Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[finneh]

The eu has nothing to do with the uk providing free tertiary education if they wanted

I never understand people with progressive views on taxation or society in general being pro free University education.

Not only is it one of the most progressive loans in the sense that the fee's are only paid back once a certain income threshold is reached and not only does the data show that the education received on average earns the person far more than the associated costs; it's detrimental to the poor who tend to go to University at a much lower rate than the upper and middle classes.

It's literally a tax on the poor to pay for the middle and upper classes to earn even more. I can't think of a more right wing tax bung than free University education.

 

[Mozza]

I never understand people with progressive views on taxation or society in general being pro free University education.

Not only is it one of the most progressive loans in the sense that the fee's are only paid back once a certain income threshold is reached and not only does the data show that the education received on average earns the person far more than the associated costs; it's detrimental to the poor who tend to go to University at a much lower rate than the upper and middle classes.

It's literally a tax on the poor to pay for the middle and upper classes to earn even more. I can't think of a more right wing tax bung than free University education.

Why should free education cut off at 18?

 

[Kentonio]

I never understand people with progressive views on taxation or society in general being pro free University education.

Not only is it one of the most progressive loans in the sense that the fee's are only paid back once a certain income threshold is reached and not only does the data show that the education received on average earns the person far more than the associated costs; it's detrimental to the poor who tend to go to University at a much lower rate than the upper and middle classes.

It's literally a tax on the poor to pay for the middle and upper classes to earn even more. I can't think of a more right wing tax bung than free University education.

The poor go at a much lower rate than the rich because their standard of education and economic opportunity is lower. For someone who has grown up in a poor family, the idea of taking on 30-40k of debt is absolutely fecking terrifying. All it means is the rich don't care because their parents help them through uni anyway, and the poor get saddled with a lifetime of debt that sets them even further behind once they start earning. The Great British way: get every cnut into debt they'll never get out of, and expect them to be grateful for it.

 

[711]

The poor go at a much lower rate than the rich because their standard of education and economic opportunity is lower. For someone who has grown up in a poor family, the idea of taking on 30-40k of debt is absolutely fecking terrifying. All it means is the rich don't care because their parents help them through uni anyway, and the poor get saddled with a lifetime of debt that sets them even further behind once they start earning. The Great British way: get every cnut into debt they'll never get out of, and expect them to be grateful for it.

The you personally should take care to point out to such teenagers that they will not have to pay back a penny until they have some means to do so. If you don't then you personally are putting them off their ambitions, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[Kentonio]

The you personally should take care to point out to such teenagers that they will not have to pay back a penny until they have some means to do so. If you don't then you personally are putting them off their ambitions, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

I'm not giving anyone advice, people make their own decisions. I'm sick of hearing though how lucky the little scamps should feel to have the golden opportunity to take on 40k of debt instead of being burdened with a nasty free education. After all, maybe a few rich kids might get it free too, and we can't have a system that doesn't divide us now, can we.

 

[711]

I'm not giving anyone advice, people make their own decisions. I'm sick of hearing though how lucky the little scamps should feel to have the golden opportunity to take on 40k of debt instead of being burdened with a nasty free education. After all, maybe a few rich kids might get it free too, and we can't have a system that doesn't divide us now, can we.

You're doing your very best to put them off though, and that's shameful.

 

[Full bodied red]

Now if everyone actually repaid the loans which were provided to them by the UK government....

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/may/12/eu-graduate-unpaid-fees-50m

http://www.newstatesman.com/politic...-abroad-getting-away-not-paying-their-student

Then the currently stupidly high fees might actually reduce.

 

[711]

There are many things wrong with student loans, such as the fact that interest rates are above inflation, which is dishonest in my opinion. I would be happy to see them subsidised, or at least no more than inflation.

 

[Kentonio]

You're doing your very best to put them off though, and that's shameful.

Shameful? Get to feck. I come from a very poor working class area, and I'm fecking tired of people talking up debt as if it's some great thing that the poor should be grateful for. When I went to uni the first time not only was it free but we got grants as well, so I'm fecked if I'm going to support handing today's kids a much shitter deal and lying about how we're doing them a favour.

 

[Wibble]

The you personally should take care to point out to such teenagers that they will not have to pay back a penny until they have some means to do so. If you don't then you personally are putting them off their ambitions, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

He isn't putting people off but governent policy is.

The history or repayments worldwide is that it creeps to the point that it cripples the young/poor. Here in Australia they have just changed (or are changing) the repayment threshhold, that has already been subject to constant creep due to never keeping up with inflation/cost of living, so that fees go up by an average of 7% at the same time that repayment % go up and thresholds go down well below average wages. In effect a huge proportion of ex-students just getting going with a career have been slugged with a 2.5% income tax rise. An utter disgrace.

