Taxing the rich to pay for the poor

Germanshepherdsmum

*Cossy*, nurses and teachers study for a degree knowing that they will not be paid well in the early years of their careers but that their earnings will improve and that they will be doing difficult, but vital jobs. That is in stark contrast to those who know full well that they are very unlikely to earn enough to even begin to repay their debt and that eventually it will just be written off.

In the great scheme of things nurses and teachers will never ever reach the dizzy heights of the top 3% of earners, yet, as you say, carry out worthwhile, crucial and difficult roles.

I’m very proud of my (autistic) Primary School daughter, and her partner, who is a pastry chef, they will really struggle to get their first home, but are prepared to move areas and both get new jobs to get their feet on the property ladder, which means, should they choose to have children, my grandchildren will be several hundred miles away.

HousePlantQueen

While we are all being offended by proxy, can I just say I am deeply offended by the statement that any student not paying off their student loan is doing so deliberately and with the intent of defrauding the taxpayer. My DD, as a primary school teacher, is highly unlikely to pay off her loan. The interest being added every year frequently exceeds what she repays. I will be sure to tell her that she needs to work harder to compensate for her poor career choices.

You are twisting words. Nobody has said that ‘any student not paying off their student loan is doing so deliberately with the intent of defrauding the taxpayer’. Read posts more carefully.

Germanshepherdsmum

*Cossy*, nurses and teachers study for a degree knowing that they will not be paid well in the early years of their careers but that their earnings will improve and that they will be doing difficult, but vital jobs. That is in stark contrast to those who know full well that they are very unlikely to earn enough to even begin to repay their debt and that eventually it will just be written off.

Most secondary school teachers I have ever known don't start their degrees knowing they will be teachers. For many graduates, the subject is less important than the fact that they have a degree, especially in humanities subjects, which teach many transferable skills. Even so-called "useless" degrees can open the doors to more vocational masters courses and/or graduate training schemes.

growstuff you are so right. I know several in my daughters year group at school who didn’t study teaching directly but have now completed an additional year and are secondary school teachers. A couple did English as their degree.

I would probably vote for you Doodledog.

Germanshepherdsmum

*Cossy*, nurses and teachers study for a degree knowing that they will not be paid well in the early years of their careers but that their earnings will improve and that they will be doing difficult, but vital jobs. That is in stark contrast to those who know full well that they are very unlikely to earn enough to even begin to repay their debt and that eventually it will just be written off.

This doesn't match the later post " Nobody has said that ‘any student not paying off their student loan is doing so deliberately with the intent of defrauding the taxpayer'." also by GSM

If you really believe that they "know full well that they are very unlikely to earn enough to even begin to repay their debt and that eventually it will just be written off." then you ARE saying that they are doing so deliberately.

It is far more likely that they think that the qualifications they are going to get WILL permit them to earn enough to pay the loan back. They may be unaware of just how much of a gap there will be between what they will earn and what their outgoings will be once they are actually working, and naive and optimistic enough to envisage a flourishing and lucrative career, but that doesn't make them the cynical grabber that you describe.

Education is of value for its own sake, as much as for equiping someone to make lots of money. A well-educated workforce is an asset to their community, whatever they work at and however wealthy it makes them (or not).

Thank you, growstuff.

I agree, Elegran, and really dislike the idea that education should be reserved for those who earn above a certain level. How will we ever get social mobility when those who have the expensive property and the well-paid jobs insist on manipulating the system to keep them for themselves?

I think that all education should be free to anyone who shows they are capable of benefiting from it by passing entry qualifications at the level below (so anyone with GCSEs can take A levels, anyone with a first degree can take a Masters and so on). If someone decides against working and has paid nothing back ofter 10 years or so, they could be charged the fees, and if they can't pay be asked to pay back in community service of some (non-punitive) kind if they are capable of doing so. Otherwise, it shouldn't matter whether they work in low or high-paid jobs.

