as much as £21k per year yet will still have to pay taxes that go towards the education of people who get a degree and then go on to earn in excess of £21k per year. So for those people earning a decent wage to moan at being worse off, is an insult to anyone who does the vitally important jobs they can't be bothered to do, such as cleaning.

We need to get much tougher on the rioters, we can't let them continue rioting.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's what I thought last time, then it turned out that they WERE mostly students. I am sure they were mostly students today too.

Of course they were.

Honest, good working students, are appalled at their fellow students who are layabouts. It really made me disillusioned with being a student!

Anyone who has any sense who gets a degree, will accept paying a little bit of their annual earnings above £21k, if they are lucky enough to get a job paying a salary above that threshold.

I also looked into repaying my student loan, and it's cheaper not to.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I watched Young Voter's Question Time tonight on BBC Three - it always amazes (like regular QT) how many left-wing people you can fit in a building.

I consider myself left wing, and I reckon the left should be pro-fees, because it's an insult to hard working people who will never earn more than £21k that these students are protesting at having increased loans.

Now, the far left, are anarchists and are just lunatics who want to destroy society and if they had their way the railways would not exist, this forum would not exist, and modern society would not exist. They need to be stopped.

One hour of the show (i.e. all of it) was devoted to Liberal Democrats 'stabbing people in the back' over fees

You mean seeing sense?

, Tories trying to defend themselves,

I used to be anti-Tory but Labour have become so authoritarian and have almost bankrupted us, so the Tories actually have it right this time, so I am glad they were defending their position.

and some female Labour frontbencher (her name escapes me) looking smug throughout all of it.

It's them who got us into this mess

My teacher told me last week, that if you only get a £22,000 job, you could pay the new rates back at a sum of £20 a month. Jesus Christ. What was the outcome of that bloke in the last riots throwing the fire extinguishers onto the crowds and police below?

Indeed. Having to repay £20 a month if you earn £22,000pa is indeed worthy of causing £thousands of pounds worth of damage that taxpayers have to pay for... according to the moaning students!:roll: I find this view despicable, disgusting, ludicrous and totally indefensible.

Their position is becoming less and less acceptable/credible by the day.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I watched Young Voter's Question Time tonight on BBC Three - it always amazes (like regular QT) how many left-wing people you can fit in a building. One hour of the show (i.e. all of it) was devoted to Liberal Democrats 'stabbing people in the back' over fees, Tories trying to defend themselves, and some female Labour frontbencher (her name escapes me) looking smug throughout all of it. My teacher told me last week, that if you only get a £22,000 job, you could pay the new rates back at a sum of £20 a month. Jesus Christ. What was the outcome of that bloke in the last riots throwing the fire extinguishers onto the crowds and police below?