Student protest, London 10 November

[L00b 441]

You seem to have conflicting views (quotes in chronological order):

 

They don't pay for your education exactly. They pay tax, and it goes into a big pot and gets sent to where it is needed.

 

Using your earlier logic, a poor polish farmer who can't afford his next meal paid for it.

 

I was making a point about the poor in the EU paying for someone's education here.

 

BTW, I very much doubt a "poor polish farmer who can't afford his next meal" would pay tax. But that's by the by

 

Well L00b referenced his education being EU funded. I believe my point works under context.

But you were quick to take that out of context to suit your argument: my point was that I wasn't British, but studied in the UK, and the EU paid the Uni fees, and that the same principle may well apply for a British student who goes to study in another EU Member State than the UK. Edited November 11, 2010 by L00b

[Chris_Sleeps 10]

Not conflicting. Post #1 is true. Post #2 and #3 are attempts at ironically prodding llamatron's views.

 

I am being misunderstood.

[Mecky 10]

Anyone has the right to go to Uni, last I checked.

 

 

And that right is to be taken away from some people because of financial prohibition.

[L00b 441]

And that right is to be taken away from some people because of financial prohibition.

 

People will still have a right to go to Uni. I don't see how the right is taken away, sorry. You seem to be confusing 'right to education' with 'right to be sponsored through education'.

[alchresearch 214]

And that right is to be taken away from some people because of financial prohibition.

 

Do they have to pay upfront before they're allowed on a course?

[Chris_Sleeps 10]

But you were quick to take that out of context to suit your argument

I never took it out of context. You got an education funded by the EU. I've not twisted that statement in any way shape or form. It wasn't even a point i was making, it was just an observation. I haven't used it to make any proposition at all.

[Tony 10]

And that right is to be taken away from some people because of financial prohibition.

 

How lovely it would be if you didn't ever have to pay back a penny of unless you earned more than £21k.

 

Imagine how jealous you'd be if you're currently paying back a loan but only earning £15k.

[L00b 441]

I never took it out of context. You got an education funded by the EU. I've not twisted that statement in any way shape or form. It wasn't even a point i was making, it was just an observation. I haven't used it to make any proposition at all.

You haven't?

I was making a point about the poor in the EU paying for someone's education here.

Well L00b referenced his education being EU funded. I believe my point works under context.

M'k, whatever... I must be misunderstanding you again

[unuspromulti 10]

I didn't say the new system would help that. But if everyone goes to uni someone has to pay. If a far lower percent of the population went to uni we wouldn't have this problem.

 

No Im not with BUPA. I fully agree with everyone paying for the NHS. Why would you assume that if I am for paying for my own education I would automatically be for paying for the NHS. They are totally different areas. We have free education for all and that is a good thing. We are talking about very specialised further education that will get the student a very well paid job.

 

You're supporting the new system and claiming that only bright kids should go to uni as if it will help the issue. The issue being that the Government have decided that they dont want to pay for university out of taxpayers money any more and are saying that those who go to uni should pay for it with interest. You agree with that perhaps as you didnt go and feel you're paying tax to the government for kids to cruise for 3 years, fine. What I pointed out is that the new system wont help the talented get to university but the affluent with no major provisions for helping those poorer off.

 

You say we should all pay for the NHS but not higher education, why should I pay for your lung transplants and years of treatment later in life if you smoked? I dont smoke yet pay for others to deal with the consequences of it yet giving those who want to better themselves by going to university and in turn pump more money into the economy you have a problem with?

 

Nursing is not a very well paid job yet now requires a degree, how are nurses (paid between 21-27k) going to able to pay off 40k of debt and then buy a house or raise a family?

[Nemex 10]

Exactly. "Higher education for all" is a fluff-brained socialist ideal which wastes education on the majority of people now attending university for Mickey Mouse degrees who are just not academically-minded.

 

We are not all equal, some people are brighter than others and not everybody should be brainwashed into thinking they have the right, or the ability, to get a worthwhile degree.

 

Instead, we should focus on providing high quality free degree level education to those properly suited to that sort of career path, and help the rest with lower-level training schemes.

 

Couldn't have put it better myself.

[donkey 10]

Its not in any way supposed to be paying off the deficit, all it is meant to do is make going to University sustainable. At the moment and for many years it has not been.

 

You don't think diverting billions in taxes which were formally for education will have an impact on the deficit?

 

I notice you doin't dispute that this is a massive hike in fees.

 

so would you prefer no government-yes that would work well!

 

Where did I say that? The point is that a government with no popular mandate has no right to impose radical changes which negatively impact on miillions of people. This government is in power through the deception of the Lib Dems. The majority of people did not vote for money being diverted from basic services to pay for the losses incurred by multi millionaires.

Edited November 11, 2010 by donkey

[llamatron 10]

You're supporting the new system and claiming that only bright kids should go to uni as if it will help the issue. The issue being that the Government have decided that they dont want to pay for university out of taxpayers money any more and are saying that those who go to uni should pay for it with interest. You agree with that perhaps as you didnt go and feel you're paying tax to the government for kids to cruise for 3 years, fine. What I pointed out is that the new system wont help the talented get to university but the affluent with no major provisions for helping those poorer off.

 

You say we should all pay for the NHS but not higher education, why should I pay for your lung transplants and years of treatment later in life if you smoked? I dont smoke yet pay for others to deal with the consequences of it yet giving those who want to better themselves by going to university and in turn pump more money into the economy you have a problem with?

 

Nursing is not a very well paid job yet now requires a degree, how are nurses (paid between 21-27k) going to able to pay off 40k of debt and then buy a house or raise a family?

 

I did go to Uni and I am currently paying my tuition fees. Guess what, I don't even count it as debt. It is just an extra tax on my wages.

 

Nurses probably won't pay off their debt eventually it will get written off-wheres the problem.

 

High earning lawyers however will pay more than it costed to administer their course. High earners will be subsidising low paid nurses etc