Telling my Tory voting mother that she should pay for my daughter to go to university.

[sociallyacceptable]

My DD is very bright and could go to university if she doesn't arse about trying to be cool like I did. She is now 12.
My mum often talks about what she might do at university when she is older. I have been considering discouraging her from going because of the cost, we cannot afford to fund it ourselves unfortunately and she will have huge debt. It's kind of light hearted but I feel like telling my Tory voting mother that she should pay for her to go as she is not interested in voting to change this.

[boys3]

Wash your mouth out!



mind you we have had plenty of alternative evidence based policy making

[olliegarchy99]

sunegg
YANBU. People don't seem to realise that in a democracy every single person's vote counts. People should be making decisions based on what they believe is best for everyone, not just themselves.
Everyone is free to vote as they wish (including the OP's mother)
So you think all these young people/students voting labour because it will save them tuition fees are making a decision that is best for everyone not just themselves.
this is the same argument as the 'remain voters' voting because their job was under threat, losing their EU nanny or waitress in Pret, or no roaming charges in Europe.
To an extent we all try to vote for what we believe is best for the country as a whole but I think those that vote for their own selfish reasons without considering the wider implications should feel slightly ashamed of their attitude.

[cushioncovers]

It never fails to astound me about just how many people complaining about the uni fees situation are voting for labour, those who actually bought the fees in. God help us.

Good point but the tories have have years to reverse this and they haven't, they've increased them. Chances are if labour hadn't introduced them the tories would of anyway.

[titchy]

evidence based policy making

Wash your mouth out!

[boys3]

I believe it is wrong to charge for education

In principle I'd agree. However in terms of priorities, and in really making a difference, I'd argue that it should be more focused initially at the start of the educational journey. Significant investment in pre-school and early years, especially in terms of the quality of the staff. Further investment in primary, and secondary. We could even try going down some sort of evidence based policy making - that would be a genuinely radical approach.

As for tuition fees. I'd leave them til last. If we want to focus anything on higher education it would be in terms of support for living costs, restoration of the maintenance grant. For many whether fees are £9,000 or £90,000 makes little difference; living costs will however be a barrier in a number of cases.

One final reflection. I compared tax rates etc that I faced when graduating in 1986 to those of today (well 2016 to be precise). The mid 80s had high unemployment, the aftermath of the miners' strike, the devastation that brought to many communities. What we never had, as far as I can recollect, was any civil unrest due to the then rates of income tax or inheritance tax.

[GloriaGilbert]

OP is the personification of a Labour voter.

[FairyDogMother11]

I haven't RTFT but was just posting to say in reply to OP who says students are heavily subsidised when they're at uni by their parents, that is not always the case. I came from a very working class family, single mother, etc. I had no financial support from family, I worked every weekend and some evenings. Lived further away and commuted to save money. I had friends of course whose parents did help them out but they had the money to spend. My friends in that situation had been privately educated, been gifted cars etc and they didn't live within their means because they'd never had to. The "debt" of my student loans has not stopped me getting a mortgage or anything like that. It's really not the end of the world having student loans to pay back because realistically it's more a tax than anything. Your mum is entitled to vote for whomever she wishes and you're being quite unreasonable. Plus your daughter might not even want to go to university. Everyone said I had the voice of an angel when I was a kid, it had no bearing at all on what I've ended up doing

[Gennz]

you would be vvvvvv U to discourage your bright daughter to go to university - if that's what she wants to do - because she will end up with debt.

My student loan was $55nz when I graduated - early 2000s - ended up $70k with interest. So about 35k in pounds, 15 years ago. I only cleared it a year ago.

Regardless it is the best investment I ever made. I have 2 degrees and professional qualification which opened the door to a really interesting, well paid career. My parents had no money and I borrowed and worked part time jobs to get through varsity. It's hard but it can done when you're young & energetic. Buying a house is still ridiculously unaffordable in London (and where I live) but not going to uni isn't going to even up that equation.

[NoLotteryWinYet]

but where is the investment in other types of training to match what is being put into university?

I don't accept the 'by that argument' line - people that are sick cannot pay for themselves, education to age 18 is clearly of benefit to every individual and every individual gets that.

Having a degree means you, as an individual earn more money than you otherwise would for the rest of your life.

I don't say that degrees that are socially useful but don't result in well paid jobs shouldn't be subsidized, but we have an aging population crisis and 50% of students going down the graduate route now. It is not affordable and what we're going to get is sausage factories teaching bland standardized degrees and very little world class research.

[titchy]

I don't think it's fair to non graduates to have to pay for graduate education when they do not get any matching investment in their skills.

Whilst I wholeheartedly agree that investment for training of all ages and skills is vitally important and sadly lacking at the moment, the principle that only those that benefit from something should pay is an impossibility unless you live in almost complete isolation from the rest of the world and have a crystal ball. By that argument only those with kids would pay tax that's earmarked for schools, only the ill would pay tax earmarked for the NHS, only the disabled would pay for disability benefits etc.

[RufusTheRenegadeReindeer]

Oh sorry

Should say that i agree with others, hopefully it will be worth it

But apparently the average figures the university has said for living costs are wrong and ds1 own costings are also wrong...he inky feels that way because his parents are spendthrifts and don't know the value of money

[RufusTheRenegadeReindeer]

Makes no difference to me whether the mother votes tory, labour or anything else

My MIL is lovely but has no concept at all of how much university will cost to live...not the fees

To be fair neither does my 28 year old nephew so its not an age thing

[NoLotteryWinYet]

Fairness is in the eye of the beholder - I don't think it's fair to non graduates to have to pay for graduate education when they do not get any matching investment in their skills.

