You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
44k in debt is what the average student can expect after they have completed their studies, according to 6music news.
44,000 pounds. by your mid 20's. that is really going to add another perspective to all financial descisions you make, isn't it?
is it worth it now? university, i mean.... i have acousin who flounced big time and now has a naff grade that is good for nothing and 32k on her head.
seems crazy to me. also seems crazy that most kids nowadays see uni as a rite of passage and a natural progression from college without really knowing what they want to do later in life.
Well, that 44k is not due to be paid for quite a while, if ever ...
it's good practice for being in debt for the rest of your life.
kind of like having a mortgage for booze.
Makes sense to me.
Go to University, just don't have aspirations to earn a good wage afterwards and you'll be fine.
Wasn't in Labour demanding 50% of kids went to Uni.
The only benefit I can see for the fees are some people might stop and think about whether they should or should not commit to it.
44k is crazy money though, regardless of how/when it's paid back.
My OH did a graduate course in medicine meaning that she spent 7 years in university and racked up the better part of 50k of debt. That course attracted some of the smartest and most dedicated people I've ever known, people who already have top notch BSc's and Msc's from the best universities in the country (and around the world), they could walk into jobs in other sectors without a thought but wanted to be doctors and I suspect most of them are ****ing good at it.
Most of those people say that if they were faced with the choice now, they wouldn't be able to afford to choose to stay in education as they'd have about 50% more debt than they already do. That seems a great shame to me.
Leave school, go to uni and you don't appear on the unemployment stats, even though you may not be doing anything meaningful. Leave uni with a whopping debt that can be sold onto a private collecting agency.
All debts will be due to be paid at some point...
My OH did a graduate course in medicine meaning that she spent 7 years in university and racked up the better part of 50k of debt.
getting into debt when you can see a clear way of paying it off with your almost garunteed high-flying job makes sense to me assuming you have the brins to do it in the first place.
studying modern art because you want to be an art teacher at the local comprehensive less so.
seems crazy to me. also seems crazy that most kids nowadays see uni as a rite of passage and a natural progression from college without really knowing what they want to do later in life.
Or is it their parents?
MrsT and I debated this twice.
Son left school and got an apprenticeship, got an HND in elect eng. He left that job to work for a construction eng firm, they paid for him to get a degree in civil eng. due to circumstances he left that job and has gone back to his old one on good terms. They are now encouraging to do a mechanical degree to future proof him and benefit them.
Daughter however went down the college/uni route and after 7 yrs(1 ill health off)she is now a teacher with an MA and a huge debt!!
studying modern art because you want to be an art teacher at the local primary less so.
Mine did textile design followed by pgce as a buffer if no jobs came about. She took up teaching and in her first Ofstead inspection last year gained an outstanding report as did her dept and the school as a whole. She has recently gained funding and introduced an after schools art club for those with poor motor skills. She has also found funding for an ICT animation project for another class teacher through her arts council contacts.
So it's not impossible for someone with a "soft arts" degree to put it to good use 😀
There are just so many "kids" out there with degrees and still have no idea what they want to or unable to get a job for whatever reason.
But it's not quite like a 'normal' debt - it'll work out more like a graduate tax you will end up paying once you reach a certain income then continue to pay for the foreseeable future.
most kids nowadays see uni as a rite of passage and a natural progression from college without really knowing what they want to do later in life.
Agreed with that though - if the mounting cost means more potential students think harder about why they want to go to uni, which course is best for them, what they plan on using the qualification for and when they are there they demand better value from the the course that won't be a bad thing.
[semi serious] For most uni is a thing you do to fill in time whilst you grow up a bit and learn how to learn - you could make an argument for the return of a version of national service that could do the same job for a lot of kids [/semi serious]
Worth every penny if the person wants to succeed - walk out having a good time, great networking and a degree.
Its not a licence to earn, its an aid to get there.
First off, I count myself very lucky to have gone to Uni before the time of tuition fees, think I even recieved a bit of a grant in year 1, but....
