Blair Determined not to give British People a say on new EU Constitution

[The Mad Monk]

I know I didn't.

[Solly]

Originally posted by MikeH
True about the Conservatives. They really know how to throw an election in style don't they.

Their whole "we'll scrap tuition fees" is just awful - not credible at all, and reactionary.

[PMKeates]

Originally posted by Boddington's
Their whole "we'll scrap tuition fees" is just awful - not credible at all, and reactionary.

It may be reactionary, but it's what a lot of people want.

[Solly]

Exactly, reactionary.

A more sensible policy would be to suggest more generous student loans, to be repaid as the current ones are now. This would not create budgetary problem, would allow equal access to university, and be in line with people's perceptions of what a Tory party could offer.

It's fair and well offering something people want, but if people perceive that they are being offered that not out of a conviction that it is a right and sensible policy, but merely a way of grab votes, they are not likely be swayed.

[*End Is Forever*]

The Conservative Party believes in opportunity. Tuition fees restrict that. It's all very well talking about huge loans when you're from a middle-class family where Daddy pays for everything anyway...

[*End Is Forever*]

Stewart, how do you feel about the excessive bureaucracy of City of Salford Council? Surely that could be tiered down considerably...

[Solly]

Originally posted by *End Is Forever*
The Conservative Party believes in opportunity. Tuition fees restrict that. It's all very well talking about huge loans when you're from a middle-class family where Daddy pays for everything anyway...

Tuition fees do not restrict opportunity if student loans are generous enough to cover them and an acceptable standard of living.

[*End Is Forever*]

They restrict opportunity if you are from a debt-averse background.

Besides, why should people pay for their qualifications twice?

[Solly]

"They restrict opportunity if you are from a debt-averse background."

If someone can't see that the returns on their investment in their own education are huge, then they do not have the merit to go to university in the first place.

"Besides, why should people pay for their qualifications twice?"

Huh?

[*End Is Forever*]

On average, graduates earn more money. Therefore, they pay a lot more tax. Tax is used, amongst other things, to pay for education. It's quite simple really.

Are you in favour of charging people to take A-levels? You could use a similar argument...

[Solly]

Originally posted by *End Is Forever*
On average, graduates earn more money. Therefore, they pay a lot more tax. Tax is used, amongst other things, to pay for education. It's quite simple really.

And once students start to pay the full cost for their degree, they will not be paying tax towards the education they invested in, as it will no longer need to be subsidised by the taxpayer.

Are you in favour of charging people to take A-levels? You could use a similar argument...

Yes, you could. But 16 year olds are not old enough to be taking decisions about debt and their future. 18 year olds are.

[*End Is Forever*]

Yes, you could. But 16 year olds are not old enough to be taking decisions about debt and their future. 18 year olds are.

Yet you effectively have to make a decision about University at 16...

[*End Is Forever*]

And once students start to pay the full cost for their degree, they will not be paying tax towards the education they invested in, as it will no longer need to be subsidised by the taxpayer.

But they will still be paying the same tax...

[Solly]

Maybe there could be a lesson about debt and finance in high school, in order to prepare potential university students for the tough financial decisions they will have to make.

[*End Is Forever*]

Have you sent UWA your £10000 cheque yet? Put your money where your mouth is...