Cameron: "Cuts will change our way of life"

[Stu Monty]

On a side topic, The Mirror are being terrible cunts about what Olly Granger has said about access to democracy. I'd be putting the boot into her today if she'd actually been saying what they are implying she is so it's only fair to call them out on being snides.

[Rico1304]

Who decides which degrees are worthwhile to be publicly funded?

How about the public?

 

The implication is that probably only those that are really good, or really driven will do those degrees. The ones that are a bit shit or doing it because they can't think what else to do won't bother.

 

You tell me how society benefits from me paying for someone to come out of a third rate Uni with a third class degree in art benefits society? Also the implication that you need to go to Uni to be good is weird.

[Stu Monty]

How about the public?

 

The implication is that probably only those that are really good, or really driven will do those degrees. The ones that are a bit shit or doing it because they can't think what else to do won't bother.

 

You tell me how society benefits from me paying for someone to come out of a third rate Uni with a third class degree in art benefits society? Also the implication that you need to go to Uni to be good is weird.

 

You dramatically misunderstand how governments use incentives to build the country they want.

 

The implication is that those with money to burn will be able to study History, those without money won't.

 

Either you are deliberately obtuse here or I've over-estimated your intelligence by a factor of about ten.

 

If you could stop asking how things benefit "ME" instead of the society as a whole you might come across better. The M1 doesn't benefit me, I still understand that it being there is good for the UK.

[Strontium]

Annoying to see SD again downplaying student debt after people's efforts to enlighten him that it is actually still a debt, and has an impact on your life.

 

All I'm doing is pointing out that it's not like any other debt, and it functions more like a graduate tax.

 

Student loan debts do not go on credit files, they won't be chased up by debt collectors, they won't need to be paid back until someone is earning a decent wage, and they will be written off after 30 years if they aren't paid off before then.

 

Lower earning graduates are actually going to end up paying back less with £9,000 tuition fees than they would have under the previous system of £3,000 fees. They might well end up paying back nothing at all.

[Section_31]

How about the public?

 

The implication is that probably only those that are really good, or really driven will do those degrees. The ones that are a bit shit or doing it because they can't think what else to do won't bother.

 

You tell me how society benefits from me paying for someone to come out of a third rate Uni with a third class degree in art benefits society? Also the implication that you need to go to Uni to be good is weird.

Half of them are probably teaching your kids.

 

There's massive social benefits to having an educated population too, even if many of them may end up as call centre fodder, they're probably more likely to have the foundations of some kind of work etbic and have learned to adapt to working with and alongside other people. Anyone can start a degree, not everyone can finish one.

 

One thuing you notice about groups of young people these days too, is how diverse their groups of friends are. When I was a teenage lad, lads drunk pints with lads, that was pretty much it. These days a group of teens will be mixed girls and lads, mixed races and sexuality, I reckon a lot of that is down to opening up the college education system and a lot of people who would not normally have stayed on, doing so, and coming into contact with a lot of people from different backgrounds who they would not normally have done.

 

I think it's trendy to dismiss arts degrees, but education is a complex tapestry. I've known people who've taught in China, love the place, but say that because the education system is so regimented the children are unable to formulate original concepts when they get older. Once they rip an idea off, their work ethic means they probably do it better than we can, but the original spark is often missing. This is what our education system does, you're not just teaching a kid to write a poem for the sake of it, you're teaching them composition and critical analysis. It's all well and good having an entire population who can programme computers, but it'd be fucking grim, and no doubt your trips to the theatre and cinema would suffer greatly, as would your enjoyment of music (wonder why Britain leads the way in 'soft power'? When was the last time you went to see a Japanese band or watched a Chinese film?)

 

Also, funding valuable degrees is all well and good, but if we value those skills so do other countries. The taxpayer still funds bursuries for some health degrees yet I bet the amount of British nurses and doctors who fuck off overseas is astronomical.

[Stu Monty]

All I'm doing is pointing out that it's not like any other debt, and it functions more like a graduate tax.

 

Student loan debts do not go on credit files, they won't be chased up by debt collectors, they won't need to be paid back until someone is earning a decent wage, and they will be written off after 30 years if they aren't paid off before then.

 

Lower earning graduates are actually going to end up paying back less with £9,000 tuition fees than they would have under the previous system of £3,000 fees. They might well end up paying back nothing at all.

 

I agree it is (currently) not like any other debt. I am pointing out to you that you were told last time that it does impact some important financial assessments that will impact your life by people with first hand experience. For example mortgages.

 

I would be very cautious about taking on a massive debt where the small print almost certainly leaves me very few avenues if the terms are changed in the future and the debt is passed on to another type of organisation. All of your comments could well be utterly irrelevant if the situation changes, something someone would be advised to think about upon taking on a huge debt.

[Bjornebye]

Half of them are probably teaching your kids.

 

There's massive social benefits to having an educated population too, even if many of them may end up as call centre fodder, they're probably more likely to have the foundations of some kind of work etbic and have learned to adapt to working with and alongside other people. Anyone can start a degree, not everyone can finish one.

 

One thuing you notice about groups of young people these days too, is how diverse their groups of friends are. When I was a teenage lad, lads drunk pints with lads, that was pretty much it. These days a group of teens will be mixed girls and lads, mixed races and sexuality, I reckon a lot of that is down to opening up the college education system and a lot of people who would not normally have stayed on, doing so, and coming into contact with a lot of people from different backgrounds who they would not normally have done.

