£9000 a year too much for a degree?

245

Comments

  • It's £3K a year here...(I remember my student grant...*sigh* I loved uni!)

  • Can't blame the Uni's for charging what they can
  • RicFRicF ✭✭✭
    seren nos wrote (see)

    and remember your plumber and electrician will have no sick pay scheme and no holiday pay and no pension scheme top up by employer........and if it snows for a week then they get no work.........and they need equipment and vans and insurance

     so the money per hour has to cover all that as well......

    Its the price of freedom.

    🙂

  • yes.but its easy for people to say that they charge £25 an hour but then forget that isn't the same as working in an office getting paid £25 an hour.....

    you have to travel to jobs and not get that time paid........you have to go out and waste time giving estimates which people will then give to someone else.....and the days you do not get any money.....

    its easy to say they are rolling in it..........some might be not not all....comparing them to GP pay is ridicolous

  • Poor estimating if you don't make an allowance for travelling time when you are doing a quote... I do that all the time
  • RicFRicF ✭✭✭

    In my early days of self employment I gave a quote based on an hourly rate only to have some office based employee start squealing about how much more that was than they got.

    They compounded their irrational comparison by saying that what I was doing (cutting a 50m privet hedge) was easy because I had the tools.

    I pointed out that the tools (a hedgecutter costing over £400) were mine because I had paid for them. And they were there to let me earn my money faster, not give them more 'bang for their buck'.

    It seems they would have been happy to see me spend 8 hours cutting the hedge with a pair of scissors.

    Needless to say, these days I only have to chat to someone about a job to determine if I want to go anywhere near it, or them.

    🙂

  • SideBurn wrote (see)

    Do not forget that when the £9K per year idea was mooted, it was said that this was the maximum figure, and only the top universities would charge it image 

    Seems to me there are a lot of top universities out there image

    Did anybody believe that ! It was absolutely , no doubt, mind -blowingly obvious they would all charge the max. Partly because if they don't then they are cheap and assumed to be no good.

    I said this at the time but in case you don;t believe me, let me make another obvious statement. As the government has also cut Uni funding, there is no real reason to stay in the public sector. Many will go private and charge whatever they like. £50K a year? For Oxbridge I wouldn;t be surprised. Imperial as well and a few others. I think a private University in Buckingham is already charging at least £30 per year for medicine.

    and yes Oxbridge will get it because they will market themselves globally.

    Secondly forget debt because there isn;t one. It is a tax. The only debt element is to enable them to charge interest. RPI plus 3.5% - way above base rates, Wonga eat your heart out!  You pay 10% of your salary a year (yes it really is a tax and has no relevance to repayment) and because of the interest you will never pay it off. The government will write it off after 30 years. Although not a debt it will affect your credit ability, mortgage etc as they will count the 10% as an outgoing. Of course they will, it is obvious again.

    So you will pay 10% of your salary for your working life and therefore actually whether the fees are £9k a year or £8.5k a year is actually irrelevant.

    So really the policy is, work hard, do the best you can, try to get on and you can have the national debt to pay off.   Mess around, skip school, join a gang and we will give you benefits. The government says verbally' the complete opposite but actions are louder than words and the whole message is completely and utterly wrong. By the way you aren't much better off if you are more vocational and become a tradesman because apprenticeship support has all been cut as well.

    Hitler Cameron and his puppet, mussolini Clegg. Actually that is a poor analogy because although I am not supporting what he did with them at least Hitler knew the importance of looking after the Youth.

    Yes if you can't tell, this really winds me up and whilst my son is paying for this decision I will not vote for either of them again which certainly will be for life.

     

  • Oh and yes all the students with current student debts should remember that they had £3,000 per year and £1.5% interest rates. However the government has sold your debt to a private company; so forget Wonga they are now fully fledged loan sharks - was that a knock on the door......

  • Wound up never ?



    We are putting 2 guys through an apprenticeship, and 2 completed in the summer and have been taken on full time.



    I suppose if kids want to go out and make something of themselves they will, with or without the encouragement of their parents
  • GraemeKGraemeK ✭✭✭

    The problem arose when the ridiculous idea of having 50% of 18 year olds going to University to keep them off the unemployment stats was dreamt up. When half were doing meaningless courses it was always going to be unsustainable. It is a graduate tax, but then people argue tht thosewho earn more should pay more tax, you can't win. what they mean is people who earn more than me should pay more tax. 

