[Archived] Election

[RibbleValleyRover]

9 Police officers injured, Treasury building being smashed up on the outside- protesters trying to break in, Churchill's statue vandalised and urinated on, trying to set fire to the Christmas Tree in Trafalgar square, Oxford street having windows smashed and the future King's car attacked.

They have done their cause no good.

[thenodrog]

9 Police officers injured, Treasury building being smashed up on the outside- protesters trying to break in, Churchill's statue vandalised and urinated on, trying to set fire to the Christmas Tree in Trafalgar square, Oxford street having windows smashed and the future King's car attacked.

They have done their cause no good.

Unlikely to be serious students RVR, just as the Poll Tax rioters of the 80's weren't home owners in the main. Simply a mob of 'rent an anarchist' who are mobilised from under their stones whenever the opportunity to further their agenda presents itself.

[RibbleValleyRover]

[Alan75]

Today’s behaviour by "students" if they truly are "students" is not a protest, but wanton vandalism.

Any sympathy that I would have had for them has quickly disappeared.

If this is what a university education provides, then god help this country.

[BuckyRover]

Is anyone watching Sky news?

They have attacked the Prince Charles' car

www.factsonfees.com

Please read it.

I find it strange that I support these increases, yet most who are against it on here, I assume aren't paying for student loans at all. Bizarre

I think it's worth it.

[Anti-Dingle-Brigade]

I'm lucky in that I am already a second year so will miss the rise in tuition fee. I knew when I applied that I'd be spending at least a decade paying off my ~£20k loan and had to think hard about whether it would be worth it. I did decide to apply eventually and haven't regretted it in the slightest. However, if the fees were £9000 .pa when I was considering my future, I wouldn't have gone to university. £20k is including all my rent and living costs. The £30,000 being quoted by the press is wrong, I'm averaging a net spend of at least £3,000 per year on living costs, not including tuition fees. If we assume that an average student is around my level (I live in Chester, it will be more in London/Manchester), the total owed by a student beginning in 2012 would be 9,000x3 plus 3,000+(x3). I make that around 36,000 for a typical 3 year degree.

Oh, and no, before Abbey arrives with his slurring 'f88484kin tax doging 89797890hfyduf students' argument, I haven't even factored in booze money.

If I wanted to be selfish, I could look at it another way. With higher fees and less applicants, I would, as a degree holder, become more exclusive and one would hope, more attractive to future employers.

Anyhow, we're missing the point of the topic really. A significant proportion of Lib Dem voters were young adults and I know at least a dozen people who voted simply on the promise that tuition fees wouldn't be raised. Not only have the Lib Dems isolated themselves from these people, who will surely never vote Lib Dem again in the foreseeable future, they have exposed themselves in a way which will make each and every person who voted for them think twice about the party and its members. If they make a promise to the NUS pledging not to raise fees in order to obtain votes, then pledge to support the Conservatives, they put themselves in an impossible position. The fact is, at the next election the Lib Dems will be lucky to get any votes from students, especially those at university. And with their integrity well and truly sold out, they will be looked at from other perspectives too. Even if you have no interest in this issue, the fact that the Lib Dems conned their way into power (and what is power? Being Camerons yes men?), what other issues will they deceive the electorate about?

P.S. The violence is idiotic and nothing to be celebrated. Most of them just arrived to make trouble and probably aren't even students - just the local scrotes. Nothing has been said about the thousands who protested peacefully, and probably never will.

Ah well.

[chaddyrovers]

Unlikely to be serious students RVR, just as the Poll Tax rioters of the 80's weren't home owners in the main. Simply a mob of 'rent an anarchist' who are mobilised from under their stones whenever the opportunity to further their agenda presents itself.

yeah but that won't matter because it was a student protest that turn nasty!!! Police officers injured, buildings trashed!, christmas tress burned, shop windows broken, and the future king attacked!!!

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

yeah but that won't matter because it was a student protest that turn nasty!!! Police officers injured, buildings trashed!, christmas tress burned, shop windows broken, and the future king attacked!!!

Looks like you're out of your depth here Chaddy, best stick to telling us who we should be signing in the window.

[RibbleValleyRover]

Looks like you're out of your depth here Chaddy, best stick to telling us who we should be signing in the window.

How so? These are all things that have happened.

The damage may have been done by a minority of anarchists and left wing groups but the whole cause or movement will be tarred or associated by the disgraceful actions of the few. They already don't have much support from the general public; actions like these will erode whatever support they have even further.

[thenodrog]

Anyhow, we're missing the point of the topic really. A significant proportion of Lib Dem voters were young adults and I know at least a dozen people who voted simply on the promise that tuition fees wouldn't be raised. Ah well.