I'm not poor (or anywhere near wealthy) and I grew up in a lower middle class family. The missus is from a working class family who did well for themselves until the troubles fecked things up. So we are more comfortable with taking on and paying off education debt that many and even we are not keen for our son to go to Uni at the moment. On the one hand it may make people only go when they really know what they want to do (many will be wrong anyway) but on the other we are dumbing down the workforce because any degree is a huge societal good even if you don't directly work in the area of your degree.

Neither the missus nor I work in what our undergrad degrees are in but the skills we gained have been a huge lifelong benefit to us and to society as we have paid large (to me) amounts of tax for 30 years or so with more to come. I doubt either of us would have paid anywhere near as much tax if we hadn't gone to Uni. The irony is that what both of us do wasn't even a thing when we went to Uni so we couldn't have taken a degree in it. And this is going to be more common as change keeps accelerating. For the benefit of society we should be encouraging more general degrees especially those with an emphasis on problem solving, critical thinking and innovation.

 

[devilish]

I never understand people with progressive views on taxation or society in general being pro free University education.

Not only is it one of the most progressive loans in the sense that the fee's are only paid back once a certain income threshold is reached and not only does the data show that the education received on average earns the person far more than the associated costs; it's detrimental to the poor who tend to go to University at a much lower rate than the upper and middle classes.

It's literally a tax on the poor to pay for the middle and upper classes to earn even more. I can't think of a more right wing tax bung than free University education.

I think its fundamentally wrong that a country with a good economy to saddle a young adult with debt over his studies especially when it closes an eye or two to rich businesses paying taxes etc. The guy could live on benefits but instead had chosen to build a life and work hard to become a taxpayer. Why force him to go into debt for it?

Also once a person is a young adult he's responsible for himself. He shouldn't and can't be expected to rely on daddy and mummy to provide him with the £££ to aid him for the future. I know of rich parents who had refused to pay for their son's bills because he went to University instead of opting for their family business. If the government didn't paid for his education then he would have never received tertiary education.

 

[711]

He isn't putting people off but governent policy is.

The history or repayments worldwide is that it creeps to the point that it cripples the young/poor. Here in Australia they have just changed (or are changing) the repayment threshhold, that has already been subject to constant creep due to never keeping up with inflation/cost of living, so that fees go up by an average of 7% at the same time that repayment % go up and thresholds go down well below average wages. In effect a huge proportion of ex-students just getting going with a career have been slugged with a 2.5% income tax rise. An utter disgrace.

I'm not poor (or anywhere near wealthy) and I grew up in a lower middle class family. The missus is from a working class family who did well for themselves until the troubles fecked things up. So we are more comfortable with taking on and paying off education debt that many and even we are not keen for our son to go to Uni at the moment. On the one hand it may make people only go when they really know what they want to do (many will be wrong anyway) but on the other we are dumbing down the workforce because any degree is a huge societal good even if you don't directly work in the area of your degree.

Neither the missus nor I work in what our undergrad degrees are in but the skills we gained have been a huge lifelong benefit to us and to society as we have paid large (to me) amounts of tax for 30 years or so with more to come. I doubt either of us would have paid anywhere near as much tax if we hadn't gone to Uni. The irony is that what both of us do wasn't even a thing when we went to Uni so we couldn't have taken a degree in it. And this is going to be more common as change keeps accelerating. For the benefit of society we should be encouraging more general degrees especially those with an emphasis on problem solving, critical thinking and innovation.

You've repeated the point I made earlier, that the main problem is the government charging too much interest on loans, where I think the fair rate should be the lowest possible rate the government itself pays for borrowing, maybe even less with subsidy.

As for the bolded, this would make sense if fewer people were going to university, but the truth is the opposite, in the UK we are now at 50%.

What I take issue with is people who are telling others they shouldn't go to university because they are poor, which is just plain wrong.

 

[Kentonio]

I think its fundamentally wrong that a country with a good economy to saddle a young adult with debt over his studies especially when it closes an eye or two to rich businesses paying taxes etc. The guy could live on benefits but instead had chosen to build a life and work hard to become a taxpayer. Why force him to go into debt for it?

Also once a person is a young adult he's responsible for himself. He shouldn't and can't be expected to rely on daddy and mummy to provide him with the £££ to aid him for the future. I know of rich parents who had refused to pay for their son's bills because he went to University instead of opting for their family business. If the government didn't paid for his education then he would have never received tertiary education.

Good post.