What we should be examining is why professions such as teaching and nursing don't pay enough to cover the cost of training for them, when others are paid many times what people in those valuable jobs are earning.

It is particularly unpleasant to hear comments from a generation that had (or had the opportunity to get) free education themselves saying that they would take it away from young people who also have to pay more than double the cost their parents did for housing as the cost of it has risen so much.

All good Christians. are we? Have we forgotten that love thy neighbour bit in the commandments ? Or does that only apply to deserving neighbours.The number of times I.ve read on her NOT MY TAXES makes me sad and angry.If not yours…who,s?If not now WHEN .Will you be happy to watch people / children go without because your taxes can’t be spent on people in need? I live in Scotland. And I pay the. Highest ate of tax. I am happy to do my bit ..I,m Nota Christian …why aren’t.t those who say they are doing their bit ? It’s only pennies in the pound and you don’t pay it on the whole income just the bit above a certain level. Thatchers mantra of greed is good …isn.t in your bible!!

Elegran

Education is of value for its own sake, as much as for equiping someone to make lots of money. A well-educated workforce is an asset to their community, whatever they work at and however wealthy it makes them (or not).

You are absolutely right but that sort of thinking has become very unfashionable with our current political class. Education seems to be being treated more like training.

GSM I’m curious about who these students are that yiu say know they’ll never repay their student loans. I may be misunderstanding but you seem to imply deliberate attempt to defraud.

I’m delighted there’s a move towards improving our apprenticeships. We need to encourage/ensure that employees take responsibility in providing good apprenticeships that skill up our workforce. In the 60’s friends did excellent apprenticeships that led to decently paid skilled work. We somehow morphed into large employers missing out apprenticeships and employing skilled workforces from other European countries

We had an (ex) extended family member who had a stepson who was on his 8th degree. All on various subjects, multiple loans who enjoyed learning but not working.

Whilst I support the quest for knowledge, I think he was and still is sticking a finger up at all of those who learn to earn and/or just work their socks off.

Expecting the state to entirely support your life choices when you are capable of supporting yourself is not something I will ever condone.

It's sad if higher education that is not a vocational degree becomes the preserve of the wealthy. My older daughter did an English degree followed by a masters in creative writing at a very good university. She's recently published her third book of poetry and won a fairly prestigious prize, she's a qualified teacher but prefers teaching adults and does quite a lot of work with U3A (which she loves) and also homeless people. She also works at the local museum as a volunteer. She doesn't have much money but her life is interesting and just a bit alternative. I have no idea if she's paid off her student loans, probably not, but I think she adds value to peoples lives in her own way. Did she go to uni to defraud the system? Most definitely not and I don't think the majority of students do either. My other daughter, having done a first degree followed by a medical degree paid off her loans this year. I am equally proud of both their achievements but according to some, one has value and the other doesn't!

Ilovecheese

Elegran

Education is of value for its own sake, as much as for equiping someone to make lots of money. A well-educated workforce is an asset to their community, whatever they work at and however wealthy it makes them (or not).

You are absolutely right but that sort of thinking has become very unfashionable with our current political class. Education seems to be being treated more like training.

It is - many people don't seem to know the difference, and see anything that doesn't lead straight into a related job as not worth having. It used to be the other way round, and 'on the job' learning via day release, night classes and so on were the poor relation to academic degrees.

Personally, I think there should be opportunities for people to do what suits their abilities and interests. Studying something like History or English might rarely lead to employment other than teaching (or a very occasional media role - the likes of Dan Snow or David Olusoga) but graduates of such courses learn to reason, to write well, to analyse and so on, and can apply those skills to roles of various types.

There is also the fact that this is Britain, and many people who say they want to see more apprenticeships don't want them for their own children. As long as we see plumbers and electricians as lower status than accountants or teachers those jobs won't attract the best applicants. It's all very well saying that not everyone is suited to university, but when the subtext is that not everyone is entitled to the same respect and opportunities it's hardly surprising that many people will want to go.