It seems to me that these days a degree is the normal stepping off point for education, whereas it was A levels about 25 years ago. Problem is that too many are doing non-vocational subjects which is dumping far too may young people into the jobs market, expecting graduate careers with a BSc in Basketweaving or the like.
Most graduates expecatations are just far too high, but then if you've been listening to the recieved wisdom that your £44K loan is an investment in your future life, it's easy to understand why.
A really good apprenticeship, (if you were lucky to find such a thing) would be my FE choice these days, probably followed by a part time degree. It's about finding a way to stand out in the jobs market and not be lumbered with a financial lead anchor until you are in your mid 50's.
edit - a bit like Treksters situation who can obviously type faster than me!
Most people won't ever pay that debt off. In that respect, high earners pay more, which is sort of "fair".
In fact, the whole thing is both deliberately, and accidentally, a big misleading mess.
Yep I went to uni and now do nothing with me degree and recently got a job where I pay it back. It's not much each month but the statements every year really piss me off and I do try to advise people to take another option. It's all in vocational qualifications that lead to careers now IMO.
go to uni, finish, pass and go bankrupt?
high earners pay more, which is sort of "fair".
This was always the case even before we started to cripple graduates with mountains of debt.
lemonysam - MemberMost of those people say that if they were faced with the choice now, they wouldn't be able to afford to choose to stay in education as they'd have about 50% more debt than they already do. That seems a great shame to me.
Then they are not as smart as you thought.
Of course they could afford to, a debt costs you nothing until you pay it off.
This was always the case even before we started to cripple graduates with even bigger mountains of debt.
Fixed that for you.
Its clearly a mad way to start life. Also mad that most of the money will never be repaid, think you repay after you earn £21k pa, and pay for a max of 30 years.
I'm pretty sure that some element of common sense and personal responsibility can see your debt below £30k, but not by much.
Pretty sure we don't need all these graduates. My wife and my cousin were pretty good at their nursing and social work jobs before some berk decided that they had to have degree rather than experience and appropriate ongoing training. And as MrsMC does post grad social work training, I can assure you that the quality of some of these indebted graduates is variable, to say the least.
My parents were desperate for me to be the first in the family to go to uni. We are now telling our kids that apprenticeships or other vocational qualifications might be better. Politicians of all sides gave really messed this up.
Maybe if we offered a grant to all the academically able people who actually would use their degree for the greater good, and made all tje affluent pissheads pay for their own courses, some normality could be brought back to the situation.
Mrs FD is still paying off student debt, now only has about £25k left to pay. Some months she can have £500 taken out of her take home pay 🙁
I think everyone should try working (or intern) for a year or two before uni, then it would give them a good idea about the real world.
I came out of university/postgrad stuff with about £40k of debt (before over a decade of interest!).
Some was on the SLC loans, the majority was regular bank finance provided to law/medicine/accountancy grads to help with extended study and exams.
To be honest, the interest rates on all loans have been (for the most part) very low, but that doesn't change the fact that I received no advice or assistance as a young lad, straight out of school, as to what this really meant.
Clearly, it was my responsibility to consider what I was doing, but at 18 you seem to be steered into university without much guidance at all. The funding for most is the least of their worries, behind actually getting a place.
Mine was a worthwhile investment from a purely financial perspective, but not sure I'd do the same again if faced with similar choices, it could have turned up very differently. The bank financed deals were no income linked, those payment just started coming out of my bank account...to the tune of £500 per month on top of my student loan.
As a trainee I wasn't earning much money and had £500 a month come off just to service the bank debt. Then I qualified and had a total of £800 a month.
Even if I hadn't managed to secure a training contract, the £500 a month would have been deducted (or not!) from my bank, which could have ruined me before my career even began. Happened to many, many friends.
Extended years of education, funded by the state, makes sense in so many ways.
Unfortunately, the people who are coming up to the age to benefit from this, can't vote.
So, it'll never happen.
Democracy in action.