 

[Adisa]

Looks like May is signalling Soft-Brexit. Whatever that means.

 

[Kentonio]

What I take issue with is people who are telling others they shouldn't go to university because they are poor, which is just plain wrong.

Which absolutely no-one in this thread has done.

 

[Adisa]

I think its fundamentally wrong that a country with a good economy to saddle a young adult with debt over his studies especially when it closes an eye or two to rich businesses paying taxes etc. The guy could live on benefits but instead had chosen to build a life and work hard to become a taxpayer. Why force him to go into debt for it?

Also once a person is a young adult he's responsible for himself. He shouldn't and can't be expected to rely on daddy and mummy to provide him with the £££ to aid him for the future. I know of rich parents who had refused to pay for their son's bills because he went to University instead of opting for their family business. If the government didn't paid for his education then he would have never received tertiary education.

Good post.
I've heard of this before. Very sad.

 

[devilish]

Good post.
I've heard of this before. Very sad.

They have a lucrative street market business which translate in 14 hours a day work 6 days a week. Their business is quite lucrative and the old man invested wisely in numerous properties that they rent. His two children has been working in the business since they were kids and at age 18 the boy already looked like an old man. No wonder why he wanted out. When he asked his dad to helped him up to continue his studies he refused to pay 1 single penny in his education as the old man was growing old, family comes first and his daughter depended on it for a living. The boy was labelled as lazy and ungrateful and his father vowed not to pay a single penny for his education.

Rest assured that blue collared workers aren't the only people who has such mentality. I've know elitist (4-5 generation lawyers with firm and all) who kicked their children out of home for not choosing to become lawyers.

 

[711]

I think its fundamentally wrong that a country with a good economy to saddle a young adult with debt over his studies especially when it closes an eye or two to rich businesses paying taxes etc. The guy could live on benefits but instead had chosen to build a life and work hard to become a taxpayer. Why force him to go into debt for it?

Also once a person is a young adult he's responsible for himself. He shouldn't and can't be expected to rely on daddy and mummy to provide him with the £££ to aid him for the future. I know of rich parents who had refused to pay for their son's bills because he went to University instead of opting for their family business. If the government didn't paid for his education then he would have never received tertiary education.

In my day kids from poorer/ordinary families like mine got a good grant to go to Uni, whereas those from wealthier families got less or nothing. Some of the kids from wealthier families were very well provided for, but the poorest students around were strangely those whose wealthier parents wouldn't give them anything, and they struggled.

In the UK today the son you mention would go to university though, they would take out a student loan to do so.

 

[devilish]

In my day kids from poorer/ordinary families like mine got a good grant to go to Uni, whereas those from wealthier families got less or nothing. Some of the kids from wealthier families were very well provided for, but the poorest students around were strangely those whose wealthier parents wouldn't give them anything, and they struggled.

In the UK today the son you mention would go to university though, they would take out a student loan to do so.

I don't know how it worked in the UK but in Malta everyone is entitled for free tertiary education and grants. And before someone snipe at 'ah taxhaven/EU money' jab, rest assured that this thing had been going on for more then 3 decades ie long before Malta entered in the EU and just after the UK left Malta with the George Cross and little else.

I think its ridiculous to expect young adults to go into debts for wanting to become better taxpayers. Also you can't assume that rich parents are going to help their children. Most do and I've seen people going to Uni with BMWs which is frigging ridiculous if you ask me. But there's a substantial lot who wont. The reasons vary from parents not liking the children's choice of education right to parents being separated and new wifey doesn't like that her husband spend £££ on children that aren't hers. Parents can be cnuts and you wont find many saints around who became rich.

I am aware that countries need to balance the books. However if a government want to tax someone then tax the rich instead. Its ridiculous to tax somebody who wants to become a better taxpayer. A highly educated person will provide the country with nearly half a century taxes to say the least. If given a chance, he will have children who would probably raise them in the same way he was brought up.

There again, we all know that the Tory Party is made up of old people who are there to appease their peers. No wonder why the UK vote on a weekday which is frigging outrageous if you ask me as its a big middle finger towards all those who bother working. Also I noted that the elderly generation in the UK just love to make sure that the younger generation wont enjoy the same benefits they had enjoyed. Its for their own good of course.

 

[finneh]

Why should free education cut off at 18?

Why should the poor pay for the education of the middle and upper classes, when said education results in those people getting richer? Unless education up until 21 becomes mandatory then there is absolutely no coherent argument for prioritising spending on richer people over poorer people.