Pricing them out is writing them off before they get a chance to prove themselves, and limiting courses in Arts to those who can afford to pay extra (very few writers or Artists make enough to pay back fees at the start of their careers) perpetuates the class divisions, and would result in only the 'elite' having their voices heard through culture. I think that would be a shame. Apart from watering down the richness of poetry, novels, visual and performing Arts in themselves, it would close so many doors to talent that would go to waste, and lose the country a fortune in revenue that artists bring in. Swiftonomics, anyone?

GG13 are you sure? 8 different degrees! Normally it's quite difficult to get funding for a second degree.

foxie48

GG13 are you sure? 8 different degrees! Normally it's quite difficult to get funding for a second degree.

I wish I was wrong.

He knew how to play the system (I think he was on the spectrum, his birth parent would never acknowledge this). I wish I had spoken up at the time, but hey ho it’s too late now.

The degree’s and a few masters could be loosely linked. It drove the person we knew to distraction, and was a significant factor in their break up.

I remember someone in the sixties remarking, about musical education in the Primary School, which had introduced the childen to the music of some of the classical composers, that it wa a waste of effort, as they were all going to work on a factory line. I replied that after they finished work for the day, they could listen to whatever they liked, - and why not good classical music?

Learning for the sake of learning is a luxury. It should not be funded by the taxpayer. I have, in retirement, finally enjoyed that luxury at my own expense. The taxpayer should not be expected to fund learning which does not benefit society as a whole.

You can get funding for one full degree plus one year (so if you fail a year you can repeat) and for very specific professional courses such as teaching, which can be added to that funding.

Even if someone used the extra year (as well as those who fail a year, some students drop out for a year, eg because of bereavement or illness) and then decided to study a professional course they would struggle to rack up eight degrees. Maybe a PGCE, an LLB and a few other conversion courses that are not full degrees, but it would take 24 years to graduate eight times ).

Much as I believe in creating opportunity, even I would draw the line at that.

Doodledog yes they are in their 50’s, never been gainfully employed

I and our family member who is no longer with the person found it both awkward and embarrassing, especially the boasting my child is so clever

Well, he doesn't sound as though he'd be an asset to an employer, to be honest.

My mother's neighbour collected O levels (he was employed and did them in his own time in the days when FE was free apart from the exam fees). He had dozens of them, despite having a degree and accountancy qualifications. He had to travel to various colleges to do them, as the local one ran out of subjects he hadn't taken. He wasn't interested in taking anything to A level - he just kept getting more and more O levels. He was odd in many ways, though

We must agree to differ, Germanshepherdsmum I don't believe that knowledge (which consists of education plus experience and contemplation) is a luxury. It is an essential. Without it, a person is an atomaton who lives only to work and to collect money. We are all blessed with minds. curiosity, and the capacity for insight, which should all be exercised as often as we exercise our bodies. Exposure to as much education as we can absorb is a part of that, and it ought to be available to all.

Local authorities used to run many inexpensive courses in all kindsof subjects, from basic 3Rs for those who adults, through vocational classes to skills for leisure time. These have dwindled in many places, along with library closures, due to the LAs funds being reduced.

Two things that help lift people out of poverty and ignorance are subsidised education and healthcare. Knowledge is meant to be shared, and a nation which grudges it to its citizens is poorer for the lack of it.

Knowledge is power.

How it is gained at what it is used for is often questionable.

But who decides what learning "benefits" society? It isn't the knowledge that one gains, it is the skills that are developed that are really transferable and those skills can be developed following a huge range of different subjects that are not strictly vocational.

foxie48

But who decides what learning "benefits" society? It isn't the knowledge that one gains, it is the skills that are developed that are really transferable and those skills can be developed following a huge range of different subjects that are not strictly vocational.

That’s the conundrum.

Just as wealthy people take risks, risk their money and homes, employ and train people all the while paying the government multiple taxes, others spend their time learning…