IMO "lifelong learning" should now be a higher priority than university. The ability to retrain and/or increase your skill set throughout your life would make for a much more effective and competitive workforce, than trying to channel everyone through education before they even know what life is about.
Not that universities should be scrapped, but they should be scaled back and much of what is offered should be replaced by other provisions.
I'm still amazed people go to Universities to study degrees with no direct relevance to their career. It seems pointless accumulating all that debt when most jobs graduates actually get don't require a degree.
if the mounting cost means more potential students think harder about why they want to go to uni, which course is best for them, what they plan on using the qualification for and when they are there they demand better value from the the course that won't be a bad thing.
Realistically mounting fees mean that only the nice well-off posh families will be able to afford to send kids to uni and the proles will have to stick to non-professional jobs... which is pretty much exactly what the Tories want.
Personally I intend on moving back to Scotland before my kids are old enough for uni! 😀
Of course they could afford to, a debt costs you nothing until you pay it off.
No shit sherlock, I think "afford" might be a more nuanced word than you give it credit for.
I'm going to push my kids into apprentice type jobs or jobs where the additional learning is all done whilst with the company. I done want them to come out with huge debts and I don't think we'll ever be in a situation to pay it for them it they'd be at private school now.
Extended years of education, funded by the state, makes sense in so many ways.
Unfortunately, the people who are coming up to the age to benefit from this, can't vote.
So, it'll never happen.Democracy in action.
I [i]was[/i] old enough to vote and I voted for the party that said they would never back the increase of tuition fees..
..[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19646731 ]that didn't work out too well either[/url]!
Democracy inaction!
Then they are not as smart as you thought.
Of course they could afford to, a debt costs you nothing until you pay it off.
Only if their parents can afford all the other costs, accommodation, materials, books etc not fully covered by loans 🙄
Daughter attended her course 5 days a week, worked in an off-licence some nights and a restaurant at weekends and still managed to spend more than she could afford!!
Eldest grandson leaves school this year and had his sights set on the army engineers. Having cracked a vertebrae falling of his bike(as part of his fitness training)he has been told there is no chance!
He is now chasing 3 apprenticeship jobs.
lemonysam - MemberNo shit sherlock, I think "afford" might be a more nuanced word than you give it credit for.
In that case I take it back about your friends not being smart, they're just over-priviliged bullshitters.
😀
patriotpro - go to uni, finish, pass and go bankrupt?
It doesn't get written off, terms are written so that it can't be cancelled like that.
Better to borrow from the banks, pay it off then go bankrupt.
I'm pretty sure that some element of common sense and personal responsibility can see your debt below £30k, but not by much.
With £9000 a year tuition fees, that would leave less than £1000 a year. Suppose you could try and juggle a job too, but that's going to be pretty tough.
Realistically mounting fees mean that only the nice well-off posh families will be able to afford to send kids to uni and the proles will have to stick to non-professional jobs
You see, that well used line really annoys me when folk talk about student debt. I'm not saying grads having big debts is a good thing but the income of their parents will have no effect on graduates ability to handle the debt - you pay out of [u]your[/u] earned income. You could say that those from posh families who use a healthy dose of nepotism to get a nice well paid job after uni will end up paying more 😉
If it was an up front cost you'd have a point.
the repayments are tiny - a graduate earning £23k will pay a whopping £17/month.
you only repay if you're earning over the threshold, i wish my mortgage worked like that.
the repayments are smaller than the old system that no-one complained about.
most people (certainly anyone earning average income or less) will pay back a lot less than under the old system.
the repayments are tiny.you only repay if you're earning over the threshold.
the repayments are smaller than the old system that no-one complained about.
most people (certainly anyone earning average income or less) will pay back a lot less.
Don't think it even covers the interest!
Only if their parents can afford all the other costs, accommodation, materials, books etc not fully covered by loans
£44k, normal degree 3yrs. Tuition fees 3x£9k = £27k
So lets call it £6k a year to live off. That is perfectly doable. Actually bother to get work in the holidays and it should be a breeze.
