Yeah, you would hope this would get them out in high numbers. It's the same pledge that was one of the key reasons the Lib Dems were successful enough to become kingmakers and form the coalition. Their abandonment of it during the coalition is also one of the main reasons they then lost almost all their younger voters...
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK General Election - 8th June 2017 |OT| - The Red Wedding
- Thread starter Jezbollah
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, you would hope this would get them out in high numbers. It's the same pledge that was one of the key reasons the Lib Dems were successful enough to become kingmakers and form the coalition. Their abandonment of it during the coalition is also one of the main reasons they then lost almost all their younger voters...
Huw_Dawson
Member
No it is not one of the reasons we were kingmakers.
Students in 2010 did not vote in significant numbers. I am sure it helped in a couple of seats, but no more than that.
My thought on student fees being immediately cancelled before the autumn is that it's reasonably obvious this is a bribe... But students will be fans. Not clear if they will actually vote, though.
Students in 2010 did not vote in significant numbers. I am sure it helped in a couple of seats, but no more than that.
My thought on student fees being immediately cancelled before the autumn is that it's reasonably obvious this is a bribe... But students will be fans. Not clear if they will actually vote, though.
QuicheFontaine
Member
They're really planning not to charge students starting in September? Is that even practically possible?
Edit: just read that BBC article, so they're aiming for autumn 2018 with a one year retroactive write off. That sounds a bit more realistic, but the write off could complicate things.
Edit: just read that BBC article, so they're aiming for autumn 2018 with a one year retroactive write off. That sounds a bit more realistic, but the write off could complicate things.
Daffy Duck
Member
You just know the phrase uncosted is going to be used by ge press and May in rebuttal to this.
Nobody wants to be put under the weight of life long debt, especially with the country leaving the EU which potentially screws opportunity. A small term debt is fine for most things, but the past huge increase in tuition fees is a major issue.
They can try but the Tories whole manifesto is uncosted so I don't think it would stick.
Snarfington
Member
The problem is that it's got so absurdly high that students don't even consider it real anymore. Being 30k+ in debt is a number that's intangible to young people who largely haven't done serious paid work yet. It's a borderline abstract amount of money, nobody actually thinks about it. The perception of debt has been ruined for many young people by the enormous increase. I try to keep it in mind in everything I do but it's so high it's difficult to look at it in a practical way.
The general attitude around me is that if any of us ever manage to pay it back they will be extremely fortunate in life.
I work in HE and I want to see costings of this. Yes, it's possible to give free education to students, but what are the upstream costs in terms of staffing, research funding, administration etc.
Universities wouldn't be able to absorb this. I keep wavering back to Labour, as I think he did a good job with the manifesto, but this is a bit desperate.
I now know how it feels to work in the NHS, when your profession is used as a political football. It's not very nice and actually disenfranchising in many ways.
It still boggles my mind that they thought they could get away with this whilst trying to present themselves as the economically credible option. I assume it's because behind closed doors they are well aware that Brexit could be an economic disaster, so it's nice to know they're being upfront about that possibility by saying nothing, crossing their fingers and hoping for the best. It just tells me that the Conservative party want power at all costs and any line about looking after citizens interests is simply a means to an end.
QuicheFontaine
Member
My concern is that ultimately the tax payer is still "holding the bag" on student loan debt. In 30 years time there's going to be a LOT of write-offs. I guess current politicians don't really care about that though.
The Rain King
Member
This^ I think people underestimate young people's ability to not give a fuck.
Miles Quaritch
Member
I think we should look into increasing the number of scholarship bonds rather than abolishing tuition fees.
Let's be honest, not all degrees are created equal. The ones that provide more benefit to society should be funded by the taxpayer on the promise that the student, once graduated, will work in UK for a pre-agreed length of time.
Let's be honest, not all degrees are created equal. The ones that provide more benefit to society should be funded by the taxpayer on the promise that the student, once graduated, will work in UK for a pre-agreed length of time.
I would normally agree with this, if it weren't for the referendum last year and with a lot young people expressing their regret with not voting to remain. I honestly think the turnout for young people will be a lot higher this year.
Theonik
Member
It's actually not a very big committent in real finance terms because...
Only about 1/3 of students right now ever pay back their student loans, in a sense university is already free for many with an additional graduate tax being imposed on the more successful ones. If the UK is to succeed as a knowledge based economy it needs to tackle its education woes and improving access to education is a huge benefit.