 

I think it's trendy to dismiss arts degrees, but education is a complex tapestry. I've known people who've taught in China, love the place, but say that because the education system is so regimented the children are unable to formulate original concepts when they get older. Once they rip an idea off, their work ethic means they probably do it better than we can, but the original spark is often missing. This is what our education system does, you're not just teaching a kid to write a poem for the sake of it, you're teaching them composition and critical analysis. It's all well and good having an entire population who can programme computers, but it'd be fucking grim, and no doubt your trips to the theatre and cinema would suffer greatly, as would your enjoyment of music (wonder why Britain leads the way in 'soft power'? When was the last time you went to see a Japanese band or watched a Chinese film?)

 

Also, funding valuable degrees is all well and good, but if we value those skills so do other countries. The taxpayer still funds bursuries for some health degrees yet I bet the amount of British nurses and doctors who fuck off overseas is astronomical.

 

Excellent post

 

However have you never heard of Scandal?

 

 

ace beyond belief. Best band ever 

[Jairzinho]

Yougov now have Labour behind Tories.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Fairly decent site for polling stuffs

 

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk

[xerxes]

Yougov now have Labour behind Tories.

This will be the oddest GE for a generation.

 

The Tories, with their morally bankrupt social policies, are banking on tax cuts - if they can afford them, which they probably won't be able to.

 

Labour is hamstrung by a lame duck leader with opportunists reckoning that an Ed failure will quicken their personal opportunities.

 

The Lib Dems are hoping they can claim that they were "nowhere near" the spiteful policies rolled out over the previous five years.("You must be thinking of someone else officer")

 

UKIP will huff and puff, probably end up with two or three seats as the serious business of sorting out the Scots and Europe leaves the detail of their policy threadbare.

 

The Greens will say they are opposed to everything including the wheel.

 

I still think Labour will either edge it, or form a pact with Clegg.

[Jairzinho]

Who will you be voting for, Xerxes?

[lifetime fan]

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29502817

[Rico1304]

Maybe a side topic but in these straightened times how about the churches start paying tax?

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Maybe a side topic but in these straightened times how about the churches start paying tax?

It's ridiculous that they don't. If all of their income was going out in charitable donations, I'd be more than happy for them to get the tax break. As it stands, they should only really get tax breaks on money spent in charity.

[lifetime fan]

No wonder Clegg wants parity between mental health and physical health, the depression he's going to have after the election he wants all the help he can get.

[lifetime fan]

It's ridiculous that they don't. If all of their income was going out in charitable donations, I'd be more than happy for them to get the tax break. As it stands, they should only really get tax breaks on money spent in charity.

 

It's not so easy to tax the riches of the Catholic church for example but they can at least be taxed on all monies received every year as a start.

 

Not going to go down well with the CoE tory voters though so don't expect to see anything happen any time soon.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Deffo won't happen. Just should.

[lifetime fan]

Deffo won't happen. Just should.

 

Agreed.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Agreed.

I like this development.

[lifetime fan]

Vince Cable says he is not losing any sleep over rising rates of student loan non-repayment in England.

 

"These losses crystallise in 30 to 40 years' time - when I'm well over 100," he told a Lib Dem fringe meeting.

 

Asked to explain what he meant, the business secretary said repayment rates would recover as the economy grew.

 

Earlier this year, the government revised down estimates for the proportion of student debt that will ever be repaid.

 

David Willetts, the then universities minister, said the rate of non-repayment was near the point at which experts believe the controversial tripling of tuition fees would add nothing to government coffers.

 

Adrian Bailey, chairman of the Commons business committee, warned that universities were facing a "financial time bomb" and the government needed to face up to the problem.

 

'Real world'

 

Labour said it was it was "clear we have built the student finance system on top of a money pit".

 

Students do not pay the fees upfront and only start repaying when they are earning at least £21,000 a year.

 

Mr Cable said his Conservative coalition colleagues such as Mr Willetts had been worried about a rise in estimated loan write-offs, known as resource accounting and budgeting (RAB).

 

But he said: "These losses crystallise in 30 to 40 years' time - when I'm well over 100. I shan't be sitting round, spending the rest of my life worrying about what happens in the year 2000-and-whatever-it-is."

 

He added: "If you are terribly fastidious about accounting then the fact that the default rate is now estimated to be higher than it was when we introduced the scheme is something [that worries some people]

 

"But I think in the real world, I don't think it actually affects things."

 

Asked by the BBC if he meant he did not care about a possible financial time bomb facing future generations, he said: "I think it does matter whether a problem arises in 30 or 40 years' time."

 

But quoting economist John Maynard Keynes, who warned about the dangers of too much forward planning, he said: "As Keynes said, in the long term we are all dead and the world could change in ways we can't predict.

 

"The reason why the RAB charge seems to be higher than we made our estimates three to four years ago is that we have been through a terrible recession.

 

"This has led to expectations of some graduate salaries being somewhat deflated and therefore the predictions are less, but if you got a period of sustained recovery, the RAB charge would suddenly fall because the predictions would change.

 

"There are a lot of things I lie awake at night worrying about. This is not one of them. And we really shouldn't get exercised about it."

Around 45% of university graduates will not earn enough to repay their student loans, the government believes.

 

If the figure reaches 48.6% experts calculate that the government will lose more money than it gained by increasing fees in England to £9,000 a year.

[Section_31]

Wobble.

[Section_31]

Wibble.

[Jairzinho]

[Guest Pistonbroke]

Nick Clegg comes over like a little child who has been found out and tries to blame others for his own fuck ups. He's about as sincere as an apologetic racist. 

[Skidfingers McGonical]

Am I right in understanding that Cable is basically saying

 

"Like the pensions that we sorted for ourselves, the 'Baby Boom' generation, and the debt we have left you with. Student debt is nothing to worry about now. Because it's not our problem. So when it fails we will either be too old or dead to be held responsible"