I'm lucky enough to pay mine back when earning over 15k and until I retire (or die). 🙂
Compound interest means it's not the highest earners who can reduce the value quickly who pay most, but the middle earners who will pay back for a much longer period.
[quote=Coyote ]All debts will be due to be paid at some point...
Apart from student loans, obviously.
[quote=GrahamS ]Realistically mounting fees mean that only the nice well-off posh families will be able to afford to send kids to uni and the proles will have to stick to non-professional jobs... which is pretty much exactly what the Tories want.
Remind me again which government introduced tuition fees? Remind me which government restructured the way student loans work, so that lower earners pay less?
You are presumably unaware that fees can be paid for by loans which you need never pay off if you don't earn very much, so it doesn't actually make the slightest difference to your finances or those of your family if they increase the fees. Or as a socialist are you getting upset about higher earners having to pay more?
Personally I intend on moving back to Scotland before my kids are old enough for uni!
No need, as under EU rules your kids will be able to go to Scottish unis under Scottish student finance system once Scotland is independent. Might be a fight for places, but living in Scotland won't help with that.
Better to borrow from the banks, pay it off then go bankrupt.
Cool, so doeable just not as simply as i quandried 8)
Stop blaming the Tories, Labour introduced them (despite it not being in their manifesto in '97. Labour tripled them (when former NUS President Charles Clarke was Education Secretary), despite their manifesto saying there would be no increase in tuition fees. The legislation to push it through was passed only with the support of Scottish Labour MPs who should have abstained as it didn't affect their consituents following the creation of the Scottish Parliament (Scots hang your heads in shame, it may have been payback for the polltax, but that's like blaming German kids now for 2 world wars).
Once it was introduced fees were only ever going to go one way? Where were the NUS when fees were introduced? Not upsetting labour, as they didn't want to risk their future careers. NUS president of 97 has been a Special Adviser to the Scottish Parliamentary labour Party, NUS President of '98 stood as a Labour Candidate for Milton Keynes at the last election. They should hang their heads in shame for shafting future generations.
Politicians are almost exclusively self-serving scumbags regardless of their "affiliation".
I'll be encouraging my kids to do vocational studies unless they want a "profession" that can afford the debt.
...the income of their parents will have no effect on graduates ability to handle the debt - you pay out of your earned income...
Oh come on! No effect?
You don't think it is a [i]bit[/i] easier to handle the tuition fee debt if you know the Bank of Mum and Dad will pay for all your accommodation, food, beer, course materials etc while you are at uni and probably for the next few years after that while you get yourself established in a well-paid job? Maybe even pay off the fees for you?
We should be working ensuring that everyone has equal access to the education they want, regardless of background - not putting in additional barriers and costs!
Trekster - MemberDon't think it even covers the interest!
is that a problem?
Remind me again which government introduced tuition fees?
Yep - Labour are no better. Almost as many posh-boy Etonians in there these days.
But it was the Tories that decide to triple the fees.
You are presumably unaware that fees can be paid for by loans which you need never pay off if you don't earn very much, so it doesn't actually make the slightest difference to your finances or those of your family if they increase the fees.
Ahh... so it is 44k of purely theoretical magical debt that doesn't really exist and never actually needs paying off?
I'm confused how anyone can think that 44k of debt doesn't make the slightest difference to family finances, regardless of how it is structured and paid off.
[quote=GrahamS ]You don't think it is a bit easier to handle the tuition fee debt if you know the Bank of Mum and Dad will pay for all your accommodation, food, beer, course materials etc while you are at uni and probably for the next few years after that while you get yourself established in a well-paid job?
You have a good point about the other costs of uni being a barrier, but as pointed out multiple times, the tuition fee debt is an irrelevance compared to that. Just in case you missed it above, the Tory government decreased the tuition fee burden on those struggling to make ends meet.
[quote=GrahamS ]Ahh... so it is 44k of purely theoretical magical debt that doesn't really exist and never actually needs paying off?