They should probably also look at maintenance loans/grants while they're at it. Current approach to determine how much money a student can borrow for maintenance is based on the assumption that parents will pay for university. If you want to borrow a higher amount your parents need to not be earning enough. Of course in practice many parents will not pay for university which leads students to have to survive on as low as £800 a month. Means testing all those benefits is also pretty expensive on its own.
Monty Mole
Member
Exactly.
Or at the very least, limit free tuition fees to certain subjects.
Or does it really need to be all or nothing? Why not just slash the fees in half. I cannot even begin to imagine how much this policy will cost.
Monty Mole
Member
As in only a 1/3 have finished paying off their loan, or only a 1/3 are earning enough to start paying their loan back? If the first, if say give them a chance! If the latter then I'd be wondering what on earth 2/3s of graduates are doing after they leave uni.
Theonik
Member
Look above. It's not like charging for tuition has helped much with limiting people's choices of shit degrees. In the first place daft degrees like Vegan Studies or whatever appeal primarily to people that can afford them. Now demanding people take loans for them also doesn't make sense because our repayment strategy is built around affordability and recovery and these people will not get jobs that can support repayment so it's not a benefit outside pleasing people's feelings.
You can make everyone's life easier by just forgetting about the whole thing. Interestingly, international students have always paid their tuition in full and European students will probably join them now. We'll see how that goes.
Huw_Dawson
Member
Maintenance loans are a disgrace and should be converted back to grants. Money to scrap tuitions fees is currently better spent in the primary/secondary education levels. We clearly need higher quality schools.
Look at the UK's average wage. Then look at the number of people that go to uni these days and you have your answer. The jobs aren't there to justify the numbers going imo.
I strongly disagree with pumping more money into universities. It seems so self evident that getting more graduates and spending more on higher education will power your economy, but the fact is there has never been a link between university spending and economic growth.
Universities work great when you have smart students dedicated to learning a subject in depth, and if you could just drive up student numbers and get more and more of those type of people it would be a fine strategy. But the more you push people to university, the less it becomes about knowledge. You just end up with certification factories, teaching average students nothing and conferring only a certificate that says "let me have a job".
Unfortunately, I don't think there is a way we can go back to a system where only a small minority got degrees and high school was enough for jobs so this is all a bit moot. Still, one thing I can say is that making university free for everyone will be a massive misallocation of funding.
Universities work great when you have smart students dedicated to learning a subject in depth, and if you could just drive up student numbers and get more and more of those type of people it would be a fine strategy. But the more you push people to university, the less it becomes about knowledge. You just end up with certification factories, teaching average students nothing and conferring only a certificate that says "let me have a job".
Unfortunately, I don't think there is a way we can go back to a system where only a small minority got degrees and high school was enough for jobs so this is all a bit moot. Still, one thing I can say is that making university free for everyone will be a massive misallocation of funding.
Theonik
Member
Annual tuition is £9000 at the moment. A maintenance loan on top of that is some £8430 per annum. For a 3 year course that's £52,290 which might not seem like a lot but real debt by the time you leave university is higher because you are charged interest in that time. The median salary in the UK is some £26k the repayment threshold is £21k. In reality it's several years of interest before a student starts paying their loans back at all at some 3-5%. And to actually pay the loan back you need to be earning enough to be paying back over the interest rate.
So say you are £55k in debt by the time you leave university. At 4% interest, you will pay £2.2k of interest a year on that student debt. To start making a dent on the loan you need to pay more than £2.2k in that year. Repayment is set to 9p for every pound you earn over £21k so you need to be making at least £45,445 to start paying it down in principle and you will never repay it at that level. Especially when your debt has grown in the meantime. Remember also that interest rates for student loans are tied to the highest measure of inflation, and that £45k is on the upper 10% of earners.
Linkstrikesback
Member
That's the thing about it. You don't need to cost anything in the short term. The government is already paying that money to universities, it's just not asking for it back 3+ years down the line.
I agree that handing out degrees to everyone doesn't help, but I disagree that about this spending not working, I think it will help quite a lot because more students will feel like they can go and study what they're actually interested in, not what will earn them the money they need to pay off the tuition fees, and that's when you start to see a social and economic benefit to university education.
That more people are interested in learning than earning will also increase pressure on universities to improve the standard of their teaching rather than their marketing which is another massive problem at the moment.
It will be really interesting to see the student turn out now though, this must be the single biggest political bribe ever made by a UK party so if they don't vote for £55k of debt relief I think we can all agree that there's no point ever trying to appeal to students politically ever again.
Theonik
Member
It's not even asking a big chunk of it back anyway. Universities are public institutions.
Tuition fees are not set on costs, they are capped/subsidised. And the remainder goes on un-repayable loans.