The poor go at a much lower rate than the rich because their standard of education and economic opportunity is lower. For someone who has grown up in a poor family, the idea of taking on 30-40k of debt is absolutely fecking terrifying. All it means is the rich don't care because their parents help them through uni anyway, and the poor get saddled with a lifetime of debt that sets them even further behind once they start earning. The Great British way: get every cnut into debt they'll never get out of, and expect them to be grateful for it.

There is no data to suggest that tuition fee's in their current manifestation put people off going to University. In fact the numbers of people attending University from all backgrounds has risen more significantly since Tony Blair introduced tuition fee's than ever before.

Anyone educated enough to want to attend University is also educated enough to realise that paying a little more tax once you're earning more money than you otherwise would have is both progressive and fair. Anyone who believes it to be "debt" in any normal sense of the word, rather than just a graduate tax has been a victim of scaremongering.

Again - the poor don't tend to go to University; so making them pay for the education of predominantly the middle and upper classes is one of the most selfish and regressive policies imaginable.

I think its fundamentally wrong that a country with a good economy to saddle a young adult with debt over his studies especially when it closes an eye or two to rich businesses paying taxes etc. The guy could live on benefits but instead had chosen to build a life and work hard to become a taxpayer. Why force him to go into debt for it?

Also once a person is a young adult he's responsible for himself. He shouldn't and can't be expected to rely on daddy and mummy to provide him with the £££ to aid him for the future. I know of rich parents who had refused to pay for their son's bills because he went to University instead of opting for their family business. If the government didn't paid for his education then he would have never received tertiary education.

Regardless of a countries economic situation if they decide to give a tax break to predominantly upper and middle class families at the expense of the poor then it is pretty awful. Your mantra of "a guy could live on benefits..." could be applied to all income taxes. Why should we tax people who earn £50k a year when they're doing society a favour by not being on benefits?

No-one is asking a young adult to rely on anyone but himself. If he wants to go to University the Government currently pay for him to go. They then tax him a little more once he's earning more as a result of his greater education. The vast majority of people who go on to earn greater salaries as a result of their Government funded education are expected to pay a little more back into the system. If their education doesn't lead to them earning a decent salary, it's free.

Again anyone calling this "debt" doesn't understand the current situation with regards to University fee's. Debt doesn't just disappear if you aren't earning enough to comfortably and proportionally pay it off. It's a tax on people who're earning greater salaries as a result of the free education the Government has provided.

Anyone who doesn't go to University because of the tuition fee's needs to be educated about fairness in society and how if you receive a great free education which results in you earning a greater salary later in life, you should be happy to pay a little extra into the system to allow others the same opportunities.

 

[Kentonio]

Why should the poor pay for the education of the middle and upper classes, when said education results in those people getting richer? Unless education up until 21 becomes mandatory then there is absolutely no coherent argument for prioritising spending on richer people over poorer people.

Kids aren't political pawns to be tagged at birth as rich or poor. Everyone has a right to an advanced education, and I'm sick of people inserting this divisive language into education.

There is no data to suggest that tuition fee's in their current manifestation put people off going to University. In fact the numbers of people attending University from all backgrounds has risen more significantly since Tony Blair introduced tuition fee's than ever before.

Correlation does not imply causation. We've been moving relentlessly towards a service driven economy, and along with the rise of the internet allowing people to discover the opportunties available to them the reasons for increased university attendance are many.

Anyone educated enough to want to attend University is also educated enough to realise that paying a little more tax once you're earning more money than you otherwise would have is both progressive and fair. Anyone who believes it to be "debt" in any normal sense of the word, rather than just a graduate tax has been a victim of scaremongering.

Sure, Project Fear and all that. Just like when the government sold off some older student loans to private companies, and as Martin Lewis put it..

“Issues such as wrong deferment forms, wrong processing of deferment forms and most crucially for the first-time student, loans being put on to credit reports, caused much distress, pain and worry for many of the people.”

But hey, it's not REAL debt right..

Anyone who doesn't go to University because of the tuition fee's needs to be educated about fairness in society and how if you receive a great free education which results in you earning a greater salary later in life, you should be happy to pay a little extra into the system to allow others the same opportunities.

They do, its called increased tax payments on earnings. The country benefits massively from higher taxpayers (and trained doctors, engineers, scientists etc) so I have absolutely zero sympathy for anyone trying to claim students should pay for it all themselves.

 

[Full bodied red]

I don't know how it worked in the UK but in Malta everyone is entitled for free tertiary education and grants. And before someone snipe at 'ah taxhaven/EU money' jab, rest assured that this thing had been going on for more then 3 decades ie long before Malta entered in the EU and just after the UK left Malta with the George Cross and little else.

