SPEN wrote:Labour promised to scrap Uni fees that's why they got the young vote , but someone has to pay ,
Tories bribed the elderly with unsustainable triple lock pension provision - paid for by all of us. Labour offer to restore free higher education so that we get a better educated and less indebted workforce for the future - paid for by all of us. I know which looks like the better use of public money to me.
understand the sentiment and with someone just about off to uni I see what you are saying but where is the money coming from to pay for this free education ?
I am not against the free education by any means just not into getting the country further in debt to pay for it. After all if someone goes to uni get a good education then through that process get a better higher paying job and then repays more taxes (thumbs) goodo, but with 50% of kids going to uni and lots not getting a decent job upon leaving how and when does that debt get paid.
we need to build a strong robust private sector to create jobs and thus increase employment, that increase in employment will create wealth that can then be used to pay for the public sector, surely ? or as I heard a Labour guy say we need to build the public sector and their spending will create wealth, though he couldn't explain to me where the money was coming from in the first place.
infrastructure needs sorting out so we can move goods and trade items about thus increasing trade and the countries wealth ?
Housing people say there is a shortage of house's yes of course there is we have an open door policy for anyone to walk in, unless the government actually build some houses themselves where are they going to come from ? Private companies build houses and they build bigger houses with the most profit margin on :whistle: so how does that help the people without house's ?
Perhaps it's me, I don't spend money I haven't got. But I see the point speculate to accumulate, borrow to grow and hopefully get a good return
cheers Spud
I had free Further Education - with no tuition fees and a £3000 per maintenance and accommodation grant from HM Govt,under the Thatcher & the Tories in the 1980's
SPEN wrote:Labour promised to scrap Uni fees that's why they got the young vote , but someone has to pay ,
Tories bribed the elderly with unsustainable triple lock pension provision - paid for by all of us. Labour offer to restore free higher education so that we get a better educated and less indebted workforce for the future - paid for by all of us. I know which looks like the better use of public money to me.
understand the sentiment and with someone just about off to uni I see what you are saying but where is the money coming from to pay for this free education ?
I am not against the free education by any means just not into getting the country further in debt to pay for it. After all if someone goes to uni get a good education then through that process get a better higher paying job and then repays more taxes (thumbs) goodo, but with 50% of kids going to uni and lots not getting a decent job upon leaving how and when does that debt get paid.
we need to build a strong robust private sector to create jobs and thus increase employment, that increase in employment will create wealth that can then be used to pay for the public sector, surely ? or as I heard a Labour guy say we need to build the public sector and their spending will create wealth, though he couldn't explain to me where the money was coming from in the first place.
infrastructure needs sorting out so we can move goods and trade items about thus increasing trade and the countries wealth ?
Housing people say there is a shortage of house's yes of course there is we have an open door policy for anyone to walk in, unless the government actually build some houses themselves where are they going to come from ? Private companies build houses and they build bigger houses with the most profit margin on :whistle: so how does that help the people without house's ?
Perhaps it's me, I don't spend money I haven't got. But I see the point speculate to accumulate, borrow to grow and hopefully get a good return
cheers Spud
I had free Further Education - with no tuition fees and a £3000 per maintenance and accommodation grant from HM Govt,under the Thatcher & the Tories in the 1980's
Why can't my son have it too, now???
Because Labour thought it was a good idea to introduce tuition fees in 1998
SPEN wrote:Labour promised to scrap Uni fees that's why they got the young vote , but someone has to pay ,
Tories bribed the elderly with unsustainable triple lock pension provision - paid for by all of us. Labour offer to restore free higher education so that we get a better educated and less indebted workforce for the future - paid for by all of us. I know which looks like the better use of public money to me.
understand the sentiment and with someone just about off to uni I see what you are saying but where is the money coming from to pay for this free education ?
I am not against the free education by any means just not into getting the country further in debt to pay for it. After all if someone goes to uni get a good education then through that process get a better higher paying job and then repays more taxes (thumbs) goodo, but with 50% of kids going to uni and lots not getting a decent job upon leaving how and when does that debt get paid.
we need to build a strong robust private sector to create jobs and thus increase employment, that increase in employment will create wealth that can then be used to pay for the public sector, surely ? or as I heard a Labour guy say we need to build the public sector and their spending will create wealth, though he couldn't explain to me where the money was coming from in the first place.
infrastructure needs sorting out so we can move goods and trade items about thus increasing trade and the countries wealth ?
Housing people say there is a shortage of house's yes of course there is we have an open door policy for anyone to walk in, unless the government actually build some houses themselves where are they going to come from ? Private companies build houses and they build bigger houses with the most profit margin on :whistle: so how does that help the people without house's ?
Perhaps it's me, I don't spend money I haven't got. But I see the point speculate to accumulate, borrow to grow and hopefully get a good return
cheers Spud
I had free Further Education - with no tuition fees and a £3000 per maintenance and accommodation grant from HM Govt,under the Thatcher & the Tories in the 1980's
Why can't my son have it too, now???
