To think scrapping tuition fees is a terrible idea

[bumbleymummy]

Just that really. Corbin saying he's going to scrap fees from September. Bloody stupid idea and something else that we can't afford to pay for.

That's a massive amount he won't have to pay if Labour get in and keep to the promise.

But he WILL pay by virtue of Corbyn's tax and NIC hikes, especially as a vet, he'll be earning over the £80k threshold when experienced, so he'll be "rich" enough to be hammered for more tax. Over his working life, he may well pay more in tax/nic hikes than his student loan repayments.

I went to university after a few years working as a waitress "just because" i could and it absolutely changed my life. I was the first in my very extended working class family to do so. If it had been a choice between £9k couse fees per year or nmw job I would not have been able to imagine taking on so much debt.

And surely a decent tax system that charges high earners more is as good a way of getting the money back from the graduates.

How is that fair to higher earners who'd didn't go to university????

I know many many doctors who graduated from UK medical schools and have chosen to work abroad (mainly Australia) so scrapping tuition fees won't encourage doctors and nurses to stay in the NHS.

If they've qualified and are moving abroad, they wouldn't have been paying the £9k p.a. for the full period of training, so they're moving away based on reasons other than the student loan repayments!!

How is that fair to higher earners who'd didn't go to university????

Because they benefit from living in a society with expertise and knowledge, like everyone else in that same society

yes howabout - why can't we have incentives to firms to offer good apprentice schemes and on the job training rather than wholesale free tuition.

I agree your point about the flip side of - if I'm never going to repay the loans, I may as well rack them up, I certainly can see that logic.

yes, I'm sure many people have been helped by me being an IT professional, erm not. The reason we have a graduate tax is because being a graduate benefits your earning powers over your whole life more than non-graduates.

But I also think that we've reached the point where this is going to start to be less true because too many people are doing degrees that won't pay for them.

"How is that fair to higher earners who'd didn't go to university????"

Or the higher earners who have just finished paying back their own student loans and are now being hit with higher taxes to cover other people's student loans (including some who probably shouldn't go to university but will choose to go just because it's 'free')

How is that fair to higher earners who'd didn't go to university????
We'll tell them that their tax contribution goes to the NHS.

How many high earners are taking advantage (in the passive way, not in an outright exploitative sense) of an educated workforce?

Littledrum Why wouldn't a Vet be able to pay off this costs spread out over several years?

The average starting salary is around £31,150 for a newly-qualified vet.
The average salary of a vet with further training and experience, at a small animal practice, is £41,148 and in a large animal practices this can rise to £44,142.

£41,000 take home pay is approx £31,000 a year. If the fees were £114,000 (forgetting the interest, haha) if that vet paid back say £5,000 (one sixth of your take home pay) a year it would take them almost 23 years to pay it back.

So you're 18 years old, not from a wealthy family and you see those figures I think quite a few people are going to think that it's not for them.

"Because they benefit from living in a society with expertise and knowledge"

That's assuming everyone actually graduates with 'expertise and knowledge' and didn't spend the 3+ years assing about at the tax payers' expense.

Bonfires, what salary would they get if they didn't go to university?

Sorry, I haven't RTFT, but as an academic at a Scottish university, I can say that the majority of universities here are in a financial mess. We receive a lot less money per student than English institutions. In theory, I support the abolition of tuition fees in England , but I can't see the extra money will come from. Likewise, the only way that I can see Scottish universities begin to pull themselves back together is through additional funding via fees.

great idea - like Germany. Brilliant.

High tuition fees have really changed the nature and quality of university education as previous posters have pointed out. Students see themselves as customers and some have completely unrealistic expectations. I think we need to scrap the current fees system (which is not working well in any case - universities are still underfunded as so much goes on the admin of it) but I would prefer a low fee rather than completely scrapping them.

the reason a graduate tax is fairer than just having progressive income tax on all high earners is because graduates earn more because of their degrees for their whole lives, so if a non-graduate is a high earner, it has been harder for them to get to that level of income.

If uni tuition is free, but non grads don't benefit from the same level of investment in their careers, people are not equally placed to earn those high salaries.

nolottery by that logic women should pay lower income tax rates because it is harder for us to earn the same salary as men....

Bonfires the vet on £41k will pay back 9% of £20k for 30 years. This is less than £2k a year or £60k total and will not touch the sides of the £100k+ student debt once interest of 3%+inflation is added. The current policy is financially illiterate and must surely have been set up by GO / NC assuming no graduate ever earns below £100k.

NoLottery: why can't we have incentives to firms to offer good apprentice schemes and on the job training rather than wholesale free tuition.

These incentives already exist. Unfortunately the apprenticeship schemes do not have to be good. See my post above.

so if a non-graduate is a high earner, it has been harder for them to get to that level of income.

That really makes no sense. The tax should be earnings not on whether or not you have a degree or any other qualification. I know plenty of people who earn far more than me despite my qualifications because I work in a sector with poor pay.

Depends on what they do bumbleymummy surely? What's your point? They won't start earning until they are mid twenties either.

My point is that university fees will and are putting people off courses like this whether or not you think earning £41k a year in your mid thirties upwards (after studying a profession for 6 years) is a lot. That's six years of no earning potential before getting any salary. Kids from wealthy backgrounds probably won't care (although their parents may still flinch a bit).

howabout, yes I understand but what's the point of the fees if they never get them back?

if you give students £30k in free uni tuition, and you don't give that money to non-graduates, you think that's fair and a level playing field for earnings? I don't.

Allegretto if you did a socially useful degree such as social work and work in social work, surely specific bursaries for that would be a better policy?

We need cleverer policies, I agree, not blanket policies. One size doesn't fit all here.

investment should pay off - if you made a bad choice and invested in a degree that doesn't pay off, or chose for it not to pay off, why should people who didn't benefit from any investment but have found their way to a decent level of earnings have to pay for your choices?

Bonfires - we were taking about the vet. My point is that 'getting into debt' of a student loan to study veterinary medicine will probably enable them to earn a higher salary than they would without the degree. So overall they may be better off - even with the loan repayments which, as someone else has pointed out, they probably won't pay off in full anyway.