  • But don't people who earn more than "you" pay more tax ?



    I know what you mean tho,
  • GraemeKGraemeK ✭✭✭
    You're right Dave, it's one of the things that confuses me with some popular arguments. They say the rich should pay more, the last time I checked, 20% of 50k was more than 20% of 30k.

    Anyway it's all the fault of the millionaire Cameron, the clearly penniless Milliband is the answer. He may be, but his personal wealth is irrelevant.
  • I didn't work as hard as you at skool, My children got drunk and stoned all the way thro uni, and ended up with a degree in brass rubbing, so none of us got a job as good as you.

    You should pay more tax, and we can all blame Cameron.

    Typical of the nanny state..... Yet again people failing to take responsibility for their own actions.

    I'm working in a supposedly deprived area, but only had 2 of the 3 apprenticeships taken up, Because the T's & C's we were offering meant they had to work for the money, and it was easier to stay in bed and sponge of the tax payer

  •  product of the Tories mining the life out of the poor.


    That is in the country with the fastest growing economy in Europe ?

     

  • RicFRicF ✭✭✭

    The national debt is racking up at the rate of £6000 per second, and it doesn't matter which political party is in power, they're not going to stop that, only slow it down a bit.

    Playing politics is a luxury that none of the parties can now afford so anyone who thinks 'labour' is this and the 'Cons' are that, is about 50 years out of date. Its just management now.

    We've developed an infrastructure that we cannot afford hence all the attacks on our wallets.

    Just imagine coming up with this lot if your country had only just started to make some money: NHS, DHSS, Emergency services, Free Education, Pensions.

    I doubt if many of these would be put into play.

    🙂

  • What absolute bollocks. 

  • Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)
    Flob wrote (see)

    Sadly Clegg,cable and Alexander have now consigned the Lib Dems to the slag heap as the dirty by product of the Tories mining the life out of the poor.

    I don't think we're mining the life out of the poor, we are just simply re-dressing the imbalance. The poor and non-working have received raises annually over a long period that have out performed wage rises. This should never happen, if wages rise at average 2% benefits and assistance should rise at less than this. I rarely agree with Tory policies but this needed doing.

    That's all fine and dandy when applied across the board bit it isn't is it? MPs have just received an 11% pay increase out of the public purse.

  • Given that they're taking from the same pot of cash that apparently isn't available to those that need it more, I would.

     

  • Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)
    popsider wrote (see)

    What absolute bollocks. 

    Explain?

    Does anyone really think we could abolish state provision of all of those and still have an economy or society worth speaking of?   That isn't even a rant it's just madness. 

  • RicFRicF ✭✭✭

    I don't recall anyone suggesting we could abolish anything. The truth is, we can't. The entire country's infrastructure, society and economy has been built around these formidable benefits.

    Lets face it, it will take at least 35 years at the current rate to truly bankrupt the country. That's how much money/assets the UK has.

    The biggest disaster of late is that the cost of the UK borrowing money has risen by 0.25%.

    All politicians are stuffed by the bigger picture. They're stuffed by the smaller picture, namely individuals doing what they always have which is looking at what's in it for them. And who can blame them.

    There's always the suspicion that those in power abuse their positions at the expense of the majority. Its been going on forever.

    Here's a publication from 1974 that I retrieved from my late mother's house.

    /members/images/493151/Gallery/DSC_0353.png

     Not much change there.

     

    🙂

  • Ric its not a suspicion.its a fact........the rich are still getting richer...and thats the same all around the world now..........because they use their money and power over governments to ensure all the laws and regulations will keep it that way

  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭
    Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)

    I don't think anyone said abolish them, I think RicF suggested that if we were presented with a situation where we had to bring those things in now, it would be seen as impossible. Or am I mistaken?

    I think that if we had no NHS, and introducing it now was proposed, there would be as much opposition here as there was in the US to Obama's healthcare proposals.

    Maybe more!

  • RicFRicF ✭✭✭
    Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)

    I don't think anyone said abolish them, I think RicF suggested that if we were presented with a situation where we had to bring those things in now, it would be seen as impossible. Or am I mistaken?

    You are quite correct Nick.

    🙂

Sign In or Register to comment.