You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
A friends 2 children both did 4 year degrees, finished only recently, in Chemistry and Physics. Both of them said there was no point at all in getting a standard degree as they would not even get job interviews for the better jobs as there were too many 'plain' degrees already in the market, so they were worth nothing to good employers.
- So an extra years tuition fees/living costs already on top of 3 years standard debt.
Where I work 10 years ago to do the bottom level jobs you needed just normal school exams. People who applied who had degrees were weeded out by the management and laughed at for being pathetic enough to have 'such low expectations', combined with the solid unmovable belief that graduates were too bright to do the bottom level work and would leave the job rapidly due to 'boredom'as they were special people, elite and above any ordinary job.
Today the same job is targeted at graduates and anyone without a degree is very rarely interviewed on the grounds they are not bright enough and would not engage fully with the job due to not being intelligent enough !!!!
Frankly, anyone with a moderate intelligence level could do the jobs perfectly well at any point from then to now as its only basic admin.
If it's gonna cost me £xx,000 to put each of my two kids through Uni, I think I will give them the option of going to Uni or me helping/financing them to start their own businesses.
As I understand it, there will be penalty clauses to stop parents with the means to do so paying fees up front.
While I don't necessarily agree with what the government proposes (and, for example, there is some debate about whether studying medicine is affordable if one qualifies with debts for fees alone of £35000), there are too many people doing soft degrees. Some Universities will not survive this.
However if the effect of needing to earn enough to pay back the fees is to increase places in science/engineering (the things the British economy needs and in which we have to bring in overseas graduates as there aren't enough of our own) at the expense of places doing David Beckham studies at the University of Fulchester, then is that really a bad thing?
Andy
What do you think Labour would be doing if they were in power, given they introduced tuition fees?
A fair point. But I would hope that, theoretically, a LibDem govt (I voted LibDem) would be considering something else. Fairness, equity, social mobility, classless-ness are important parts of Liberal thinking are they not?
On the value of a university education: Work does not prepare you for life IMO - Education is not training. Education is the inverse of Ignorance, something that advanced societies really need.
But we cannot afford to fully educate everyone to their maximum ability. How do we decide who pays and who gets our funding? It used to depend on real ability (for parents) to pay. Now it depends in [i]theoretical[/i] ability of the student to pay eventually.
But many degrees will not, in themselves, lead to higher-paid work. Also our industries needs graduates of some degree subjects more than others. Whilst I cannot deny the value of an "English Lit" graduate, perhaps a "Computer Science", "Accountancy" or "Fashion and Media" graduate is more valuable and deserves our funding.
As I understand it, there will be penalty clauses to stop parents with the means to do so paying fees up front.
Really? I've not seen that but have seen a stupid suggestion about getting those who pay off debts early to pay more.
A fair point. But I would hope that, theoretically, a LibDem govt (I voted LibDem) would be considering something else. Fairness, equity, social mobility, classless-ness are important parts of Liberal thinking are they not?
Anyone remember (or hear about) the Scottish LibDems key promise that they would abolish tuition fees if they were voted into the Scottish Parliment back in 1998? I voted for them and so did a lot of students purely on that basis. This was the first thing that went out the window as soon as Labour offered them a place in the coalition government.
I decided then that the only genuine policy the LibDems had was that they were for Getting Into Power and against Not Getting Into Power and that in actual fact they were the Scum of the Earth. Hell, even the BNP has an actual agenda.
University should be for the top 5% of highly capable talented people, not privileged toffs, or mediocre "also rans".
The problem with this model is that private schools are the best at getting their kids to float to the top no matter which criteria is used. On average, those kids don't do as well as those from state schools with the same grades. So with a high selection ratio we end up with lots of kids from richer backgrounds getting to University and getting the better paid jobs. That ain't (socially) fair
the expansion of university places was a good thing imho
as our economy has transformed from a blue collar to white collar we need more university trained professionals,
even silly degrees are all good, more students= more money = better facilities and international students are a cash cow and continue to come as the reputaion f UK universities is as high if not higher than ever
the explosion in the finacial sector, among others has required that we need more IT, a****ants, lawyers etc etc and salaries have risen to reflect this
sadly in the other areas we excel; science and engineering salaries have not risen, hence why midnightours friend feel their science degrees are not worth anything, they could get basic jobs but the starting salaries are a joke
the problem is not that degrees are worth less its that business does not reward them
although i believe nulab should have done something to encourage unis to focus on real degrees over softer subjects
raising tuition fees is a mistake it will massively reduce the number of people going to university at a time when we need to be investing in the future, we will be condemed to an educational dark ages
the libdems have sold their soul-
you expect torries to be against social mobility
but cable has shown his true colours hes as honest as castirondave and obviously just using a yellow badge to get into power
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
the libdems have sold their soul
Need to sell all sorts to clean this mess up.
Good photos. I may email them to my LibDem MP.
Getting Into Power
The primary agenda of political parties of all colours! Compromising policy is the nature of consensus politics - it does not make them bad people. While I'm frustrated by ConDem policy, I have to remind myself that it is the nature of the game. But it's hard when cherished policies are dropped.
[s]Compromising[/s] capitulating on policy is the nature of consensus politics
Fixed it for you.
This is not a compromise it is a reversial of stated policy as it was over the economy. They could have held frin over their beliefs and principles in asort of principled manner instead of propping up /enabling a Tory govt to do what the libs said they would not do and what they di dnot stand for...shamefull and they will pay an electoral price for this IMHO.
[i]Need to sell all sorts to clean this mess up. [/i]
really so how does this in any way prevent another global financial meltdown, by actually reducing our knowledgebase?
I wish I could agree but it didn't seem to have any effect on the results of the Scottish Parliament elections in the 2003 or 2007 elections 🙁This is not a compromise it is a reversial of stated policy as it was over the economy. They could have held frin over their beliefs and principles in asort of principled manner instead of propping up /enabling a Tory govt to do what the libs said they would not do and what they di dnot stand for...shamefull and they will pay an electoral price for this IMHO.
even silly degrees are all good, more students= more money = better facilities
Why do more students mean more money when it's all coming from the same budget? Unless you're suggesting the students pay fees (which you seem to be against) or the publicly funded budget expands in proportion to the number of students - when the same amount of money could mean even better facilities with less students. I don't see how the people with silly degrees help with the need for skills in important areas.
The important question is who exactly should be paying for this massive expansion in useless degrees if you wan't to prevent a rise in fees - a point you don't seem to have covered, kimbers. At least us elitists have a plan to keep fees down - decrease the numbers.
The problem the Lib Dems have is that it's easy to come up with idealist policy ideas when you don't expect to ever be faced with the reality of how to implement them...
so how does this in any way prevent another global financial meltdown, by actually reducing our knowledgebase?
Well it will be tough, but somehow we'll just have to muddle through with less people qualified in photography and meeja studies.
I just by the time my two have decide whether they want to go on to university or not the system will have collapsed and rebuilt itself into something more sustainable.
The Tories did start the rot when Polytechnics morphed into (generally second rate universites). They had a different role and filled it well. Labour really stuck the boot in and destroyed the social mobility aspect of universtiy that grants and acemdemic standards criteria had started to introduce in the 50s and 60s. All labour did was make it expensive to go to universtiy and less worthwhile financial when you came out. They also had huge double standards, on the one hand they based your eligibility for grants and loans on your parents income but then linked repayments to your income. The whole pont of what Labour was trying to do was give everyone an equal chance, great sentiment, why not treat everyone equally then, your background and parent's finances ought to be irrelevant if everyoone comes out the increased earning potential. Also seems ironic that those that least use the additional education they get and end up in low level jobs are also the ones least likely to repay their costs.
That's going to all pretty irrelevant though if call me Dave's all in together policies come to fruition. The whole system will crash, there's not many people who are going to take on £ 50k debt before they earnt anything. maybe it's all a cynical and cowardly wall to reduce the university sector without having the balls to stand up and say it's not actually desireable, affordable or economically required for so many people to have degrees. These plans are going to hit everybody except the really wealthy and put back genuine merit based social mobility back by decades.
The problem the Lib Dems have is that it's easy to come up with idealist policy ideas when you don't expect to ever be faced with the reality of how to implement them...
The problem with the Lib Dems is that even when they know that they probably will get some power through a coalition government (as happened in Scotland 10 years ago and this year in the UK in general) they still have absolutely no intention of implementing any of their key policies.
The Tories did start the rot when Polytechnics morphed into (generally second rate universites).
The change happened in the middle of my HE time - I started off at an average Poly (Sheffield) and ended up at a decent Uni (Warwick). I believe the opinion at the time was that Polys had a 2nd rate feel to them that wasn't really fair as the best Polys had better courses than the worst Unis. I think initially Polys were more vocational but by the time they changed they were similar IME - my Warwick MSc was pretty vocational really and you could study more academic courses at Poly if that was your thing. So I believe the change removed a level of snobbery - or at least attempted to as mostly we know the best and worst Unis and which one you went to does matter to a degree 😉
well saying silly degrees were [u]all[/u] good wasnt right
and
who exactly should be paying for this massive expansion in useless degrees if you wan't to prevent a rise in fees - a point you don't seem to have covered, kimbers. At least us elitists have a plan to keep fees down - decrease the numbers.
so....
personally id rather see people pay more to do soft degrees, unless exceptionally talented in which case you could get some kind of bursary - the arts do have some merit and im sure that someones done something useful with a media studies degree somewhere
and the rest should be funded with a means tested grant system
i also dont have a problem with an earnings related graduate tax
though knowing several ex IT graduates working in the city im sure theyd employ accountants to make sure they avoid those taxes the way they do the rest of em
still need extra money, then taxes would have to rise,
or i could wheel out the other libdem lie about scrapping trident....
I'm just thankful that I got to study Archaeology & Anthropology at Oxford for three years, without incurring debts of £20K plus - because there's not a cat's chance in hell I could do it now. My undergrad degree was of zero benefit financially (I subsequently worked as an auxiliary nurse...), but - **** me - I loved every minute of it & I'm eternally grateful for my Bod card. I can't even begin to quantify what it means to me.
Generally, I disagree with much of what [url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4642806.stm ]Boris[/url] says, but his defence of education for, uhh, education's sake (especially Classics) is impeccable. Especially if the alternative is simply factory processing kids for a lifetime in accountancy.
Caution: Smug bugger reply...
Education has done me well, First class degree, (almost) a PhD and I am about to enter my dream job... In a country where the sun is out for 300 days a year!
For those of you who feel strongly about this there is going to be a march at Westminster on 10th November.
Stoner - Member
No. Labour killed the value of Uni when they started aiming for 50% young people undergraduate. But then Im an elitist dinosaur.
I have to agree on that!
Didn't want to go to uni. Couldn't afford it either. I'll use a few examples of people I know who went to uni. Same age or thereabouts. "A" has a degree in History, "B" in law and "C" in engineering (not sure which branch).
"A" now works as a manager in a retail outlet. Studied history because he was interested in it.
"B" now a lecturer at a uni. Worked for 12 years prior to going to uni. Funded himself (no debt when he finished)
"C" has his own sales agent business. Engineering because his dad was an engineer.
"A" and "B" used my tax £ to fund an interest or hobby if you will.
How would everyone on here like to contribute to my hobby?
"B" used my tax £ (and his own) to receive an education to educate others in the future. His uni experience will benefit the country at some point. "A" and "C"s experience has benefited them personally and given them the "uni" experience.
In each case, I earn more than them, have worked more years than them and have contributed more in tax than them.
Where has the education in History and Engineering gone? For balance, I also know 2 people who have been to uni and have a career directly related to their degrees.
I have 3 children. If they want to go to uni, they can. They will have to pay for their education and so they should. I dont want anyone to fund my childrens interests. If they want learn more to earn more, good for them. If they want to experience uni just for the experience....it should cost them.
I want to experience New Zealand...anyone willing to pay for me...?
No...?
Rant over.