I think its ridiculous to expect young adults to go into debts for wanting to become better taxpayers. Also you can't assume that rich parents are going to help their children. Most do and I've seen people going to Uni with BMWs which is frigging ridiculous if you ask me. But there's a substantial lot who wont. The reasons vary from parents not liking the children's choice of education right to parents being separated and new wifey doesn't like that her husband spend £££ on children that aren't hers. Parents can be cnuts and you wont find many saints around who became rich.

I am aware that countries need to balance the books. However if a government want to tax someone then tax the rich instead. Its ridiculous to tax somebody who wants to become a better taxpayer. A highly educated person will provide the country with nearly half a century taxes to say the least. If given a chance, he will have children who would probably raise them in the same way he was brought up.

There again, we all know that the Tory Party is made up of old people who are there to appease the elderly. No wonder why the UK vote on a weekday which is frigging outrageous if you ask me as its a big middle finger towards all those who bother working. Also I noted that the elderly generation in the UK just love to make sure that the younger generation wont enjoy the same benefits they had enjoyed. Its for their own good of course.

You do really come across as a bit ungrateful, you know.

You could live anywhere in the EU, but presumably you chose to live in the UK - please don't come on here moaning about everything that's wrong with the UK and how poorly the UK treats you, etc....

I'm old enough to remember that the UK had a very special relationship with Malta, even after independence, and Maltese will always be welcome there. But if you've decided that the UK has too many faults with its society or how it is organised or runs itself, then you could always try one of the other 26 countries if you don't want to go back to Malta.

Sorry to be so blunt - but you're ammunition for those xenophobes in the UK who voted LEAVE purely on the basis of reducing immigration numbers.

As for your comments about ' the elderly generation in the UK just love to make sure that the younger generation wont enjoy the same benefits they had enjoyed ' is nonsense. I will admit that I was lucky to be born when I was and where I was, but by that I mean not a hundred years ago, and not in some God forsaken, broken country in Africa. But to say that my generation are deliberately trying to make sure it is worse for your generation is absolute bollocks.

You really do need to wind it in a bit.

 

[devilish]

Regardless of a countries economic situation if they decide to give a tax break to predominantly upper and middle class families at the expense of the poor then it is pretty awful. Your mantra of "a guy could live on benefits..." could be applied to all income taxes. Why should we tax people who earn £50k a year when they're doing society a favour by not being on benefits?

No-one is asking a young adult to rely on anyone but himself. If he wants to go to University the Government currently pay for him to go. They then tax him a little more once he's earning more as a result of his greater education. The vast majority of people who go on to earn greater salaries as a result of their Government funded education are expected to pay a little more back into the system. If their education doesn't lead to them earning a decent salary, it's free.

Again anyone calling this "debt" doesn't understand the current situation with regards to University fee's. Debt doesn't just disappear if you aren't earning enough to comfortably and proportionally pay it off. It's a tax on people who're earning greater salaries as a result of the free education the Government has provided.

Anyone who doesn't go to University because of the tuition fee's needs to be educated about fairness in society and how if you receive a great free education which results in you earning a greater salary later in life, you should be happy to pay a little extra into the system to allow others the same opportunities.

So in few words, the Tories are overtaxing young adults who dared getting a tertiary education simply because they love the poor? I never seen it that way. Here's an alternative. Instead of overtaxing those who happen to be unfortunate enough not to have parents to pay their bills why not increase the tax bands and the property tax? In that way, whoever earns more or have more property will be paying more! Poor people will not be hurt either way! But of course the Tory party will never do that. Else those who can easily vote on a thursday will not be voting for them.

In my opinion education is a RIGHT and by distinguishing between poor and rich on that regard will cause a divide with the rich evading tax rather then allowing others to see him as a cashcow and the poor suffering because of it. A smart government will provide free tertiary education to everybody and then recoup the money from those who afford paying.

 

[devilish]

You do really come across as a bit ungrateful, you know.

You could live anywhere in the EU, but presumably you chose to live in the UK - please don't come on here moaning about everything that's wrong with the UK and how poorly the UK treats you, etc....

I'm old enough to remember that the UK had a very special relationship with Malta, even after independence, and Maltese will always be welcome there. But if you've decided that the UK has too many faults with its society or how it is organised or runs itself, then you could always try one of the other 26 countries if you don't want to go back to Malta.

Sorry to be so blunt - but you're ammunition for those xenophobes in the UK who voted LEAVE purely on the basis of reducing immigration numbers.

