You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Feeling hard done by yet?
"I believe in this and it's been tested by research......".
Thanks Mystery Mod! 8)
Recent news from Bury North is far more concerning than this.
I thought that was what he said? That they'd look at it?
They did commit to abolishing tuition fees though. For new students..
[url= https://www.google.co.uk/amp/amp.timeinc.net/nme/news/jeremy-corbyn-will-deal-already-burdened-student-debt-2082478%3Fsource%3Ddam ]From the GE campaign.[/url]
Oh look money tree ... 😆
Yep, sounds like a non-story to me. Jeremy Corbyn in backing up what he has already said, shocker!
Usual BBC crap.
Hmm I am not a Corbynista but there's no inconsistencies there.
Recent news from Bury North is far more concerning than this.
It was a poor self agrandising maiden speech which failed to make any real contribution to the debate on tution fees, but Binners still thinks the sun shines out of his backside and to be fair he has maintained the local profile consistent with his predecessor
Or are you on about the kiddie porn cover-up at Bury MBC?
[url= http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/two-bury-council-officers-deliberately-13362889 ]Paedophillia alleagations not investigated to help Labour in election[/url]
[img] 
[/img]
So anyone want to give us a good idea how much of the 9k fee's will end up being paid back in the end?
So anyone want to give us a good idea how much of the 9k fee's will end up being paid back in the end?
Probably the bulk of them, given that the starting point for repayment has been frozen at £21,000. Repayment calculators suggest that a graduate on an "average" career path will pay off over 23 years and repay about 50% of the capital in interest.
One of the perverse features of a graduate loan rather than a graduate tax is that those that get higher paying jobs pay off their loans more quickly and end up contributing less overall than those with lower paying "average" jobs.
Got a link to the figures you used?
Repayments are calculated on earnings above 21k the example on the loans site has earnings of 30k so repayments are 9% if 9k leaving you 33 years to pay off the original loan.
The real question still stands is it better to put that debt around the necks of the young or should it be part of general taxation as it should enrich the economy.
How can we have got to a situation where in 20 years university educational funding has been obliterated from complete to minute.
In small steps it has become easy to accept that huge fee's are normal.
I didn't know he was friends with Nicholas Cage.
eddiebaby - Member
"jeremy-corbyn-i-never-said-we-would-write-off-student-debt"Feeling hard done by yet?
i didn't think he did?
(scrapping tuition fees, and cancelling debt, are different things)
anyway, 'kids'? - i'm 40, and i'll be making payments to my student loan till well into my 60's.
slackboy - MemberOne of the perverse features of a graduate loan rather than a graduate tax is that those that get higher paying jobs pay off their loans more quickly and end up contributing less overall than those with lower paying "average" jobs.
one of the interesting things about the (relatively) new system of 9k fees, and higher repayment threshold, is that this problem is hugely mitigated.
one of the interesting things about the (relatively) new system of 9k fees, and higher repayment threshold, is that this problem is hugely mitigated.
again when did we get to the point that these sort of fee levels were needed.
About 100 years ago
But we persisted in a regressive scheme of lower income segments subsidising the middle classes instead. Most bizarre...
How can we have got to a situation where in 20 years university educational funding has been obliterated from complete to minute.
Thatcher.
I went to Uni for free with grants (due to folks low income) post Thatcher...
She had her faults but she did not take away free uni.
Yep, sounds like a non-story to me. Jeremy Corbyn in backing up what he has already said, shocker!Usual BBC crap.
+1
I went to Uni for free with grants (due to folks low income) post Thatcher...She had her faults but she did not take away free uni.
She set the scene though.
Did she set the 50% of people going to uni target?
That caused the problem.
99% of people don't need a degree, and most that do just need 3 years to get drink, drugs and lying about out of their system.
[quote=molgrips ]She set the scene though.
In what way?
Did she set the 50% of people going to uni target?That caused the problem.
