'Right to Recall' March 24th November 12pm

[ThatYank]

which one of you bozo's will start the trouble ???

[alas_alas]

Yes, we have excellent - if not the best - universities. Unfortunately, our government seems to think so little of them that we currently have one of the lowest rates of support from central funds of most other developed countries. Come the cuts, we'll be at the bottom of the pile. The American government spends proportionally more on its privitized universities than we do, at present! Don't believe me?:

 

Quote, "It is often forgotten that, in America, not only do the universities receive a much higher proportion of private money than British universities, they also receive a higher proportion of public money - from both the federal and state governments. Student contributions to university finance should complement public funding, not obviate the need for it."

 

from http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=414033

 

You might want to march tomorrow too, clubfoot, as you'll be lucky to get out of a social work qualification without a lifetime of debt dragging after you!

 

Dan_Ashcroft: ha! Just read your post. Hilarious. 'Higher education is not being cut'. Let me quote from the same source as above:

 

"It is not clear whether the Browne reforms would lead to the universities enjoying additional income. The report seems to concede that they will not. The levy is to begin at an annual charge of £6,000, at least £1,000 below what is probably needed to break even. Browne admits that "this may be less than the charge that institutions need to make to replace the Hefce funding that is removed from the system", but argues that "the purpose of starting the levy at a lower point is to instil a focus on efficiency throughout the system"."

 

Plus, do you think the almost complete removal of teaching grants for non-STEM subjects is not a cut? Erm...

[alas_alas]

And, yes Dan, tax should account for higher education spending, as it does in the American system, even though their universities are privatized.

 

Not everyone needs the NHS, we still pay for it. Not everyone needs the royal family, we still pay for that (plus some for the occasional marriage).

 

Higher education benefits everyone, which is more than can be said for many things the taxpayer funds.

 

'Bozos'? Jog on!

[Dinkey]

How much is an art degree worth anyway, unless you're going for a job in an art gallery or museum or similar ?

 

I can't begin to tell you how sad that post is

If you don't think there is any value in pursuing anything that is not just about simply making money or profits, I feel very sorry for you.

[Dan_Ashcroft]

Dan_Ashcroft: ha! Just read your post. Hilarious. 'Higher education is not being cut'. Let me quote from the same source as above:

 

"It is not clear whether the Browne reforms would lead to the universities enjoying additional income. The report seems to concede that they will not. The levy is to begin at an annual charge of £6,000, at least £1,000 below what is probably needed to break even. Browne admits that "this may be less than the charge that institutions need to make to replace the Hefce funding that is removed from the system", but argues that "the purpose of starting the levy at a lower point is to instil a focus on efficiency throughout the system"."

 

Plus, do you think the almost complete removal of teaching grants for non-STEM subjects is not a cut? Erm...

 

But Universities are going to charge £9k, not £6k. Why would they run anything at a loss now they have effectively been privatised?

 

The univeristies are being privatised (in all but name). Their public money is going, but they've been given licence to operate in the market and not only replace the losses through fees, but increase their revenue and grow where they have the capacity to do so.

[ThatYank]

I can't begin to tell you how sad that post is

If you don't think there is any value in pursuing anything that is not just about simply making money or profits, I feel very sorry for you.

 

or teacher ---you forgot teacher.

[Dan_Ashcroft]

And, yes Dan, tax should account for higher education spending, as it does in the American system, even though their universities are privatized.

 

Not everyone needs the NHS, we still pay for it. Not everyone needs the royal family, we still pay for that (plus some for the occasional marriage).

 

Higher education benefits everyone, which is more than can be said for many things the taxpayer funds.

 

'Bozos'? Jog on!

 

Why not nationalise everything and go for 60 or 70% income tax? Oh, hang on a minute, didn't we try that between 1945-78...

[chem1st]

I think you need to get a couple of your facts right.

 

Higher education is not being cut. All independent analysis agrees that the sector will grow by about 10% over the next 5 years. About a dozen of the worst universities will close or merge, but the best ones (including the 2 Sheffield ones) will expand at a greater rate and increase overall capacity. Funding per student will remain about the same, just students will pay directly, rather than taxpayers indirectly.

 

STEM subjects are retaining 20% government funding (while non-STEM are getting none; both currently get about 65%). STEM courses are more expensive to run though (because of the cost of labs, more contact hours etc.), so the £9k unis receive directly from students will be enough to pay for both STEM and non-STEM just the same as present.

 

If you want HE to remain state funded then you need to outline serious alternatives - a 10% rise in income tax say?

 

Please also try not to throw fire extinguishers at people from rooves this time. You managed to lose every ounce of public sympathy for your cause in one fell swoop the other week.

 

Don't be daft.

 

The tuition fee rise is a 9% increase in tax for students earning over £288pw.

 

Now, the fairness of this is very debatable.

 

Why should we not tax all equally? The students of tomorrow are not the ones benefiting today neither are they the ones whom hold the majority of today's funds.

 

A rise in income tax for all would be welcome.

 

%1 here and 1% there. NI for all at flat rate or at least in a regressive manner.

 

Not 12% for low earners and 1% or less for the rich.

 

A person entering university will spend a few years out of work and in education, for that a 1-3% (permanent) rise in income tax would be fair to be applied to all whom have received state funded education.

 

Education is a brilliant thing, it's how we use it that matters. Make it free for all but with conditions. Pass/Fail, time spent, long term benefit to society.

Deliver it in an efficient way.

 

People can learn all year round over two years rather than two terms a year for three years for example.

 

The fire extinguisher was thrown by a single person, not the future youth/ university educated youth. It does however symbolise the anger within some of the youth, however, they do appear to bear the brunt of the cuts/tax rises.

[HeadingNorth]

In a matter of weeks Parliament will vote on whether to raise tuition fees, which will see many young people in Sheffield forced to choose their University based on cost not course.

The poorest people could be priced out of education with the prospect of them and their families being saddled with soaring levels of debt.

 

 

Since both of those claims are entirely false, I trust nobody is going to be misled into supporting this campaign.

[Hairyloon]

Students are due to march on Sheffield Town Hall tomorrow in a demonstration to raise the issue of planned cuts to higher education and rises in tuition fees.

What do you expect to accomplish with this march?

A bit of rioting and violent clashes with the Police?

Get your faces on the telly?

Maybe get some politicians to spout some more baloney at you?

 

It has been done before, it rarely accomplishes anything constructive.

 

Why don't you try something different?

Call a meeting (if there is not already one due) of your community assembly, and exercise your rights under the Local Government Act 1972, Schedule 12, section 34 to call for a referendum on, for example, whether or not Mr Clegg should step down.

See what result you get.