Well £27k of it certainly is - the other bit is nothing to do with tuition fees. Given that somebody on low income will pay less under the current system than the previous one, why is it an issue how big the nominal debt is?
I'm confused how anyone can think that 44k of debt doesn't make the slightest difference to family finances, regardless of how it is structured and paid off.
If it makes no difference to your take home pay or to your ability to get a mortgage, what other difference do you imagine it would make to family finances? Banks certainly don't treat student loans the same as ordinary debt when assessing financial circumstances.
£44k, normal degree 3yrs. Tuition fees 3x£9k = £27k
So lets call it £6k a year to live off. That is perfectly doable.
Rent would consume around £4k p.a. Still think £2k p.a. for everything else is doable?
GrahamS - MemberAhh... so it is 44k of purely theoretical magical debt that doesn't really exist and never actually needs paying off?
pretty much, yes.
but most importantly, the repayments are less, by £50/month than they were.
that's £600/year, can i transfer my old student debt to the new system please? - i'll gladly accept the increased debt, because as has been mentioned once or twice, it'll makes no difference (other than reduced repayments)
Why do people go to Uni?
[b]Because there is a glass ceiling above their heads otherwise.[/b]
I'm applying for a MSc course, not because I want to [i]from an academic perspective[/i], but because I [i]have to[/i] in order for my career to progress.
Without a degree, my years of experience (and subsequent responsibilities) mean naff-all. I even applied (out of curiosity) for the most junior position in my area of IT, neglecting to include in my CV I had already done that job back in 2005. No degree? Sorry, you're not qualified for this position.
Without a degree/masters, there is no "up" from where I am now - and seemingly, no "down" either, which is worrying.
The poorer you are less you have to pay.
More importantly there are staggering amount of jobs which never required a degree in the past. I know someone who left school at 16 and is an area manager for a bank. All her qualification she picked up at the bank ie they were directly related to her job. Lots of jobs you used to learn on the job. It seems rather a waste of resources to be teaching people things they will never need.
25 yrs ago a £400 student overdraft was a big deal, and your annual student Loan of £500 was used for a pc or to help out with [s]beer[/s] living expenses and if I recall had to be paid back in 5 years 😆
[quote=ahwiles ]can i transfer my old student debt to the new system please?
You would presumably also happily triple your "debt" in order to do so?
(I'm assuming here that you're not a particularly high earner, so won't be paying off the debt).
double post - somebody please report to mods?
ransos - MemberRent would consume around £4k p.a. Still think £2k p.a. for everything else is doable?
Should be able to get rent below that, I pay that living in a nice part of Cambridgeshire, but yes, I think it's doable because I do it.
Add on a job for the holidays and it should be no problem.
Rent would consume around £4k p.a.
My daughter is at uni in That London Tarn. 4k pa rent looks like a dream to me !! 🙁
aracer - MemberYou would presumably also happily triple your "debt" in order to do so?
yes, happily, where do i sign? It'll save me £15,000, in actual money.
(I'm assuming here that you're not a particularly high earner, so won't be paying off the debt).
correct, exactly average salary, that's an Engineering degree for you.
Without a degree, my years of experience (and subsequent responsibilities) mean naff-all. I even applied (out of curiosity) for the most junior position in my area of IT, neglecting to include in my CV I had already done that job back in 2005
Your contradicting yourself you applied for a job which you were qualified (via experience) for but didn't tell them and funnily enough they didn't give you the job! Honest!
Also you had done the job before therefore how did you get the job that you weren't qualified for?
We need a better educated work force, the question isn't whether more people should be going the question is whether we should subsidize higher education more.
[quote=ahwiles ]that's an Engineering degree for you.
Ah yes - I too have one of those, and worked out I would be better off under the new system than the old (fortunately I'm old enough not to be on either).
Your contradicting yourself you applied for a job which you were qualified (via experience) for but didn't tell them and funnily enough they didn't give you the job! Honest!
Also you had done the job before therefore how did you get the job that you weren't qualified for?