As for your comments about ' the elderly generation in the UK just love to make sure that the younger generation wont enjoy the same benefits they had enjoyed ' is nonsense. I will admit that I was lucky to be born when I was and where I was, but by that I mean not a hundred years ago, and not in some God forsaken, broken country in Africa. But to say that my generation are deliberately trying to make sure it is worse for your generation is absolute bollocks.

You really do need to wind it in a bit.

Erm, read again what I've written. Im criticising the Tory party not the UK. If the Tory Party and their values represent all UK citizens then I geniunely apologise.

And don't worry me soon enough I'll move. For some strange reason my country is over the moon in me paying all my taxes there.

 

[JPRouve]

Erm, read again what I've written. Im criticising the Tory party not the UK.

And don't worry me soon enough I'll move. For some strange reason my country is over the moon in return to pay all my taxes there.

Will they broadcast your returning day parade?

 

[devilish]

Will they broadcast your returning day parade?

It will be like Donald Trump coming to the UK

 

[Kentonio]

You do really come across as a bit ungrateful, you know.

You could live anywhere in the EU, but presumably you chose to live in the UK - please don't come on here moaning about everything that's wrong with the UK and how poorly the UK treats you, etc....

@devilish Please continue to say anything the hell you please about the UK. The idea that you should be a happy, grateful little immigrant, or just shut your mouth is despicable and goes against everything modern Britain is supposed to stand for.

 

[devilish]

@devilish Please continue to say anything the hell you please about the UK. The idea that you should be a happy, grateful little immigrant, or just shut your mouth is despicable and goes against everything modern Britain is supposed to stand for.

I don't mind writing all the faults of my country if @Full bodied red want to. However that's out of topic isn't it?

Also note I was criticising the Tory Party which I admit I am not particularly fond off. I am sure that most British people share my same line of thought on that regard

 

[Full bodied red]

Erm, read again what I've written. Im criticising the Tory party not the UK. If the Tory Party and their values represent all UK citizens then I geniunely apologise.

And don't worry me soon enough I'll move. For some strange reason my country is over the moon in me paying all my taxes there.

The Tory party represent only 40% of people in the UK. The rest are really quite normal.

 

[devilish]

The Tory party represent only 40% of people in the UK. The rest are really quite normal.

And you think that those 40% share all Tory values?

 

[Cassidy]

You do really come across as a bit ungrateful, you know.

You could live anywhere in the EU, but presumably you chose to live in the UK - please don't come on here moaning about everything that's wrong with the UK and how poorly the UK treats you, etc....

I'm old enough to remember that the UK had a very special relationship with Malta, even after independence, and Maltese will always be welcome there. But if you've decided that the UK has too many faults with its society or how it is organised or runs itself, then you could always try one of the other 26 countries if you don't want to go back to Malta.

Sorry to be so blunt - but you're ammunition for those xenophobes in the UK who voted LEAVE purely on the basis of reducing immigration numbers.

As for your comments about ' the elderly generation in the UK just love to make sure that the younger generation wont enjoy the same benefits they had enjoyed ' is nonsense. I will admit that I was lucky to be born when I was and where I was, but by that I mean not a hundred years ago, and not in some God forsaken, broken country in Africa. But to say that my generation are deliberately trying to make sure it is worse for your generation is absolute bollocks.

You really do need to wind it in a bit.

Anyone who comes here is allowed to have an opinion/moan etc, the UK should also be grateful they are here contributing to society, paying taxes etc

 

[finneh]

Kids aren't political pawns to be tagged at birth as rich or poor. Everyone has a right to an advanced education, and I'm sick of people inserting this divisive language into education.

The statistics show that people from poorer households go to University at a much lower rate. To ignore this fact as it's an uncomfortable reality is not only naive but is also dangerous.

Correlation does not imply causation. We've been moving relentlessly towards a service driven economy, and along with the rise of the internet allowing people to discover the opportunties available to them the reasons for increased university attendance are many.

Correlation does not imply causation. However I've seen no evidence that people from poorer backgrounds are put off by the current graduate tax system. In fact quite the opposite - the anecdotal evidence I've seen suggests that people would like to be earning far more than £21,000 to have to pay a good proportion of their student loan back!

Again it's like the 45% income tax rate in this sense. No-one wants to pay 45% of their income to the state, but most people on lower salaries would love to be paying it as it would mean they're earning much more than they are.

Sure, Project Fear and all that. Just like when the government sold off some older student loans to private companies, and as Martin Lewis put it... But hey, it's not REAL debt right..

It isn't real debt. Any administrative errors that caused distress to people is unfortunate of course. However to design a regressive tax policy around a few distressing errors would again be the height of reactionary.

