£100BN Labour lied to get the students vote.

[Whodoesthis17]

I read the news today and saw that Labour admitted they never costed this out, and don't know where the money will be found, so won't be doing this if elected. Hang on wasn't this the reason the young voted for them.

So Corbyn LIED.

There were more massive lies from the Tories in my opinion, their manifesto was unbelievably weak, TM had to u/turn and backtrack yet here we are, she's still "leading" the country.

But your OP is about the abolition of debts. That's what you must have heard on Andrew Marr today? And if Guardian have taken it down, there may be a reason for it?
You make no sense.

*"Labour 'aim' to wipe £100bn student debt - Angela Rayner"

Typical, only usually they say one thing to the media, another in meetings or standing on a local soap box.

The under 25's I know have all stated they voted labour as they promised to ditch the fees.
This is about 40 people, who all think that labour said it, so it doesn't matter what they meant it has been taken to mean the fees would go..
I just think that to imply your doing it so the young of this county believe it is going to happen means if it doesn't your lying.

I don't think that article says what you think it does. It's not talking about the scrapping of fees but the promise to look into ways to "ameliorate" the debt of students who have been charged the 9,000 fees.

Labour's new government quango Investment Bank with £250 billion newly borrowed from the UK taxpayer.

What commercial or government expertise does Corbyn and McDonnell have to form and run that - on top of the cost another 1 million new 100% tax funded government workers with 'decent' salaries, no doubt decided on by public sector trade unions?

I remember the last bank they played with, headed by a Labour apparatchik, the Co-op Bank run by a reverend - how did that turn out???

The under 25's I know have all stated they voted labour as they promised to ditch the fees

The promise was for the future, not retrospectively.

Like say if you put that you would give £350m a week to the NHS on the side of a big red bus, but you were only joking?

1. He didn't lie, it wasn't in the manifesto. He said it would be looked at.
2. "Young people" voted on a range of issues. It's so patronising to suggest that they voted on one issue and were hoodwinked at that. 40 people is not representative and I don't know anyone in their 20s who voted for that reason.

Quelle surprise

My 'young people' voted on that pledge . 2 votes he wouldn't have got otherwise

Hang on wasn't this the reason the young voted for them

No. No it isn't and I'm sick of hearing this. I have a lot of just graduated, studying and college age friends. Not one of them voted labour for free education. They voted because they care about our old people, the disabled and the NHS. I am so so sick of people making out that the young voters are basically selfish, single minded voters. Maybe some only voted labour for free university, but IME this wasn't the thinking for most of them.

What pledge? The one he didn't lie about (scrapping tuition fees) or the other one he didn't lie about (looking into reducing or abolishing existing debt)?

You know a different bunch of young voters than me then weasel. I can say categorically, they voted for free university. Sorry to burst your bubble, bit a whole load of votes came in because of that pledge.

I'm confused about this, this policy isn't helping all young people is it? Just the intellectually and usually financially better off.

In fact isn't this just going to increase the tax burden for all young people?

Wouldn't £100billion be better spent on schools, then all young people would benefit. Even the ones who aren't politically active (or is that just me being cynical?

Quite amouse. Pie in the sky.

That's depressing

When Labour was ‘just’ promising £10 billion out of THIS years already set Education budget for free education to UK and EU students (why the latter?), the IFS opinion below said it all – but then a £30 billion ‘rumour’ came out re the cutting of old debt – and now the student ‘wind up’ is £100 billion.

IFS; “Labour’s manifesto spending plans are impossible to cost”

Policy by soundbite needs few details, as many would like to cure world hunger, or to a lesser cost extent make sure no one is poor, but as usual, 'the devil is in the (lack of) policy/costing detail' – they got away with last time, but won’t again.

Young people voting for free tuition for themselves just doesn't make sense me. They might have agreed with the policy but only a small number of them entitled to vote would ever have benefitted from it. You can't vote until the age of 18 and they never promised to apply it retroactively or write off existing debt so any scrapping of fees would have come in too late to benefit the majority of young voters.

And that's not even counting those who didn't got to university or who aren't interested in going.

He promised from September this year Dumbledore. So everyone at uni or abit to go. Have one ds one at uni, one about to go, all their friends plus my 17 year old dses 18 year old friends. All voted labour on this issue. And the fact the tax evaders would pay for it . That promise was absolutely huge in getting the young out to vote. In my area anyway.

Lapdance much as it is denied on MN, and much as I would like to believe it, I really do think that the majority of the voting public do vote in their own best interest, or what they believe is their own best interest - young and old. If they didn't, then why would the Tories especially, but all parties to an extent, be so terrified of losing the votes of the old? They know the old vote more than the young, and so they are pandered to in ways that other sections of society aren't.

I used to think this wasn't true, but I'm doubting it more and more.

So that's around 2/3 of existing students (those in their final year wouldn't benefit) and those in year 13 old enough to vote and intending to go to university. Labour outperformed the Tories with all age groups voters from 18-49 as shown in the link below. They can't all have been voting for tuition fees. The overwhelming support amongst the younger demographics and the fact that the tipping point between labour and Tories was late forties means that the fees explanation just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The plural of anecdote isn't data.

yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election/

Of course it was never going to happen. There hasn't been a socialist government yet that hasn't bankrupted the country. Corbyn is a nice bloke and has great intentions but he is deluded in what is possible. Austerity is a load of bollocks too. It just means living within our means. And I say this as a NHS nurse! ps. I'm not a tory either though!

Believe that if you want to Dumbledore. We'll see over the next election or two.