to think a graduate tax is a very bad idea

[olderandwider]

Just read that a graduate tax is now Government's preferred option for funding universities. Lord Browne is reporting later in year on his findings, so the idea may stay on the drawing board - but still, I need to rant.

1. How will this grad tax be ring-fenced so the universities get the money? What is to stop Gov just treating this grad tax as an extra income stream to pay for new pet projects or pre-election sweeteners?

2)It will encourage a brain drain as graduates go abroad to avoid paying the tax.

3. The idea that graduates earn on average over a lifetime £100,000 more than non-grads presumably is based on figures pre-dating the huge rise in the 90s of graduates (because graduates of the 90s haven't completed their careers and won't for several decades so their earnings are unknown.)

So, perhaps the graduate earnings premium has been diluted to the point that for many, a degree is not longer a guarantee of far better earnings. Doesn't that make the grad tax very unfair?

4. Once you put a tax in place, it usually stays there. And goes up. Will students know before they enrol at uni what their extra tax rate will be? Or are they signing a blank cheque for the Gov to dip into their earnings whenever it feels a bit short?

Anyone agree with me? Or is this actually fairer than, say, allowing unis to charge more for tuition fees in return for providing burseries for poorer students.

Unseen - yup, agree it would make more sense to invest in universities especially as all the economists and government ministers keep banging on about the dratted knowledge economy.

(Is your name a TP ref, btw?)

It's a stupid idea for lots of reasons.

• graduates with any sense will leave the country.

• lots of students these days study pointless degrees. If the tax is going to bite on those who earn a decent wodge afer graduating, is than an incentive to spend 3 years drinking and studying Madonna Studies or some other crap?

• there's a 50% income tax band already and so top earners will get hit by that.

Vince Cable has lost the plot if he thinks this is worth stropping over.

what i was referring t Edam, was the fact that if a university admits students to an arts course with Ds at A level, are those students ever going to really enter heigher level study?

I did Philosophy - got good A levels to do it. The degree course was (in terms of concepts covered) stretching and definitely a step above A level. I met people studying Philosophy to, allegedly, degree level at Brighton university. The work was not of a level that would stretch an able A level candidate. Some was tabloid and laughable, even (the guy who was doing a study on 'holy blood, holy grail', for e.g.).

Well I did Re and Philosophy at a so called lesser uni and whilst technically you could select your own diss topic, that would have earned you a terrible grade (I did Christianity and the transatlantic slave trade; others included Scientology, Messianic Judaism, Ahimsa within Jainism, and a comparative study of definitions of karma across Eastern faiths.

edam, yes it is.

Unseen - always good to meet a fellow member of the Pratchett Appreciation Society. Even enjoyed that book despite hating football. Did you read the recent-ish kid's book set on the island? Very moving. Selfish of me but can't help hoping he's got at least one more book in him...

Here's a wild and wacky idea from a lecturer.

Universities could start to help students economise instead of:

• fleecing them for flash en suite bedrooms (instead of letting them share simpler accommodation and go to the library to work)
• stopping them from sitting in university cafeterias if they have brought in their own packed lunches (they get booted out unless they buy the university's overpriced coffee and sandwiches)
• charging rural students with no realistic access to public transport vast megabucks to park on campus, and so on.
• charging them 10p a page to print their essays out instead of the 1p it actually costs.

I could go on.

I am totally against the idea. I pay 50% tax, I no longer get a personal allowance, my pension tax relief is restricted and my capital gains tax rate went up to 28%. I don't begrudge paying my fair share and putting back into the system. Equally, if the tax was say an extra 1% of income tax, firstly, I would be paying more in income taxes (51%) than I take home (and that doesn't include NIC),and secondly, I would have repaid the government in a relatively short period, but would spend the vast majority of my working life repaying the government over and over again. How is that fair to somone with my fact pattern? I can also see lots of other scenarios where it wouldnt be fair. Bad idea!

Edam - I think TP is an amazing guy. I mean to carry on writing at the frequency (and quality) that he does even with Alzheimer's! I haven't read any recent children's books (but have read some of the earlier ones, such as Truckers, Diggers and Wings and the ones which were an off-shoot of the Discworld novels with the Nac Mac Feegle). I thought I'd hate his books when I was first introduced to them, because I'm not into fantasy books at all, but he is just great.

me too, unseen - dh was nagging me to try Pratchett for ages but those covers put me right off. Eventually picked one up and much, much later, when I'd finally torn myself away, had to slink over to ds and admit 'OK, on this ONE solitary occasion you were right and I was wrong.'.

Ah ecam we're ther everse LOL- have read pratchett since my youth but DH is the nagged novert!

Have UA on teh go atm though saving it for next two weeks when we have less going on and I will have some proper peace as well.

Also fans of Tom Holt, and DH like Robert Rankin but he makes my head hurt.

Saw TP doing a speech at the Pagan Federation annual beanfest in London years ago. Thought both parties had an excellent sense of humour - them for inviting him and him for turning up and delivering a v. v. witty speech.