They do, its called increased tax payments on earnings. The country benefits massively from higher taxpayers (and trained doctors, engineers, scientists etc) so I have absolutely zero sympathy for anyone trying to claim students should pay for it all themselves.

Earning enough to pay for your own higher education, which allows the next generation to go to University should be something that makes people proud. Certainly more proud than forcing a higher percentage of poor people who don't go to University to pay for the education of the richer people in society.

So in few words, the Tories are overtaxing young adults who dared getting a tertiary education simply because they love the poor? I never seen it that way. Here's an alternative. Instead of overtaxing those who happen to be unfortunate enough not to have parents to pay their bills why not increase the tax bands and the property tax? In that way, whoever earns more or have more property will be paying more! Poor people will not be hurt either way! But of course the Tory party will never do that. Else those who can easily vote on a thursday will not be voting for them.

In my opinion education is a RIGHT and by distinguishing between poor and rich on that regard will cause a divide with the rich evading tax rather then allowing others to see him as a cashcow and the poor suffering because of it. A smart government will provide free tertiary education to everybody and then recoup the money from those who afford paying.

The Tories are trying to find money to pay for Public services and have stumbled upon a very progressive way of doing this.

If you've read any of my previous posts I am aware that we're already taxing the richest in society as much as we possibly can. This is because they provide the most money whilst offending the least amount of people. Therefore every party in Government tries to tax this income group as much as possible. This isn't to do with left, centre or right politics. This is to do with wanting power - which is every parties desire. Any party who can bribe the bottom 95% of earners with freebie's paid for by the top 5% is going to do this as they'd win an election a huge majority. Read the IFS report into the Labour manifesto to see the cynicism of tax receipt increasing byr making arbitrary changes to corporation tax or £80k+ income tax levels.

The Tories have gotten the top 10% paying more tax in numeric terms and more tax as a % of their income than ever before. Likewise in terms of money after tax over the past ten years the bottom 25% of earners have had a greater increase in terms of % of salary than the top 25%.

But lets say for one second that there is a magical way of getting rich people to pay more and lets assume they won't change their behaviors to avoid paying more. Who do you think will end up paying for the decrease in their salaries as a result? Everyone else. If they're paying more in corporation tax and income on dividends they'll increase the price of their goods to redress the balance. So a manufacturer of bread might put an extra 10p on a loaf to claw this back. Poorer people are naturally hit hardest as 10p on all their essentials to them is far more damaging than 10p on richer people.

I agree that education is a right. This is why students don't have to apply to a Bank and get any loans secured against either their assets or their parents; like any actual loan. A graduate tax is the most progressive way of making the higher earners pay a little more in tax, whilst the poorer people who don't go to University aren't subsidising the richer ones who are.

Any policy irrespective of good intent that has the blatant byproduct of the poor paying to make the rich, richer is a ridiculous one.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

You do really come across as a bit ungrateful, you know.

You could live anywhere in the EU, but presumably you chose to live in the UK - please don't come on here moaning about everything that's wrong with the UK and how poorly the UK treats you, etc....

Says the person who criticises the EU but chooses to live in a country that is one of the founder members of said community.
Free speech has not been banned in the UK ... yet

 

[jackofalltrades]

Kids aren't political pawns to be tagged at birth as rich or poor. Everyone has a right to an advanced education, and I'm sick of people inserting this divisive language into education.



Correlation does not imply causation. We've been moving relentlessly towards a service driven economy, and along with the rise of the internet allowing people to discover the opportunties available to them the reasons for increased university attendance are many.



Sure, Project Fear and all that. Just like when the government sold off some older student loans to private companies, and as Martin Lewis put it..



But hey, it's not REAL debt right..



They do, its called increased tax payments on earnings. The country benefits massively from higher taxpayers (and trained doctors, engineers, scientists etc) so I have absolutely zero sympathy for anyone trying to claim students should pay for it all themselves.

It used to be much worse. At the age of 11 your life was more or less decided for you if you were working class. Going to university was about as natural a part of your life plan as going to the moon. That's why providing all people with the possibilty of higher education is essential, we mustn't go back to those days.

 

[devilish]

Anyone who comes here is allowed to have an opinion/moan etc, the UK should also be grateful they are here contributing to society, paying taxes etc

I don't think anyone should be grateful to anybody tbh. I dont need the UK to make money, in matter of fact I would be earning more money if I was in Malta. The UK on the other hand can easily live without me and Im doing it no favours by staying there.

@Full bodied red I don't think Im treated badly by the British. Quite contrary I am here because of the way the British society work (its not as clingy or as intrusive in other people's personel affair as a typical Southern European society is). There again, democracy work were people can say whatever they like without being insulted back or bullied to silence. Both our ancestors fought nazism/fascist regimes. Lets not repeat those regimes mistakes.

