Falling in Love...

[C0ckney]

when you set a (IMHO ridiculous) target of getting 50% of young people into university, as labour did, you have to pay for it somehow. or of course, they could reduce the size of the university system to make it more manageable, but then they'll be accused of destroying education or some such...

as for the lib dems future, there's certainly a lot of moaning about 'betrayal' and 'selling out to the tories', presumably because the people saying these things don't understand that going into coalition means making compromises and not getting everything you want. there's a lot of similar moaning by right wing tory voters as well. the lib dems might be punished at the next election by voters switching to labour. however, i think it might go the other way too, because people will see the lib dems as a responsible party of government and people who were previously attracted to them but didn't want to 'waste' their vote will be more likely to vote lib dem.

oh yeah, laz, how's that rees-mogg fellow getting on as MP your birthplace by the way?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

THIS is the tuition fees betrayal - one could say that once Labour opened the flood gates, it made the latest decision inevitable...

If only we could have a change of government! So that Labour won't be in power any more!

It's an interesting argument, Mobius. If you think this latest proposed rise is inevitable (for reasons you aren't sharing) does that mean the LibDem election pledge on them was a lie, a mistake, or a joke?

[MikeH]

Spoke to a friend yesterday, in a ltd company with his wife. They pay themselves the exact maximum they can without paying higher rate tax so they'll be getting the absolute max 86k, but still receiving child benefit.

[MikeH]

If the electoral system doesn't get changed (and it's not in the interests of Tory or Labour MPs to vote for a referendum) The LibDems will be finished for at least a generation. Too much has been compromised already, and the only ones still cheering are the "Blue Liberals" and those who support political parties out of brand loyalty, as if they were football teams.

I think this is true.

I'm getting more and more disappointed as time goes on. Mind you I do wonder how bad the Tories might have been without any LibDem moderation.

[MikeH]

Vince Cable defending the science cuts that are going to kill our R&D going forward is really depressing.

[OzzyKP]

The most obviously retarded thing about the child tax credit proposal is that certain people will make more money if they AVOID getting a raise (they'd want to keep just barely low enough to still qualify for the benefit) which is rather silly.

Isn't that the same with all progressive taxation?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

No.

[MikeH]

This should keep the riff raff out!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/oct/12/browne-review-universities-set-fees

Let's make sure we keep the good Universities just for the rich!

[MOBIUS]

If only we could have a change of government! So that Labour won't be in power any more!

Funnily enough, when there's a general election, a magic wand isn't suddenly waved and all the **** that the previous govt did disappears. We're 5 months into a new govt that has to clear up 13 years of ****: Labour was spending money on health and education like it was going out of fashion for some questionable returns - suddenly it's all coming home to roost because of Brown being exposed as a **** chancellor...

What do you want, a ****ing miracle...!?

It's an interesting argument, Mobius. If you think this latest proposed rise is inevitable (for reasons you aren't sharing) does that mean the LibDem election pledge on them was a lie, a mistake, or a joke?

Don't get all emotional and put words into my mouth. I'm not deliberately 'not sharing' anything... IMO it was 'inevitable' for several reasons: Labour has bloated university places in an unsustainable manner with its crackpot plan of getting 50% of school leavers into Uni places; then there's this whole global financial crisis on top that the previous govt has left massively exposed to; finally there's the fact that Labour set the precedent in the first place, which means that the Tories and other people are given carte blanche to attempt to raise the fees even further!

Personally, for the Lib Dems, I think that this is the thin end of the wedge. They need to take a stand, because they did make it a central pledge in their manifesto - more to the point, what good is a 'coalition' if one side doesn't reserve the right to at least abstain from policies that they are against. This IMO is a real test on which the future of the Lib Dems as a credible party rests - but before people leap to defame them as some kind of evil pariah party - they haven't actually made a decision yet!

Perhaps there are other ways to bridge the gap other than directly raising the tuition fees by such a massive jump? Some solutions could be to cut or stabilise the number of places available (as places are still subsidised by 2/3s) and at the same time increase places to international students - perhaps students from China etc could help to subsidise the university system? Then there's the graduate tax idea etc...

Hopefully, what we're seeing is the first stages of negotiation, where the various sides set out their stall (remember that this is an independent review and not a Tory proposal), then there'll be some manouvring to reach a palatable and realistic outcome. That's what I'd do anyway...

More to the point, what is your solution to this mess...?

[C0ckney]

i think the coalition agreement allows them to abstain on this, and if the current review is put to parliament as a bill, i would expect a lot of lib dem MPs to vote against it. i expect that the bill that comes before parliament will be significantly different from this review, but we'll see.

the central problem is that the current system, created by labour, is unsustainable, especially given the cuts that are going to happen in the next few years, so tough choices need to be made. you can either make the system smaller or make students pay more of the cost of their education, or you can fill our universities with rich foreign students, or some combination thereof. sticking our heads in the sand and pretending that everything can carry on as it is isn't an option i'm afraid.

[MikeH]

I can't see how MOBIUS could mount any defence of Vince's speech today.

Complete U turn from manifesto policies.

Poor kids can just do vocational courses which will suit them better? I mean really. So disappointing.

[MOBIUS]

Please read my previous post for my stance.

Sure I can defend it, because as C0ckney has summed it up: Get your heads out of the sand!

But, as I said earlier, I do not think they should go back on the essence of their pledge. There are ways of increasing funding and saving money for universities without increasing tuition fees.

Personally, what I'd like to see is the Coalition scrapping the idea that the NHS should be ring-fenced and making some cuts there as well.

If the Lib Dems have to swallow some kind of u-turn on tuition fees, then it seems only right that the Tories should make a u-turn on the NHS!

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Funnily enough, when there's a general election, a magic wand isn't suddenly waved and all the **** that the previous govt did disappears. We're 5 months into a new govt that has to clear up 13 years of ****: Labour was spending money on health and education like it was going out of fashion for some questionable returns - suddenly it's all coming home to roost because of Brown being exposed as a **** chancellor...

What do you want, a ****ing miracle...!?

Mobius- answers like that are why the general public don't trust politicians.

[MOBIUS]

So you do expect a miracle. Excuse me while I pull a magic wand out of my arse and spray some fairy dust over the UK economy, UK education, the NHS etc and make all the evil goblins float away back to evil goblin land so that we can all live happily ever after...

I ask again, what is your solution to this mess, seeing as you're more than happy to shoot down the attempts of others to try and fix things?

[Arrian]

Isn't that the same with all progressive taxation?



Holy crap. Ozzy, you're a pretty smart guy. Think that one through. The marginal rate would have to be over 100% for it to be true that a raise = making less money.

-Arrian