A bankrupt economy. Armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Immigration. Terrorism. etc etc and people base their vote on tuition fees!

Bout right these days I suppose.

[Anti-Dingle-Brigade]

You know what I mean, Drog. Was there a party that addressed all of those issues? The people I mentioned were looking after their own interests.

[jim mk2]

Millband hasn't forgotten that his lot left the country in the desperate financial straits that now necessitates these harsh measures.

One day you will get it through your thick head that Labour's policies in the aftermath of the collapse of the world's leading banks and the worldwide recession that followed saved this country's economy. The "rabbits in the headlights" were the Tories in the form of Osborne and Cameron who offered precisely no solution, absolutely nothing, to save Britain from its predicament.

These "harsh measures" being foisted on students are another example of Tories hitting the weakest and the poorest while turning a blind eye to the rich and wealthy, those who caused this economic maelstrom, who continue to award themselves huge bonuses and extravagant pay rises.

If the multimillionaires and Oxbridge-educated Cameron and Osborne truly believed that "we're all in this together" they would be hitting the rich as hard as they are hitting the poor.

[chaddyrovers]

Please read this Jim??? The poorest will be better off and paid less

http://www.factsonfees.com/index.php

[LeChuck]

I think it's worth it.

But some won't, and those people (potentially very talented ones) will be missing out based on this awful decision.

A few interestings things I read today

- If uni cuts were made in line with other cuts, fees would 'only' need to rise to £4,000

- The '£21k' figure the Condems are bleating on about is misleading. The figure would be £19k in today's money.

You don't have to reply to this if you don't want, I know we'll end up going over the same old ground!

[chaddyrovers]

here are what you will pay back each month, please look at table on the link page:-

http://www.factsonfees.com/helping-graduates.php

It is a fairer system imo! and poorer students will get help with a new £150 million National Scholarships Programme to help the poorest students into the top universities!

[Sandiway Blue]

here are what you will pay back each month, please look at table on the link page:-

http://www.factsonfees.com/helping-graduates.php

It is a fairer system imo! and poorer students will get help with a new £150 million National Scholarships Programme to help the poorest students into the top universities!

Now now Chaddy,you can`t be putting simple facts on here straight after Jim`s predictable anti-tory rant (just waiting for the "Thatcher`s love child" comment to come up,shouldn`t take too long! )

As Jim will just plain ignore them like he does with any other post that contains the facts.

[JAL]

Is anyone watching Sky news?

I find it strange that I support these increases, yet most who are against it on here, I assume aren't paying for student loans at all. Bizarre

I think it's worth it.

You wont be paying for it now thats a smart answer Bucky. This has been seen as a progressive plan, increasing the costs of tuition fees, from 3k a year to 9k a year, where is the sense of fairness here, the fees havent just doubled they've tripled FFS !

In a country were the education standards have slipped in the world rankings to 28th FFS!

So this is a progressive plan, whats next in this plan, do they go up again in a couple of years time passing 10k and beyond ?

Will the interest on the debt always be Zero interest, or will this fluctuate considering the behaviour of our wonderfully corrupt banks ?

How damaging will this be to the students future ability to save for their retirement and their ability to afford to raise a family.

Some MP's who have gone back on their word to the electorate in little over six months, so whats next, what will the next lie be Bucky, can you trust the government and its people behind them because you never know you may be next.

[LeChuck]

Now now Chaddy,you can`t be putting simple facts on here straight after Jim`s predictable anti-tory rant (just waiting for the "Thatcher`s love child" comment to come up,shouldn`t take too long! )

As Jim will just plain ignore them like he does with any other post that contains the facts.

Did you bother to look at that link? I'm guessing not.

It's a load of meaningless spin. Quite obviously repayments will be lower when the threshold is raised, but that's hardly compensation for the overall debt increasing threefold.

The bottom of that link says it all "Promoted by Alan Mabbutt on behalf of the Conservative Party, both at 30 Millbank, London, SW1P 4DP".

Try reading things instead of looking for cheap points to score, you can end up looking a bit silly.

In a country were the education standards have slipped in the world rankings to 28th FFS!

Good thing to bring up.

It's quite obvious what section of society is bringing our score down. This will just further alienate those sections of society from higher education - it hardly provides an incentive to them, does it? Education, in the eyes of some, will become for the well off, no matter how desperately the government try to convince people otherwise.

[DE.]

Whilst paying off the fees may become easier for some, it doesn't change the fact that I have a debt £3,600 for my 3 years of university, whilst my sister, only a few years younger, will be paying £18,000 - £27,000. It's not fair, especially when it's harder than ever to get a job in the current climate and degrees are arguably losing rather than gaining value in the job market.