I neglected to tell them I had done 1st line support work, but included the 2nd line, 3rd line, etc.
Lack of degree meant I didn't even match their minimum criteria for entry (regardless of experience)
Rent would consume around £4k p.a. Still think £2k p.a. for everything else is doable?
My rent (in 2004-2008) was £2500/yr for a room in Sheffield. And that came out of a £4k loan, and I actualy came out of uni with money in the bank (mostly saved from summer jobs and never spent).
So yup, £2k is plenty, £3.5k is even more.
Uni is still good VFM, just need to be bright and pick your course. Engineering, medicine, etc. University for people with B's and C's probably less so.
There are alternatives that may (I stress may) bring education costs down. MOOC's are growing in popularity and the technology makes the long distance learning alternative more viable and appealing. Adults less engaged in new technology may find it hard to acclimatise but kids will find it more 'normal'.
PS and she doesn't work for the coop bank where qualification are a disadvantage!
Surely payments START at £50/month
Just paid off my mortgage style loan after a million years (including a few years of downplaying earnings for deferrment). Have to say I would think twice about going to Uni now the debt would certainly scare me off. Seems far more transactional these days, less about getting an education and more about getting a job. Very sad state of affairs.
ahwiles - you're talking rubbish
I was old enough to vote and I voted for the party that said they would never back the increase of tuition fees..
Well two parties have said that, and both did the opposite after the elections (2001 & 2010).
But the truth is, the people who this most effects directly in future, still can't vote.
It is pretty terrible. But it's not quite had the effect we expected, the prediction was that it'd hammer admissions from lower income homes, not so much because of affordability but because of the whole spectre of debt thing- middle class people are just assumed to be more comfortable with scary sums of debt. In practice that doesn't seem to have happened, at least not for us, there does seem to be some truth that the lending facility is a playing field leveller- applications from lower income areas have actually increased a little. Mind you, we're doing more for widening access- more funding, more consideration during applications (and that extra funding largely comes from the higher income from fee-payers so it's a big feedback loop) and some say that we're actually seeing a longer term increase being suppressed a little, rather than a new increase. Frankly the statistical cases are easy to fiddle.
aracer - MemberNo need, as under EU rules your kids will be able to go to Scottish unis under Scottish student finance system once Scotland is independent. Might be a fight for places, but living in Scotland won't help with that.
I'll field this one 😉 Actually, the outcome isn't decided at all but what you describe is the least likely outcome and isn't taken seriously by the industry.
The 2 most likely outcomes:
1) The legal case for special circumstances is succesful. Fundamentally exemptions are allowed where legislation would bring an essential service into risk. Some folks seem to think this is going to work, I'm not, it's the scottish fee-free system that's at risk not the university sector. So the alternative...
2) The incredibly simple one, make it free at point of sale via automatic scholarships so while scottish/resident students are still officially paying fees, a fee abatement or scholarship for the same amount is made for every qualifying student. This is a system already widely used for PG funding via the SFC so the infrastructure all exists, it's really just a process change. I bet 10 scottish salmondollars this is what will happen.
Well £27k of it certainly is - the other bit is nothing to do with tuition fees
If it makes no difference to your take home pay or to your ability to get a mortgage, what other difference do you imagine it would make to family finances?
Makes no difference to your take home pay... [i]unless[/i] you earn more than £21,000 (when last I heard [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-20442666 ]the national average wage is £26,500[/url]).
Okay you have a long time to pay it off but it is still money directly out of your pocket when you are starting your career.
Banks certainly don't treat student loans the same as ordinary debt when assessing financial circumstances.
Perhaps not, but what about that other £17k worth of debt...?
I'm glad I graduated long before all this, but even [i]way[/i] back then I was still on pitiful student loans, four of us in a two bedroom flat, eating KwikSave "mince" and holding down two night jobs to pay my way.
