Is it feasible to scrap student fees?

I was reading some news websites when I found the headline “ I'll scrap tuition fees, says Labour hopeful Jeremy Corbyn.

"There are no student fees in Scotland, Germany and 12 other European countries; I want to bring all UK students into line with that sensible approach."

“ .. the £7 billion in lost fee revenue would be replaced through a 7% rise in National Insurance contributions on anyone earning £50,000 or more a year.”

The above may not be new to many but I am struggling to make sense of the £7 billion in lost fee revenue would be replaced through a 7% rise in National Insurance contributions on anyone earning £50,000 or more a year … is this true, is it feasible, can it be done, could you explain it in more details please

I was reading some news websites when I found the headline “ I'll scrap tuition fees, says Labour hopeful Jeremy Corbyn.

"There are no student fees in Scotland, Germany and 12 other European countries; I want to bring all UK students into line with that sensible approach."

“ .. the £7 billion in lost fee revenue would be replaced through a 7% rise in National Insurance contributions on anyone earning £50,000 or more a year.”

 

The above may not be new to many but I am struggling to make sense of the £7 billion in lost fee revenue would be replaced through a 7% rise in National Insurance contributions on anyone earning £50,000 or more a year … is this true, is it feasible, can it be done, could you explain it in more details please

its another indication of how out of touch the labour leadership hopefuls are out of touch with reality.

I was reading some news websites when I found the headline “ I'll scrap tuition fees, says Labour hopeful Jeremy Corbyn.

"There are no student fees in Scotland, Germany and 12 other European countries; I want to bring all UK students into line with that sensible approach."

“ .. the £7 billion in lost fee revenue would be replaced through a 7% rise in National Insurance contributions on anyone earning £50,000 or more a year.”

 

The above may not be new to many but I am struggling to make sense of the £7 billion in lost fee revenue would be replaced through a 7% rise in National Insurance contributions on anyone earning £50,000 or more a year … is this true, is it feasible, can it be done, could you explain it in more details please

Presumably by "lost revenue" he's talking about income from fee's to the universities that the government lends to students in order to pass on to the uni.

So instead of lending it, they'll just give it directly to universities.

The only real loss to the government would be future repayments of the loans, which I doubt stands at £7billion a year.

Is he assuming that everyone that goes through uni will be on 50K a year and be able to pay it back via increased NI? Its been a few years since I've been to uni and I'm not on that yet.

What about the cost of all those that drop out and never go on to earn 50k? Will they be pursued for the monies spent on their education? I'd really need to know how Scotland and the 12 other countries do things and if we'd implement the same before saying whether its good or bad.

Is he assuming that everyone that goes through uni will be on 50K a year and be able to pay it back via increased NI? Its been a few years since I've been to uni and I'm not on that yet.

 

What about the cost of all those that drop out and never go on to earn 50k? Will they be pursued for the monies spent on their education? I'd really need to know how Scotland and the 12 other countries do things and if we'd implement the same before saying whether its good or bad.

i would envisage a lot of folks going through high school and uni without paying a bean. then when faced with a massive tax rate for working in the uk when earning £50k deciding to buga off and work in the usa, canada or oz where they can earn more and keep it.

National Insurance is a tax on all income earned by working.

The high earning workers pay less as a percentage than those on mid to low income because there is a maximum.

Income earnt from most other sources are not subject to NI.

If NI was a tax based on income alone then high earners would pay significantly more, not only on their salaries but also on their unearned income.

Tories will not change NI despite the vast majority of their voters paying a larger percentange than their leaders and party support.

Abolishing/absorbing/levelling of NI has the potential to extract billions fron the richest without affecting those who earn £49 999 or less.

National Insurance is a tax on all income earned by working.

 

The high earning workers pay less as a percentage than those on mid to low income because there is a maximum.

 

Income earnt from most other sources are not subject to NI.

 

If NI was a tax based on income alone then high earners would pay significantly more, not only on their salaries but also on their unearned income.

 

Tories will not change NI despite the vast majority of their voters paying a larger percentange than their leaders and party support.

 

Abolishing/absorbing/levelling of NI has the potential to extract billions fron the richest without affecting those who earn £49 999 or less.

IMO, National Insurance is one of those fiddly taxes that should be abolished and money obtained by income tax. It all goes into one pot, after all. Successive governments seem to revel in keeping and even creating lots of different taxes in order to micromanage (and confuse) people. Much better, IMO, to simplify the lot and have as few separate taxes as possible. Simpler and cheaper to manage and collect.

Is he assuming that everyone that goes through uni will be on 50K a year and be able to pay it back via increased NI? Its been a few years since I've been to uni and I'm not on that yet.

 

What about the cost of all those that drop out and never go on to earn 50k? Will they be pursued for the monies spent on their education? I'd really need to know how Scotland and the 12 other countries do things and if we'd implement the same before saying whether its good or bad.

Young Scots get squeezed out in favour of rich kids from non euro nations. The SNP like to keep this fact a wee secret.

Is he assuming that everyone that goes through uni will be on 50K a year and be able to pay it back via increased NI? Its been a few years since I've been to uni and I'm not on that yet.

 

What about the cost of all those that drop out and never go on to earn 50k? Will they be pursued for the monies spent on their education? I'd really need to know how Scotland and the 12 other countries do things and if we'd implement the same before saying whether its good or bad.

No, he's expecting all those that do earn more than that (education non withstanding) to pay the extra.

I was reading some news websites when I found the headline “ I'll scrap tuition fees, says Labour hopeful Jeremy Corbyn.

"There are no student fees in Scotland, Germany and 12 other European countries; I want to bring all UK students into line with that sensible approach."

“ .. the £7 billion in lost fee revenue would be replaced through a 7% rise in National Insurance contributions on anyone earning £50,000 or more a year.”

 

The above may not be new to many but I am struggling to make sense of the £7 billion in lost fee revenue would be replaced through a 7% rise in National Insurance contributions on anyone earning £50,000 or more a year … is this true, is it feasible, can it be done, could you explain it in more details please

In one word - no!

You should bear in mind that when David Willetts was Shadow Education Minister he opposed the move to tuition fees. Then when he became Minister for universities and Science he actually raised them. Similar thing goes for the Lib Dems - said they would vehemently oppose any rise, then went along with the Tories and did it anyway.

What all this means is that it's easy to say one thing in opposition and a completely different thing once you actually chat to all the policy officials and experts and realise the real cost of your ideas. Just look at Greece. Current Governement elected on the back on anti-austerity promises and even hold a referendum on whether to accept measures. But in the end they do it anyway because the simple reality is, they can't afford not to.

No, he's expecting all those that do earn more than that (education non withstanding) to pay the extra.

what even the ones who decide to work abroad?

far from scrapping the fees! they should be increased to weed out the time wasters that just go on to uni with their dumbed down gcse and A level results to avoid joining the real world? then sitting around afterwards with the non degrees that are around now.

increase by 50% if you really want to go and have only half on a loan