[adopted scouser]

Disgraceful scenes of police brutality at the students' demonstrations

Stop trolling Fred, and cheer the cavalry. Baton charging on Horseback, absolutely marvellous. Where was the water cannon ?

[Paul]

here are what you will pay back each month, please look at table on the link page:-

<a href="http://www.factsonfees.com/helping-graduates.php" class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='nofollow external'>http://www.factsonfe...g-graduates.php

It is a fairer system imo! and poorer students will get help with a new £150 million National Scholarships Programme to help the poorest students into the top universities!

Chaddy do you appreciate this information is written by Alan Mabbutt? You know who he is?

Can I suggest you read the IFS report stating a graduate earning £49000 pa will take 26 years to repay the loan.

This is government moving money around to make the numbers look good. The bulk of these loans will never be repaid and you will still be paying for students to attend university. You won't think you are because it appears the Coalition have changed things. The reality is the taxpayer will still pick up the bill via loans which are not repaid. This is simply putting off the day when the money has to be found.

[Sandiway Blue]

Did you bother to look at that link? I'm guessing not.

It's a load of meaningless spin. Quite obviously repayments will be lower when the threshold is raised, but that's hardly compensation for fees increasing threefold.

The bottom of that link says it all "Promoted by Alan Mabbutt on behalf of the Conservative Party, both at 30 Millbank, London, SW1P 4DP".

Try reading things instead of looking for cheap points to score, you can end up looking a bit silly.

Good thing to bring up.

It's quite obvious what section of society is bringing our score down. This will just further alienate sections of society from higher education - it hardly provides an incentive to them, does it? Education, in the eyes of some, will become for the well off.

Maybe we should start dumping loans on school children, get them to pay for their education.

new system

The Coalition Government is proposing changes to how higher education in England is funded.

•The upper limit on tuition fees will be raised to £9,000 with a lower threshold of £6,000. Courses charging between £6,000 and £9,000 will be subject to new requirements on widening access to the poorest students.

•Tuition fees will not be paid upfront by either students or their parents. Graduates will make a contribution after they have left university.

•The earnings threshold for graduate contributions will be raised from £15,000 to £21,000. The repayment rate will remain at 9 per cent. This means that no one earning under £21,000 will pay anything and graduates earning over £21,000 will pay back £45 less each month.

•All outstanding contributions will be written off after thirty years. Over half of graduates will have at least some of their contribution written off. The poorest quarter of graduates will pay less over their lifetimes with the new system than they do under the old system.

•There will be more support for students on low incomes: there will be a new £150 million National Scholarships Programme to help the poorest students into the top universities; maintenance grants for students from lower-income families will increase from £2,906 to £3,250; and partial maintenance grants will be available to students from families with incomes between £25,000 and £42,000.

•Anyone earning under £21,000 will continue to have the interest on their loan subsidised by the government. A real rate of interest will be applied to the loans of graduates earning £21,000 or more. The rate of interest will rise gradually as a graduate’s earnings increase, reaching a maximum of the RPI (Retail Price Index) + 3 per cent for those earning £41,000 or more. This will provide extra revenue and mean that those who earn more, pay more.

•Although reductions in government spending on higher education will help reduce the budget deficit, there will continue to be substantial public funding for universities. The balance of university funding will shift from 60 per cent government, 40 per cent private to approximately 40 per cent government, 60 per cent private.

•For the first time, part-time students will be eligible for student loans. Until now, part-time students have had to pay fees upfront. Part-time students on their first degree will no longer have to pay anything until they have graduated and entered well-paid work, so long as they are studying a quarter as much as a full-time student.

So what you are saying is that none of this is true? that somebody has just decided to print this just to pass the time away?Seems a little odd to me...

As somebody who has never benefitted from university education,IMO if somebody gets a leg up to earn over £21,000 after a couple of years studying,then they SHOULD pay back a sizable amount of money for it.

It`s taken me the best part of 25 years of hard graft and i still don`t earn that amount in a year,and i`m sure a lot of other board members are in the same position too.

[LeChuck]

So what you are saying is that none of this is true?

I was on about the link, not that stuff you copied into your post.

Having seen the angle you're coming at this from in the last two sentences I'll just drop this now.

[Sandiway Blue]

I was on about the link, not that stuff you copied into your post.

Having seen the angle you're coming at this from in the last two sentences I'll just drop this now.

The stuff i copied was taken from that link.

[JAL]

Will certain foreign students still get their tuition fees for free, i'm sure some will.