 

[Full bodied red]

And you think that those 40% share all Tory values?

No....Absolutely not.

Just like the majority of the electorate in most countries, most people tend to vote against something rather than for something.

Like I said last week, I would have voted Tory for the first time in life - because I would have been voting against leaving the BREXIT negotiations to a combination of Labour / LibDem politicos whose heart isn't in BREXIT, and would have reopened the door for UKIP and even worse.

 

[711]

It used to be much worse. At the age of 11 your life was more or less decided for you if you were working class. Going to university was about as natural a part of your life plan as going to the moon. That's why providing all people with the possibilty of higher education is essential, we mustn't go back to those days.

True. It was Labour reforms in the 60s that improved educational chances for ordinary folk. I watched it live.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

 

[devilish]

If you've read any of my previous posts I am aware that we're already taxing the richest in society as much as we possibly can. This is because they provide the most money whilst offending the least amount of people. Therefore every party in Government tries to tax this income group as much as possible. This isn't to do with left, centre or right politics. This is to do with wanting power - which is every parties desire. Any party who can bribe the bottom 95% of earners with freebie's paid for by the top 5% is going to do this as they'd win an election a huge majority. Read the IFS report into the Labour manifesto to see the cynicism of tax receipt increasing byr making arbitrary changes to corporation tax or £80k+ income tax levels.

The Tories have gotten the top 10% paying more tax in numeric terms and more tax as a % of their income than ever before. Likewise in terms of money after tax over the past ten years the bottom 25% of earners have had a greater increase in terms of % of salary than the top 25%.

But lets say for one second that there is a magical way of getting rich people to pay more and lets assume they won't change their behaviors to avoid paying more. Who do you think will end up paying for the decrease in their salaries as a result? Everyone else. If they're paying more in corporation tax and income on dividends they'll increase the price of their goods to redress the balance. So a manufacturer of bread might put an extra 10p on a loaf to claw this back. Poorer people are naturally hit hardest as 10p on all their essentials to them is far more damaging than 10p on richer people.

I agree that education is a right. This is why students don't have to apply to a Bank and get any loans secured against either their assets or their parents; like any actual loan. A graduate tax is the most progressive way of making the higher earners pay a little more in tax, whilst the poorer people who don't go to University aren't subsidising the richer ones who are.

Any policy irrespective of good intent that has the blatant byproduct of the poor paying to make the rich, richer is a ridiculous one.

Let me share a story about my country which my old man told me. Back in the day, Malta was poor, really poor. People were leaving to Australia like rats on a sinking ship and most Malta's government policies were centered around emigration. A new government came out and out of the blues he decided to push for pensions for everybody. Everyone went ballistic. The business class were at arms, the nationalist party (ie our version of the Tory Party) was at arms, even the friggin church were at arms, claiming that its the children's responsibility to take care of their parents and that the elderly people would spend it in alcohol. Everyone was potraying a doom and gloom scenario were Malta will suddenly become so uncompetitive that everyone will starve etc. Guess what? the reform passed and the country not only survived but thrived from it. The reason being that thanks to it wives had more freedom to focus on their children instead. That translated with more children going to school which meant a more educated workforce. Thanks to that Malta could attract better business which lead to people being paid better.These days no PNist or clergy dares mentioning that anymore.

Few decades later (ie about 4 years ago) the same party did the same with free child care for families with both parents working . The same reaction occured all over again. The opposition party went ballistic by saying that Malta would need a bailout in few years time. Not only we didn't need a bailout but we're starting making a surplus. Do you know why? The majority of our graduates are women. By offering free child care to those who needed it, the government allowed these women to keep on working. That was translated in more taxes which in return brought more euros in our coffers. Also professionals of my same age group and who immigrated elsewhere are returning home because they are better off there. These people are bringing skills (and paying taxes) that the country need.

I am not suggesting a free for all here. However sometimes, its worth giving something to get something bigger in return. Also note that when someone feel that he benefitted from taxes paid and he's not a mere cash cow then he's less likely to evade tax.

 

[devilish]

No....Absolutely not.

Just like the majority of the electorate in most countries, most people tend to vote against something rather than for something.

Like I said last week, I would have voted Tory for the first time in life - because I would have been voting against leaving the BREXIT negotiations to a combination of Labour / LibDem politicos whose heart isn't in BREXIT, and would have reopened the door for UKIP and even worse.

So don't you agree that the people Im criticising is a tiny friction of the UK population ie the elderly people who share all Tory values?