BAJR Federation Archaeology

Full Version: Government vote on higher education fees
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
There was an article in the Independent at the weekend that postulated only 25% of students would be able to pay off their student loan during their working life.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pol...58168.html

Whilst this might appear to justify the Lib-Con contention that only 'higher earning' graduates would be paying the 'full amount' of fees, the opposite is actually true. Whilst there is a threshold level at which individuals will begin to pay back, there has been little publicity for the fact that 'interest' will continue to be added to the charge. This could lead to an individual who comes late to the threshold level paying back a much larger proportionate rate than someone who has paid off little by little over the years.
University over the past few years has been used to keep the under-22s off benefits and out of the unemployment statistics. Even before the recession, there were few jobs and fewer apprenticeships for those leaving school at 18, hence Labour wanting to increase university attendance. It was never anything to do with producing a well-educated and qualified workforce. It was a more cost-effective way of distributing the inevitable State funding for this age group, since the UK no longer has a production industry needing a lot of entry-level factory fodder to sustain it.

Now there will be more people unemployed after leaving school, as they'll be put off university by the threat of massive debt. The State will pay benefits in return for them doing all the "Big Society" work that the government will no longer be funding. By cutting university funding and increasing loans, they're creating the necessary "volunteer" workforce to replace axed services at a minimal cost. Anyone who's ever moaned that we need to bring back National Service, effectively has their wish (for those who can't buy or borrow their way out of it, at least). Still, at least they won't be using this cheap labour for archaeology, heritage, museums... oh... er... hang on though. Looks like we won't need many of those pesky professionals any more then.

Look on the bright side though. Higher education funding cuts being made now won't be compensated for by loan repayments, which will happen over decades - and possibly not at all. With any luck, some universities will go to the wall. This will leave even fewer places available thus boosting the cheap workforce further.

Cynical? Moi?
well teh fall out continues - lots of footage of daft and pointless police horse action inflaming crowds, several confirmed reports of injudicious beatings with police batons, widespread complaints about the disorder generated by kettleing tactics, disabled man in wheelchair dragged by arms across the street.........everything one would exprxt from the boys and girls in bright-yellow.....

The right wing, crypto-fascists (and yes, i use the term correctly, as Gore Vidal intended), and not-so-crypto-fascists are all baying for blood (or least water cannons! huzar!). at least now we know what to expect from thugs on both sides.....(and please save the noble beast from this turmoil....whinny " (sings) oh.....you cant keep a horse in riot man, it isnt the place for old ned, a horse's place, is on dry land, he'll never be happy - panic he may well...oh, you cant keep.....this verse needs work- suggestions please?)


back on topic;

interest is an issue, as yet again, the rich (who can pay off early) pay much less in interest, and are therefore further pampered by a state which cares less and less about the rest of us.

It is not just about money shuffling - the whole basis and philosophy of eduction is f****ed!
the country needs to look beyond eduction as a job training or as a means of supplying grist to the industrial mill.

education is about creating better, happier, more fulfilled and more social Citizens - it is for the benefit of Society, not simply the economy (as we have discussed previously in this form in relation to archaeological degrees).

The education bill affects more than just fees - loss of EMA (costs 1billion - compare with 36billion "unaccounted" for in MOD - or bank bailouts - or collective bonuses across finance...)

Of most concern for archaeologists is surely the loss of Arts and Humanities funding (even if personally i consider myself a scientist...)
How do we see this panning out?

(just heard that the Crime Scene Forensic thingy is going to be closed - it is losing money, apparently crime doesn't pay after all....) - everywhere, specialist services are bieng threatened, often because they don't in themselves make much money and/or because they they are not visible 'frontline'.....this hole gets deeper every week, and its going to be herder and harder to get out!
Quote:education is about creating better, happier, more fulfilled and more social Citizens
No, it really isn't. It's a way of keeping a specific population demographic out of the way until needed by the State. Universities are resource storage facilities.
They know the price of everything, the value of nothing!!
Kel Wrote:
Quote:education is about creating better, happier, more fulfilled and more social Citizens
No, it really isn't. It's a way of keeping a specific population demographic out of the way until needed by the State. Universities are resource storage facilities.
That might be what the government views them as, but that is not what university education is about.
yes indeed - Socratic Education

yes - high student numbers impact on unemployment figures.

but the real con here is the governments slight of hand with the education budget figures.....

"It is an accounting fiddle, designed to lower the appearance but not the substance of government debt. A loan that is repaid over 30 years does nothing to plug the funding gap now. Whatever funding is needed still must be paid up-front.
What it does do is give the Treasury the chance to claim that it’s not really expenditure, but rather buying an asset (the debt) that will repay over time, and thus not count it towards government borrowing figures.
The increase in student fees does nothing to reduce the amount of money the Government has to pay now; it just makes the financial situation look better on paper."
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/let...58589.html



and still billions are earmarked for Trident, for aggressive foreign policies, the Olympics, and presumable a new riot detecting sat-nav for the royal family....


Even worse yet more billions is OWED by major high street chains, who have consistently managed to avoid paying UK taxes, in way that must be in some way sanctioned by the government...else they would surely go after it, no?


Will the popular movement against destruction of public services, welfare and education fizzle out or grow momentum? who knows.



This is time for fear and courage - not cynicism.
http://botherer.org/2010/12/14/the-bbc-and-the-police/
It will all change come the asteroid
Quote:That might be what the government views them as, but that is not what university education is about.
It's reality vs. the ideal. Of course universities should be seats of learning, with knowledge transfer and expansion as their core functions.

Reality: This hasn't been the case for many years now. It's no longer how the government (of any colour) views universities and they pay the bills (or try to make sure the bills get paid by others, at least). He who pays the piper, calls the tune. Sadly it appears that we no longer control the piper. Tried it with the Lib Dems and look how well that worked out.

It's like saying that the NHS is about making sick people well. It isn't. It's about keeping as much of the population as is cost-effective, just healthy enough to keep working and paying taxes.

Idealism about university function was touted by the Lib Dems during their electioneering. Reality bites.
time to bite back
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7