You could even save money by reducing admin on paying down student loans in the long run. Which is where this even matters.
chromatic9
Member
The elderly care policy is probably hurting the Tories. All those south west and south east counties all vote Tory but will get rinsed. I'm expecting Tories to go back on this pledge or change it, like on the budget.
Sucks for Lib Dems though, even Brexit has taken a back seat for quite a while with how Corbyn has come out fighting.
Sucks for Lib Dems though, even Brexit has taken a back seat for quite a while with how Corbyn has come out fighting.
QuicheFontaine
Member
Eh? I really don't understand this. I'm interestered in history and philosophy, but if I'd studied either of those I'd probably be unemployed. What's the "social and economic benefit" of that?
Edit:
I do agree with this however.
Blue rinsed?
chromatic9
Member
Yep. I was going to add that in but thought some might be too young for the blue rinsed brigade. I don't hear it anymore.
Spuck-uk
Banned
There's never been a link between social care for the disabled spending and economic growth either, that doesn't mean it's not worth doing.
On the flip side, it's also common for wealthy families to fiddle the submission to get their son/daughter the maximum loan amount.
No graduate wants to never pay back their loans, the problem is degrees were devalued by New Labour pushing eveyone into higher education and the job market falling on it's arse. This helped foster an anti-academia, anti-intellectual attitude in management (which already existed amongst those without HE qualifications). Broadly speaking obvs.
The bribe would work if they were going to cancel outstanding student debts as well.
The only way those who went to uni in the last 5 years can escape is to get as many people onto those loans that they become politically important.
Why would someone who graduated 2 years ago vote for this.
The only way those who went to uni in the last 5 years can escape is to get as many people onto those loans that they become politically important.
Why would someone who graduated 2 years ago vote for this.
Well if anyone can provide a convincing reason for this with no reference to economic benefit, and justify why money should be spent on this and not elsewhere, then I could support it. I don't think that will be the case
Spuck-uk
Banned
It's important for people to know if someone they'll be voting into a position to affect legislation, has views on that position affected by his religion.
The interviewer was still shit though.
nekkid
It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan.
I can see people who have just graduated or will do so in the next year or so be wholly put off by this policy.
They'd be in the worst place, financially, by both having a huge debt and having to immediately support the students right behind them through their studies via tax.
They'd be in the worst place, financially, by both having a huge debt and having to immediately support the students right behind them through their studies via tax.
WhateverItTakes
Banned
Meh, I'm not too fussed by it. Sure it's pretty annoying but that's the way things go.
Almost seems too late to announce this. Last day to register to vote is today right? Good luck getting students to react that fast in significant numbers.
Unless you think they'd vote against this?
They might not, but maybe there's something else in the manifesto they like.
Unless you think they'd vote against this?
Personally, it's the way it should be. The last thing I want to be is "fuck you, because I won't get mine."
Probably tory voters anyway.
ReplacementPelican
Member
One thing I've noticed this election is previously previous Labour voters finding an issue with one Labour policy and thus decide to vote Tory despite having a vast ideological cavern between them and the Tories and also most likely many issues with Tory policies. Its a really weird phenomena. I'm not a fan of Corbyn and I'm not a Labour voter however even I have to admit he's being weirdly vilified since day 1, its crazy to see people getting so hyperbolic about him.
I mean, I understand some people who would be directly affected but I'm not so much talking about those people.
I mean, I understand some people who would be directly affected but I'm not so much talking about those people.
Spuck-uk
Banned
Beat me to that punchline, damn.
travisbickle
Member
Spuck-uk
Banned
They're just trying to justify voting Tory to themselves.
Huw_Dawson
Member
Which is why Corbyn's occasionally dodgy past (also see: Abbot, McDonnell) is of interest...
I don't think it is controversial to be pro-life in a religious sense ("I wish abortion wasn't needed") but be a liberal and pro-life in practice ("I want every woman to have their own choice and not be judged by others").
Sky interviewers are bulldogs though. I listened in to her podcast later on talking about her exchange and I don't think that is the actual character of the interviewer. Her show tweeted Lib Dem Press afterward thanking them for allowing them to ask tough questions.
Sky hasn't been totally Murdoch'd yet.
I ultimately think Farron knows he's sometimes regarded as bonkers for his religious beliefs. He hasn't yet found the line on how being a Christian and being a Liberal actually work together. Christians don't judge people, and neither do Liberals. (I'd even argue that English Liberalism is closely rooted into Protestantism.)
Spuck-uk
Banned
There was a referendum on FPTP and people massively voted to keep it. People are incredibly stupid and easily led.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked