Scruff7 said:
I think you're missing the main reasons behind the Liberal Democrats proposal. In the past, University used to be totally free, it was paid for through taxes so everyone paid for University whether you went to one or not. Unfortunately, this was an unsustainable model, and sine university was only really available to those who were already from better off backgrounds (there were much less spaces, and less universities) it was a pretty elitist system at which only the richer could achieve. They scrapped the Government Grant and replaced it with Student Loans. University is still heavily subsidised, but you end up with £thousands of debt, which you pay straight from your pay-cheque. For mine, i pay back £200 a month and will continue for another 4 years. it's therefore like a tax until you finish paying it off, and the interests, although favourable, go up as soon as you graduate. If you have assets you can not take the loan, or pay it off straight away. Most of us cannot afford that, so end up having to pay over many many years, while accruing interest. There is a degree of means testing which pays for all or part of tuition fees, but not for Loans. The new proposal, put forward by Vince Cable would mean that you would pay back much less per month as a % of salary, but you would pay it for the whole of your life. Considering that people with degrees earn much more on average than people without, it would be very affordable, and you wouldn't be saddled with thousands of pounds of personal debts afterwards. It would put everyone on a level playing field, and those people from poorer backgrounds would be able to afford university as those from richer backgrounds can, they would be able to compete for higher paid jobs and wouldn't have to worry about debts which historically have been shared throughout the whole family. |
No, your missing the point. It won't work and will have the opposite effect.
It won't put people on equal backgrounds... it just further favors the rich even more... and by quite a lot more.
Furthermore it's silly, poorly thought out and highly abuseable.
The difference between a loan and a tax?
If I leave the country, I still have to pay a loan... however I don't still have to pay a tax.
You are self braindraining your own nation.
Plus it's so variable... the imput about how much money you'll pull in as a government for education funding will vary rapidly... way more then loans, because you'll never know what kind of jobs people will get.
It's an administrative nightmare.
What happens if your graduates start getting pushed out of the highest paying jobs by EU graduates from other countries? Then your education budget ends up fucked.
Because that's the problem, such a tax would be VERY reliant on those "super rich" jobs. The risk would be all located in one area... making the system EXTREMELY vulernable to a complete collapse.
Heck, those jobs might just stop existing and you'd be screwed.
While in the current system you wouldn't be because your risk is much more spread out.
You'd be better off with one person with a $400,000 dollar a year job and 3 people unemployed then 4 people making $100,000. Your screwed in fact if there aren't those super rich people.
While the current system is better off with many people employed. You are actually giving reason for the government to favor unequal income distribution.