Because Labour thought it was a good idea to introduce tuition fees in 1998
or we can all simply pay more taxes to fund all the "free" things people want (thumbs)
SPEN wrote:Labour promised to scrap Uni fees that's why they got the young vote , but someone has to pay ,
Tories bribed the elderly with unsustainable triple lock pension provision - paid for by all of us. Labour offer to restore free higher education so that we get a better educated and less indebted workforce for the future - paid for by all of us. I know which looks like the better use of public money to me.
understand the sentiment and with someone just about off to uni I see what you are saying but where is the money coming from to pay for this free education ?
I am not against the free education by any means just not into getting the country further in debt to pay for it. After all if someone goes to uni get a good education then through that process get a better higher paying job and then repays more taxes (thumbs) goodo, but with 50% of kids going to uni and lots not getting a decent job upon leaving how and when does that debt get paid.
we need to build a strong robust private sector to create jobs and thus increase employment, that increase in employment will create wealth that can then be used to pay for the public sector, surely ? or as I heard a Labour guy say we need to build the public sector and their spending will create wealth, though he couldn't explain to me where the money was coming from in the first place.
infrastructure needs sorting out so we can move goods and trade items about thus increasing trade and the countries wealth ?
Housing people say there is a shortage of house's yes of course there is we have an open door policy for anyone to walk in, unless the government actually build some houses themselves where are they going to come from ? Private companies build houses and they build bigger houses with the most profit margin on :whistle: so how does that help the people without house's ?
Perhaps it's me, I don't spend money I haven't got. But I see the point speculate to accumulate, borrow to grow and hopefully get a good return
cheers Spud
I had free Further Education - with no tuition fees and a £3000 per maintenance and accommodation grant from HM Govt,under the Thatcher & the Tories in the 1980's
Why can't my son have it too, now???
The number of students going to uni was low by todays standards, kids are told that they will earn more if they go to uni and employers now seem to want people with degrees for jobs that don't really require one.
In my opinion most of the current issues with education are caused by the fact that the majority of people involved in education policy making come from an academic background and therefore tend to have done well in the classroom at school. Therefore they have created an education system that values only academic classroom based subjects. Even those that you would think are more practical e.g. P.E. and Design and Technology (the closest you will get to metalwork or woodwork these days) are now 70% theory at GCSE level. This means you can have a student who can't cut a piece of wood at a right angle or can't catch a ball who can still get a high grade in these subjects.
Because 'experts in education' valued their own university experience they feel that for anyone to be of value they have to have a degree. Hence we have loads of young people with degrees but not enough engineers or builders to meet demand.
Couple this increased 'need' to send more young people to university with the drop in the level of individual and corporate taxation since Thatcher's era and you create a need for tuition fees.
In my view uni is not the only or the best route for all young people. When my oldest lad was talking about university I said if he had a desperate desire to follow a career that needs a degree then I would support him but if he thought he was going to get pissed at my expense for three years he had better think again. Thankfully he has ended up with a good career in engineering and they paid for him to do his degree. This may have been harder work for him but he isn't saddled with loads of debt.
At the moment our whole education system is in a state of meltdown and I do not think any party really addressed that in their manifestos.
Cheers Jak
Totally agree. I was secondary teacher until I retired. The whole curriculum, the way it is taught and the way kids are examined is geared towards traditional university subjects. It suits kids who's intelligence lies in that area, but is worse than useless for kids who's intelligence lies in their hands or imagination. They become de-motivated and very quickly lose the desire to do well. And to rub it in, schools are judged and put into league tables according to success in those traditional academic subjects, so thats where tge focus and money goes.
This is bad for kids, bad for schools and bad for the country.
One of the reasons that Germany continues to do well economically despite re-unification etc is thst they have a superb system of technical education that starts in specialist schools and continues with technical colleges and technical universities.
I went to a grammar school from 1965 to 1970 and walked out the door ten seconds after my last O Level with great relief. Hated the place.
I had a week at home and then got a job on the petrol pumps at a local car showroom and have been in work every single day since then and I retire next Wednesday just before my 63rd birthday.
I eventually went into an architectural practice and did 6 years of day release to degree equivalent and in 1986 set up my own one man practice.
I am no academic and university would have been a waste of time. However, I do think i have a reasonable brain and surviving this long must have something to do with it and I have been lucky enough to have a good life.
University is not the be all and end all of life and the gap year is a slobs joke. We need to get people properly assessed for their best route in life rather than expecting to walk into a £50k banking job at 22 (a client's son thought that) with a new M3, 4 bed house etc etc.
As said above, we also need to get engineers and the like and recognise them like the Germans, in particular, and maybe the career would be more attractive. We also need to lower our dependence on the banking and service side and get back into design and manufacturing.
