Rioting students

[ralphchadkirk]

Yorkie: your entire argument seems to be based around the fact that the threshold is rising from 15000 to 21000, and that many students will not earn above that, and that if they do, they'll only get 22000. This simply isn't true, as those who do valuable degrees (i.e. not media) will be earning far above 21000.
This isn't the whole point of the protests. This is only one point. It's also about cutting EMA, making university more expensive for the poor and easier for the rich, it's about cutting research and arts funding.

Having said that, some student's are being hypocritical about this. Why walk out of the eduction that's going to get you to uni? Why attack the police as well - they aren't the ones who have cut funding and raised fees.

 

[yorksrob]

Yorkie: your entire argument seems to be based around the fact that the threshold is rising from 15000 to 21000, and that many students will not earn above that, and that if they do, they'll only get 22000. This simply isn't true, as those who do valuable degrees (i.e. not media) will be earning far above 21000.
This isn't the whole point of the protests. This is only one point. It's also about cutting EMA, making university more expensive for the poor and easier for the rich, it's about cutting research and arts funding.

Having said that, some student's are being hypocritical about this. Why walk out of the eduction that's going to get you to uni? Why attack the police as well - they aren't the ones who have cut funding and raised fees.

Absolutely right. These proposals will make a University education the preserve of the rich, with a few token poor people paid for, so that the self serving establishment can feel good about itself.

Those Vice Chancellors that have decided to egg the Government on instead of publicly fighting against the cut in the Teaching budget are a disgrace. They should resign.

 

[jon0844]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but someone with little money could get a loan to go to University to better themselves and only pay anything back if they then go on to be successful and earn lots of money? And if they do, they won't be poor and will have achieved what they always wanted. That's a good thing isn't it? That is making education accessible for all surely?

If they don't, and plenty won't regardless of their wealth or class, they'll have paid nothing and be no worse off. And, job or no job, they will have still gained knowledge and probably met a lot of good people along the way. Not bad for your self esteem either.

No wonder some students are now saying this was more about money paid to people to keep them at school. When that argument is blown out of the water, they'll have to think of another reason before admitting that they're simply young and up for a bit of mischief because they're still of an age where they cave in to peer pressure and get caught up in things that they'll probably know are wrong - especially in a few years when they enter the real world.

I think it's fair to say that all the people who are saying how wrong the students are probably thought the same as the students at their age. We all did. We were young and wanting to 'stick it to the man' and be free and independent. Then we go and get jobs, have a family, get a mortgage and a car on finance and wake up!

 

[Greenback]

I've never been in favour of EMA. Mrs Greenback works in further and higher education and says that the motivation for quite a few of the 16-18 students she deals with is the money, rather than the course.

 

[ainsworth74]

I think EMA is a good idea it's just poorly implimented. Rather than just giving away £20-£30 pounds however often it's payed, I think it would be better to target it into specific things like say a buspass valid between home and college or an equivilent on the railway. I'm sure there are other things that could be given (money to college to buy books for the recipient for instance). Basically making it contribute just about only to their education. So keep EMA but reform the hell out of it because right now it is just about getting a bit extra pocket money rather than helping contribute to education.

 

[GB]

So keep EMA but reform the hell out of it because right now it is just about getting a bit extra pocket money rather than helping contribute to education.

I agree. I have read posts on several gaming forums that some indivduals use it to buy video games and booze etc etc.:roll: If its not going to be spent on the actual education then they shouldn't have it.

 

[Greenback]

Ainsworth is right, there are better ways to ensure that the money goes towards the cost of education. I should have been clearer - I'm not against helping 16-18 year old's with the cost of studying, but too many are using the money on other things due to the way EMA was implemented.

 

[Oswyntail]

What i dislike about the EMA is the way it can be manipulated by some declaring incorrect income. From my chidren's accounts, it went to the poor kids - who spent it as pocket money - and the children of accountants, financial advisers, bankers who knew how to avoid tax. And we still had to buy the textbooks!

 

[yorksrob]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but someone with little money could get a loan to go to University to better themselves and only pay anything back if they then go on to be successful and earn lots of money? And if they do, they won't be poor and will have achieved what they always wanted. That's a good thing isn't it? That is making education accessible for all surely?

If they don't, and plenty won't regardless of their wealth or class, they'll have paid nothing and be no worse off. And, job or no job, they will have still gained knowledge and probably met a lot of good people along the way. Not bad for your self esteem either.

No wonder some students are now saying this was more about money paid to people to keep them at school. When that argument is blown out of the water, they'll have to think of another reason before admitting that they're simply young and up for a bit of mischief because they're still of an age where they cave in to peer pressure and get caught up in things that they'll probably know are wrong - especially in a few years when they enter the real world.

I think it's fair to say that all the people who are saying how wrong the students are probably thought the same as the students at their age. We all did. We were young and wanting to 'stick it to the man' and be free and independent. Then we go and get jobs, have a family, get a mortgage and a car on finance and wake up!

The fact is, I don't believe that it is at all appropriate to saddle school leavers with such huge debts.

We do indeed go on to get jobs, have families get mortgages and the like. The time to be saddled with such responsibilities is when they have had a chance to make their way in the world. If I'd been confronted with such a debt at the time, it would have acted as a perverse incentive not to go to University.

At every stage, these proposals tip the balance against meritocracy and in favour of entrenched wealth.

And as for cancellation if wages don't come up to scratch, What an even more perverse incentive for people not to do well. I thought the Conservatives were supposed to be about encouraging people to help themselves !? or is that just amongst their wealthy business cronies.

Don't believe what they say about student loans being at a low interest rate. Even with my comparatively small student loan, it still racked up a healthy amount of interest until I started paying it back - and that was before the system's flogged off to private sector bandits.

 

[jon0844]

Is it a debt before you actually begin to owe it? If you never land that highly paid job, you pay nowt. If you lose your job after a certain time, I presume you also stop paying?

So, it seems you only pay as long as you earn enough to allow you to afford to pay.

How is that a bad thing?

 

[LE Greys]

Ought to mention that I was there on the 3rd, up near the front of the column. As I saw it, a small group of idiots hijacked the whole demo, got all the headlines and thoroughly let the side down. That's why I stayed away from the one this week.

From my point of view, universities are not there so that people can study easy subjects and go off and get a good job in the cities, they are there so that academics, scientists, scholars (and a few doctors and lawyers) can learn their trade and then apply their knowledge to further Human understanding (by finding out new things). However, churning out graduates is not going to help anyone if there are no jobs for them. I spent four years studying zoology, ran up £18,000 of debt and have no job. Waste of time and money.

Solution, cut the number of BSc/BA graduates by half. Do that by converting some universities back to Polytechnics, others to Art Schools and Business Schools. Polys would still offer BSc/BA courses, but other types of course as well, and would teach in a much more compressed way. Business Schools would be funded by industry, and would have a near-monopoly on Economics, Management and Business Studies. The remaining universities would take around 25% of school leavers, would not charge fees and would be expected to carry out research as well as teaching. Not sure what to do about the Art Schools, but that's not my area.

The problem is simply that we have too many students (like the old joke about the Cuban cigar factory, staffed entirely with law graduates). Numbers down, standards up and provide alternatives. Oh, and don't make people start life with a mortgage-sized debt hanging over them.

 

[yorksrob]

Is it a debt before you actually begin to owe it? If you never land that highly paid job, you pay nowt. If you lose your job after a certain time, I presume you also stop paying?

So, it seems you only pay as long as you earn enough to allow you to afford to pay.

How is that a bad thing?

Yep. It's hanging over you like a sword of damocles - and all the while it's deferred, it's notching up interest. And don't forget, the average annual wage in this country is around £25,000 - 26,000 per annum so we're not talking about just the very rich.

Also, I don't recall there being any provision to postpone or cancel repayments in the event of difficulties once repayment had begun.

 

[Oswyntail]

....
Solution, cut the number of BSc/BA graduates by half. Do that by converting some universities back to Polytechnics, others to Art Schools and Business Schools. Polys would still offer BSc/BA courses, but other types of course as well, and would teach in a much more compressed way. Business Schools would be funded by industry, and would have a near-monopoly on Economics, Management and Business Studies. The remaining universities would take around 25% of school leavers, would not charge fees and would be expected to carry out research as well as teaching. Not sure what to do about the Art Schools, but that's not my area......

Eminently sensible. What you are basically saying is to reverse the previous government's cack-handed "reforms" and make sure the system that works works well.

 

[jon0844]

Also, I don't recall there being any provision to postpone or cancel repayments in the event of difficulties once repayment had begun.

If that's true, then that is an issue. You might get made redundant after six months and surely they can't continue to charge you? That would be very wrong indeed.

I'd expect the debt to be put on hold again, until you get another job. The people here paying their student loans are paying between £30-50 a month and seem to be happy with that (well, as happy as anyone can be to have to pay back anything they've spent ages ago!).

 

[ainsworth74]

If your income falls below 15k currently then you stop payments until your earning over 15k again. I would assume under the new system where 21k is the point at which payments start it would be the same if you start earning less than 21k then payments stop.

 

[jon0844]

If that is true, there's no problem at all. You'll only ever pay back the money when you're earning enough to make it easy to pay.

I am sure that anyone who goes on to get a job at £21k or above will have plenty of other optional monthly commitments (things like, say, a £35 a month mobile phone contract, a Sky subscription, credit card interest etc) to worry about than a student loan that can quite easily be forgotten about as it's taken at source, so you'll never see it in the first place.

As you earn more, you'll pay off more - so it is cleared quicker. Simple.

What a shame ordinary people can't get one of these loans!

 

[Pumbaa]

What a shame ordinary people can't get one of these loans!

But its changing - the old student loans had a very low pegged interest rate. In 2009, this went to just inflation (so effectively no interest). The proposals call for a removal of this and opening it up to a more market-going rate which is where the extra cost is coming from.

This is where it pays to be rich and be able to pay it off quickly, rather than on a 35k salary with an MNC.

I've never been in favour of EMA. Mrs Greenback works in further and higher education and says that the motivation for quite a few of the 16-18 students she deals with is the money, rather than the course.

By the same token, EMA has been incredible where I used to live, and there has been notable improvements in the area. Herts CC had an effective way of monitoring attendance and dishing out EMA, as soon as you fell below the line it was removed. And it really did help a lot of young people realise potential.

 

[Greenback]

But its changing - the old student loans had a very low pegged interest rate. In 2009, this went to just inflation (so effectively no interest). The proposals call for a removal of this and opening it up to a more market-going rate which is where the extra cost is coming from.

This is where it pays to be rich and be able to pay it off quickly, rather than on a 35k salary with an MNC.

By the same token, EMA has been incredible where I used to live, and there has been notable improvements in the area. Herts CC had an effective way of monitoring attendance and dishing out EMA, as soon as you fell below the line it was removed. And it really did help a lot of young people realise potential.

I don't have any problem with the principle behind EMA, of trying to assist students with the cost of staying on in further education. What I do have an issue with is the failure to implement it properly - I'm not talking about attendance per se, but the motivation of those who do attend, but don't really try! This is the aspect that my missus finds most frustrating! Some, and by no means the majority, just regard it as a way to get money for doing sod all! And this applies to their parents as well, the kids have no desire to learn, and just go so their parents can have the cash. Apparently they readily admit it too, by saying they don't really want to be there, but they'll get chucked out of their house if they don't go!

Of course there are other kids for whom the payment has been a lifeline, and that is very good. But I don't think anyone can disagree that some of the money has been completely wasted.

 

[Pumbaa]

Of course there are other kids for whom the payment has been a lifeline, and that is very good. But I don't think anyone can disagree that some of the money has been completely wasted.

Absolutely. Tackling the problem would be the sensible way round it, not withdrawing it all together.

Despite denying that the mounted police charged the kettled protesters on Wednesday...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgxwTF-qeAo&feature=player_embedded

It is my opinion that kettling creates an unwelcome hostility that leads to inevitable crowd anger and discordance. It is unlawful in Sweden, and frowned upon in other EU/G20 countries. To the best of my knowledge, only France, Germany and Portugal employ the tactic as a trained response like us. I wouldn't go so far as to say that planting the police van in the way of the march (an old Sprinter with numberplates removed) was bait, but it wouldn't surprise me if it had indeed been done.

 

[Greenback]

Similarly I wouldn't discount the notion that some of the instigators were agent provocateurs intent on undermining the protests. The tactic is not unheard of either!

