Sausage
The wurst of the wurst.
- Dec 8, 2007
- 809
I agree.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
How thick are students...
- Thread starter Rookie
- Start date
I agree.
This.
I await some poor sobbing students because they got a bloodied nose from a police baton.
A graduate tax - the more you earn the more you pay and no debt hanging over you. Also deducted at source so most people wouldn't notice a difference.
Most suggest a graduate tax or a 'people fund for higher education'.
Interesting article on it here: Student leaders call for graduate tax to replace tuition fees | Education | guardian.co.uk
Whatever is done, higher education should be made available to all those who warrant it, not just all those who can afford it.
Neither do I but would a sit in , in the street of gained the same press ?
bhaexpress
New member
Maybe it'd be a good thing if some studnets here had a look at what an education in the US costs.
Why?
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
I think the question should actually be more fundamental than that, do we want an educational system that treats everyone the same, or one that recognises that individuals have individual educational needs and potential. Once we've worked that one out maybe we can start thinking about what we actually need, how it would benefit society as a whole, and then the best way to fund it.
bhaexpress
New member
That won't work too well, how many unemployed graduates are there now ?
Superphil
Dismember
It certainly is an idea that seems to have been well discussed. How much extra tax would you expect a graduate to pay, over say a non graduate earning the same amount of money?
Is it not similar to how the current debt works? You leave University, get a job, and when you start to earn enough you start paying it back, or is that incorrect?
Hatterlovesbrighton
something clever
Aren't student loans deducted at source as well?
Graduate Taxes do nothing to disuade people from going to university to study pointless courses and end up with the same job prospects as before they enetered.
bhaexpress
New member
Because their degrees are massively expensive.
So because America has it wrong, we should follow?
sten_super
Brain Surgeon
Except that the Browne report suggested that a graduate tax set at 3% (higher than suggested in that article) is not viable. It would probably have to be double that, and you'd still be reliant upon the government covering the shortfall in the interim.
bhaexpress
New member
No they're just more realistic about what an education costs. How does that make them wrong ?
Can this not be pro-rata for different subjects? I dont mind my tax money fully subsidising someone to do a medical degree, I dont even mind part funding someone to learn about business or geography but if you want to do the History of Art? or Surfing?? you can pay for the whole thing yourself 
What about a compromise of the two. When a student signs up they have a choice - pay a yearly lump sum say £6k ( they get a student loan to do this ) or pay 6% extra tax once they graduate.
I know there would be complications with drop outs but I'm sure that could be overcome.
Superphil
Dismember
That would be my thought, a graduate could end up paying 26/46p in the pound in income tax as soon as they get a job (even if if they end up in Tesco or working in a pub(23p obviously)), which would seem no fairer to me. How long would they pay that rate? Long enough to cover the amount the education cost? that would go on for a long time.