I agree it is a problem, but wasn't that a Blair thing? I got a token grant in 94 and nothing in 95.
In what way?
We've done all this before.
I agree it is a problem, but wasn't that a Blair thing?
I can't remember, but yes, I thought it was Blair.
A degree is now worthless, but you really have to have one, and it costs a fortune. Law of unintended consequences...
It's hard to compare a 80's / 90's Uni experience to one now. There won't be many (any) Uni's still running catered halls of residence with 3 amp sockets and shared bathrooms. The library landscape has changed vastly, was back in the day all about buying books journals, now it is all about online subscriptions, costing many, many thousands of pounds. There have also been big improvements in labs, sporting facilities etc. Add on the increase to 50% of youngsters attending and it means someone needs to pay for it all.
And don't forget the taxpayer is still giving big sums of money to the Uni's even with tuition fees etc in place.
Unfortuantely, not sure how to get back from the brink with this.
I dont have a degree, but my sister does (Law). She works in Morrisons and I work with electricity transmission.
Its a joke that she has a good degree and cant get a decent job, yet someone with a bit more 'fluffy' degree can waltz into a good job as they have that bit of paper...
crazyjenkins01 - Member
...yet someone with a bit more 'fluffy' degree can waltz into a good job as they have that bit of paper...
yeah, it's exactly that easy, kids of today don't know they're born, etc. etc.
[quote=molgrips ]We've done all this before.
I must have missed it, humour me as I genuinely don't understand how it's Thatcher's fault at all. I was at uni when she got kicked out, and at that point there was still almost a full maintenance grant. However whilst she set in place the removal of maintenance grants (and replacement with loans), I still don't see how that directly led to fees - it certainly wasn't something I imagined was going to happen when I left (by which point Major had won a GE).
Tuition Fees (which I think is what we are talking about?) were introduced in 1998.
It was Blair and his expansion of higher education. Which at the time seemed like a good thing 🙁
[quote=somewhatslightlydazed ]It was Blair and his expansion of higher education. Which at the time seemed like a good thing
Did it? I'm sure I thought it was mistaken at the time - but then I was undoubtedly an elitist back then and my motives for thinking that might have been flawed.
I thought it was a dumb idea at the time. Not because I'm an elitist. Quite the opposite. I thought uni was a huge waste of time (apart from the beer, drugs and lying around obviously).
A degree is now worthless
Some degrees are.
The Higher Education systems in this country is a mess.
The problem now is that about a third of graduates' earning potential is no greater than a non-graduate - we have literally hundreds of thousands of grads with degrees in subjects no want wants with big debts.
At the same time we have acute shortages in science and technology - we need 70,000 a year for 10+ years to simply keep pace with people retiring. Any ambitions to grow UK manufacturing post-Brexit are laughable - these are above average income jobs.
Conversely, we have way more students doing law degrees than there are jobs, but no one telling them to stop.
Likewise, bursaries for nurses have been replaced by loans - guess what, no one wants to do nursing and we've told qualified immigrants we don't want them either.
[quote=5thElefant ]A degree is now worthless, but you really have to have one
What an excellent oxymoron!
At least we now have transparency on the mess. Hopefully in time, Uni will respond with different types of courses, over different periods and with different pricing with reference to things like face time with tutors etc.
The current one size fits all structure and pricing is absurd
got a link to the figures...
here:
https://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/student-loan-repayment-calculator
one of the interesting things about the (relatively) new system of 9k fees, and higher repayment threshold, is that this problem is hugely mitigated.
Nope, observation was based on the new system.
If you are paying 9% of your income above £21k and you earn £50k then you'll pay off the capital quicker and than someone who pays for 30 years at an average level and eventually has the remaining loan written off..
So in that case, someone on high income who has done "better" out of uni pays less than someone whose earning potential has not been as high, e.g. because they went into teaching/nursing/social work/theatre etc, etc.
The whole thing is absurd.
The student "loans" system is an utter farce. Its just a way of kicking the financial can down the road. Less than half of student loans will be repaid. the shortfall will have to be made up by the taxpayer, as will the cost of administering such a complex system in the first place.
A well educated population is a net benefit to everyone in the country. We should fund it properly and stop kidding ourselves that the current system is any better than a Ponzi scheme
A well educated population is a net benefit to everyone in the country.
If half the courses leave you unable to earn a decent living then those courses don't represent being 'well educated'.
With all of humanity's knowledge at our fingertips I'm not sure traditional education is of much use at all.
[quote=slackboy ]If you are paying 9% of your income above £21k and you earn £50k then you'll pay off the capital quicker and than someone who pays for 30 years at an average level and eventually has the remaining loan written off..
Not necessarily the case based on that calculator - an investment banker starting on £38250 pays back more than a civil engineer starting on £24500 (and I'd expect a civil engineer to be rather better paid than somebody going into teaching/nursing/social work/theatre)
Not necessarily the case based on that calculator - an investment banker starting on £38250 pays back more than a civil engineer starting on £24500
Nope
Its simple really they start with the same loan principle but one pays it back over a shorter period because they are earning more.
Substitute "student loan" with "mortgage" and it is exactly the same. If you pay your mortgage off in 20 years rather than 25 you'll pay less overall
Except you don't get to write off a mortgage after 30 years. Have you actually tried the calculator?
Not necessarily the case based on that calculator - an investment banker starting on £38250 pays back more than a civil engineer starting on £24500
And a marketing person starting on £26,000 pays back £55k - more than the investment banker.
I didn't write the tool but there seems something odd about the civil engineer calculation.
I don't know enough about the income profiles of the different careers - I looked at their examples of high and medium earners as a comparison.
Have you actually tried the calculator?
Have You?
Civil Engineer Starting Salary 24,500
Loan at start of repayments £40,136
Total repayments £56,065
Repayment term 23 years, 11 months
Investment Banker Starting Salary 37,500
Loan at start of repayments £40,136
Total repayments £49,353
Repayment term 12 years, 5 months
What am I missing?
Defund all the neo-marxist / postmodern humanities before we have conversations about scrapping fees . The ideological homogeneity of such institutions has reached it's zenith - Thus communists like JC want to mobilise the long march through proliferation of 'free' higher education.
[quote=richmtb ]What am I missing?
I'm not quite sure, because:
Civil Engineer Starting Salary 24,500
Loan at start of repayments £40,136
Total repayments £45,640
Repayment term 30 years
Initial loan repaid 85%
[quote=slackboy ]I didn't write the tool but there seems something odd about the civil engineer calculation.
It's assuming much less wage inflation for the engineers from what seems a decent starting salary. From personal experience that's quite close to realism.
richmtb - MemberThe student "loans" system is an utter farce. Its just a way of kicking the financial can down the road. Less than half of student loans will be repaid. the shortfall will have to be made up by the taxpayer, as will the cost of administering such a complex system in the first place.
Exactly this. It's subprime for students. The IFS has predicted that the lifetime cost of the new (£9000/3% over RPI) is actually going to prove more expensive than the previous system. It's just a way of hiding public borrowing and of course selling bits of the loan book off to the private sector.
At the same time we have acute shortages in science and technology - we need 70,000 a year for 10+ years to simply keep pace with people retiring.
And the fees have made this worse, as STEM courses tend to need more expensive equipment, labs etc, so the fees were maximised. (but are they all maximised these days?)
The discussion about total paybacks is flawed as there's no consideration of inflation and discounted costs. Yes, people on a lower salary pay more in actual pounds, but in real terms the later payments are lower.
slackboy - MemberNope, observation was based on the new system.
now change your calculations to use the numbers from the old system...
Using children who know no better - tick
Promising free everything for everyone - tick
Lying - tick
Just another day at the office for Labour