[Frankiestein401]

I don't care who introduced fees - I believe it is wrong to charge for education. I believe it is wrong that parents who can afford to subsidise their children give them a significant advantage over those whose parents can't.
I earn more than 80k - no government policy over the last decade has reduced my income, no conservative policy proposes to hit me let alone millionaires.
How can that be fair when people are being hit who have average wage let alone minimum.
Austerity was and is an obscene unnecessary policy and its perpetrators deserve shaming.
The fact that the media is ignoring the failure of that policy implies bias or ignorance

[onemorecupofcoffeefortheroad]

OP spoken like a true Labour voter.bwants everything free and paid for by others.

Bit of a generalisation methinks. DP and I are life long staunch Labour voters and we 're also in the highest tax bracket - so would be not be paying for the students' uni tuition fees (which we support) through our taxes?
I'm also not sure how this means we expect everything for free in view of the fact we already both have degrees which we paid for ourselves.
I'm also more than happy to pay taxes for tuition fees (I'd rather my hard earned taxes were going towards students' university fees than many other uses of public money).
I believe in taxation for the good of society as a whole and am happy to contribute towards a society that has educated people in it - those who are qualified doctors, nurses, teachers, lawyers etc - doctors for my old age, nurses in case I get sick, teachers to educate my grandchildren and lawyers in case I ever get arrested! Bring on those taxes!!

[Madbengalmum]

It never fails to astound me about just how many people complaining about the uni fees situation are voting for labour, those who actually bought the fees in. God help us.

[NoLotteryWinYet]

oh I believe they'll abolish them, and in 5 years time when things are in complete disarray, they'll be re-introduced again. I won't be wrapping up my savings for my DCs' (hopefully) university funds anytime soon.

[peachgreen]

Woodlice So on your current salary, you must be paying under a tenner back on your student loan? Which is pretty much a bargain, don't you think? I'm a Labour voter through and through but scrapping tuition fees is not a good use of (limited) public money. The current scheme is very fair; those who reap the benefits of going to university (by getting well-paid jobs) pay for the privilege in a manner which is affordable. Why do we need to subsidise that with public money?
There's no privilege to being diagnosed with cancer, losing your job or being made homeless because you're fleeing from an abuser - so let's spend our public money on services which will benefit the vulnerable like the NHS, social welfare and social care.

If public money was unlimited then of course I'd want everyone to be able to go to university for free. But it's not. We have to prioritise spending. The current system is fair, it doesn't penalise students from poorer backgrounds (barring the 'start up' costs I mentioned earlier, for which I believe there should be bursaries available), and it doesn't leave anyone struggling to pay a debt they can't afford.

(There is definitely an argument to be made for wiping student debt for those in particular service careers e.g. nursing and I would happily support a policy along those lines.)

[Carolinesbeanies]

OP, youre misunderstanding Labours intent. This proposal, will only benefit the already comfortable middle classes.
www.theguardian.com/education/2014/apr/29/free-tuition-scotland-benefits-wealthiest-students-most-study

Personally, I dont think theres a hope in hell that Labour will abolish tuition fees, firstly because they cant afford to (even if they won, youd get some slippery propaganda about 'means testing, further studies on student impacts i.e. Scotland) and secondly they know that promising a complete u-turn on Labour policy is irrelevant as they wont get in anyway. Its cynical populism, simply designed to deter support from the Torys rather than win an election. They are not looking for a win, theyre looking to rebuild by undermining tory support. Its promise Unicorns time.

[Schleeping]

You've got this all arse upwards. Labour introduced tuition fees. As for discouraging your daughter's ambition- I have a feeling you're a bit of a lost cause.

[PeanutButterBunny]

OP spoken like a true Labour voter.bwants everything free and paid for by others. And "My brothers child just finished university, studied History and has £30000 debt, what job can they get now??" Why did he study History then? I have 6 openings at the moment but in technology field. We just can't find people with the right skills and the pay is above average even for juniors! If everybody's parents are like you and discourage young people to go to uni we are fucked. We will have more low skilled workers in the near future.

[BandeauSally]

If you're earning £25k p/a your monthly payment is £30. It doesn't have a "significant impact"

It's a pretty good deal isn't it? This comment really puts it in perspective. £30 a month to go to university and get a degree? Yes please. Bargain.

[titchy]

woodlice

Two points - what has the fact that your salary is low got to do with anything on this thread? The vast majority of graduates will significantly out-earn non-graduates. Your low salary is the exception not the rule, the same as great-aunt Edna who smoked 40 a day and lived till she was 90 is the exception.

Secondly this thread was not about debating the moral rights and wrongs of students having to have loan vs having their fee costs fully met (student maintenance has always required parental contributions if they earned enough) - it's about the diabolical shirt-sightedness of a parent who discourages their child from doing something based entirely on what she reads in the DM or on the Facebook sidebar of shame, rather than researching the facts.

[AtMidnight]

Without meaning to, you have summed up my opinion of so many Labour voters OP.

Your attitude of "well, you pay for me and my children" is what has infuriated so many who pay their own way through life and expect others to aswel.

Despite the inaccuracies in your post, your attitude is loud and clear and it stinks.

[NoLotteryWinYet]

this was all hashed out when Blair brought in tuition fees. Degrees typically confer the biggest return to the individual, not society. Society didn't benefit from my history degree, I did.

I'm not saying there aren't perhaps exceptions where degrees for jobs that do not pay well should not receive bursaries, but as a general rule doctors earn plenty to more than reward their investment in themselves.

Where is the matching investment in non-graduates?