My rent (in 2004-2008) was £2500/yr for a room in Sheffield. And that came out of a £4k loan, and I actualy came out of uni with money in the bank (mostly saved from summer jobs and never spent).So yup, £2k is plenty, £3.5k is even more.
You're way out of date. The cheapest self-catered halls at Sheffield are now more than £4k p.a.
https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/accommodation/prospective/rents
Lack of degree meant I didn't even match their minimum criteria for entry (regardless of experience)
That's the dumb ass HR filter in full effect, and why I cajole all my minions to ensure they get certified. Don't give anyone an excuse to not interview you.
Although I agree a degree for a service desk job is just bollocks.
Surely payments START at £50/month
Just for factual accuracy, payments start at 9% of earnings above £21K. So if you earn, for example, £25K you would be expected to pay 9% of £4K pa = £30pm.
If you earn less than £21K the amount you earn goes up by the current rate of inflation. By £41K pa earnings the interested accrued goes up to rate of inflation plus 3%.
Anyway, the staggering thing about the tripling of tuition fees is that it isn't significantly reducing the cost of higher education to the taxpayer.
the national average wage is £26,500).
Average graduate satarting sallary in 2013 was £29,500 IIRC, so that's a 9% retrun on an investment of £44k, that you may not even have to pay back if it doesn't give you a return!
One daughter university degree 32 £35,000 a year
second daughter no degree £50,000 a year and a company BMW [u][b] and neither of them will give me any money surely the bank of Dad should be paid first. [/b] [/u]
.thisisnotaspoon - Member
the national average wage is £26,500).
Average graduate satarting sallary in 2013 was £29,500 IIRC, so that's a 9% retrun on an investment of £44k, that you may not even have to pay back if it doesn't give you a return
I think that £29,000 should be after tax?
thestabiliser - Memberahwiles - you're talking rubbish
example?
graduates at our place start on £23k, that's £2k over the £21k threshold.
they pay back £200/year, that's £17/month.
(ok, it's 9% over the threshold, so it's actually less than i'm suggesting)
Graham S - But it was the Tories that decide to triple the fees. "
Following the precedent set by their Labour counterparts, who introduced them and tripled them within 5 years of their introduction, despite a manifesto which said that they wouldn't.
Once introduced fees will only go one way....
VAT was a tax on luxury goods when it was introduced, is heating and lighting your home a luxury???
ransos - MemberYou're way out of date. The cheapest self-catered halls at Sheffield are now more than £4k p.a.
So get a private house share for much less.
Unless you're telling me that accomodation around Sheffield is more costly than my nice part of Cambridgeshire, which I sincerely doubt.
Surely anyone who warrants a university education can work that out.
kelvin - But the truth is, the people who this most effects directly in future, still can't vote.
But shouldn't WE be voting for our kids futures? Not the baby boomers that really did "never have it so good"?
Our kids are effectively mortgaging their futures to pay for the retirements that their grandparents were promised.
[quote=GrahamS ]Makes no difference to your take home pay... unless you earn more than £21,000 (when last I heard the national average wage is £26,500).
You've confused me now, Graham. By saying "mounting fees" and "what the Tories want." I assumed you were complaining about the fees being increased by the Tories, not them being introduced by Labour. Apologies if it's actually Tony you're having a go at. What the Tories have done with the fee system increases the take home pay for those on national average wage.
Perhaps not, but what about that other £17k worth of debt...?
The debt which is related to the abolition of grants rather than the introduction of tuition fees? Well I think you can actually blame that one on Facha, but it might even pre-date her.
I'm glad I graduated long before all this
Not in maths presumably?
sbob - MemberUnless you're telling me that accomodation around Sheffield is more costly than my nice part of Cambridgeshire, which I sincerely doubt.
probably not, but Sheffield has 2 good universities, and only a small part of the city is favoured by students, there's a lot of demand!
The average 29k graduate salary is calculated by looking at graduates entering graduate schemes and the like. It completely ignores the fact that many graduates will not be doing these sorts of jobs or be earning those sorts of wages even though the job they're doing might list a degree as a requirement.