 

[Oswyntail]

Seemed pretty restrained to me. Yes they went in on horses, but it seemed far from being a "charge". What we saw in the video was some very distressed people, but that is the sort of reaction that happens when people are contained and in a heightened state, such as you get on a demo. From this video, I do not see the police did anything wrong [though I agree that "kettling" will usually produce these reactions]

 

[Geezertronic]

I think from previous incidents, the police are damned if they do and damned if they don't. There will always be videos claiming this and that, the simple rule of thumb is if you don't like it then stay away.

They should have got the hoses on them as well in my opinion, zero tolerance is what is required when protests start to get violent and destructive

 

[ainsworth74]

Those protesters didn't look particularly violent to me (going on that video).

 

[Tom B]

I don't have any problem with the principle behind EMA, of trying to assist students with the cost of staying on in further education. What I do have an issue with is the failure to implement it properly - I'm not talking about attendance per se, but the motivation of those who do attend, but don't really try! This is the aspect that my missus finds most frustrating! Some, and by no means the majority, just regard it as a way to get money for doing sod all! And this applies to their parents as well, the kids have no desire to learn, and just go so their parents can have the cash. Apparently they readily admit it too, by saying they don't really want to be there, but they'll get chucked out of their house if they don't go!

Of course there are other kids for whom the payment has been a lifeline, and that is very good. But I don't think anyone can disagree that some of the money has been completely wasted.

I believe it is up to the individual school/college/etc to have an "EMA policy" - for instance dealing with absence etc. Generally, more than 20% absence in a week would result in the payment not being made. At my 6th form, the effort of EMA people was monitored closely - and if they were clearly mucking around they'd get thrown out. Of course, to the management of schools and colleges, students aren't students - they're bags of money on legs.

 

[Oswyntail]

.... Of course, to the management of schools and colleges, students aren't students - they're bags of money on legs.

A somewhat wild generalisation, not quite up to your usual standard of analysis.

 

[Pumbaa]

I believe it is up to the individual school/college/etc to have an "EMA policy" - for instance dealing with absence etc.

As far as I was aware, it was down to the LEA to issue a broad policy, and the school/college/etc may decree a stricter version of this, but not one more lenient.

I think from previous incidents, the police are damned if they do and damned if they don't. There will always be videos claiming this and that, the simple rule of thumb is if you don't like it then stay away.

They should have got the hoses on them as well in my opinion, zero tolerance is what is required when protests start to get violent and destructive

As far as I see, the Police are becoming a law unto themselves. Harking back to the G8 protests, with the death of Ian Tomlinson, it is becoming routine for the police to be able to carry out borderline illegal acts (such as denying exit of under-18s in the London kettling on Weds) and get away with it, while anything else anyone does that is just as borderline or illegal is instantly defamed.

Paul Stephenson (now a vilified figure within his old force) was right when he said a new era of protesting and policing has arrived. And I really hope its not for the worst, although I fear it! The police have a duty to obey and uphold the law.

 

[scotsman]

Students aren't students - they're bags of money on legs.

I bloody wish!

I contribute so much to society through my various volunteering roles (I don't ask or expect anything in return), why should I be punnished for not getting a job aged 16, while still in full time education!

 

[90019]

As far as I see, the Police are becoming a law unto themselves. Harking back to the G8 protests, with the death of Ian Tomlinson, it is becoming routine for the police to be able to carry out borderline illegal acts (such as denying exit of under-18s in the London kettling on Weds) and get away with it, while anything else anyone does that is just as borderline or illegal is instantly defamed.

Paul Stephenson (now a vilified figure within his old force) was right when he said a new era of protesting and policing has arrived. And I really hope its not for the worst, although I fear it! The police have a duty to obey and uphold the law.

I've noticed that it seems to be the Met that are the worst.

From what I've heard from a friend who was part of Lothian & Borders at the time, they were apalled by the conduct of the Met police who were in Edinburgh to help out with the G20 protests.

 

[ainsworth74]

Yeah it does seem to be the Met that are the worst, but then again most of the high profile demonstrations take place in London so they're more to be put under the microscope and any minor flaw discovered. None the less their actions over the past few years whilst being under that microscope are nothing but concerning that's for sure.

 

[Tom B]

A somewhat wild generalisation, not quite up to your usual standard of analysis.

I shall clarify my comment.

There is an element within the management of education institutions who see students as walking bags of money. For instance, they might wish a student who is clearly taking the wee, never turns up, does no work etc to stay because of the money lost if they leave. These are equally the type who push for statementing students when it may not be the best thing - as statemented students attract funding.