*ahem* :P

I do sincerely apologise for this, but I got the impression that you were a Labour supporter.

I will pray to Margaret Thatcher for forgiveness.

The raising tuition at better unversities isn't student oriented.

It's school oriented in trying to

A) Keep up their prestige

B) give other schools incentives to improve.

Can you guys not get student loans at all because of your standing, or is it just you can't get free tuition assistance. 

Do you guys even have free tuition assistance, with all the talk of loans it's been ominiously quiet about that.

I mean, I have friends that go to school, not even for anything in particular just because the government pays for them to go to school for free.

Quite honestly I could probably get the same arrangement.

Well, we have a scholarship program, you can get grants, rather than loans, if you have an exceptional talent in something. I personally don't know of anybody who has been awarded a scholarship, and it's typically only for a couple of thousand pounds, so it doesn't pay for Uni, just makes it more affordable.

We can get the most basic of loans. Basically, I have been loaned enough money to cover my tuition fees and my accommodation. However, if you belong to lower tax brackets you can get further loans like maintenance loans to cover food, text books, and Uni life in general. The idea being that if you're family are wealthy, they will provide for you... though, it doesn't always work that way.

Haha, hardly! I remember in a thread by Stickball on the political compass, I was one of the most right-wing members on this site.... which, I have to say, surprised me... a lot.

I was right next to Nick Clegg on that damned no-good Political Compass.

How the hell did you get so far right? I thought to myself "Okay, I am going to be as right wing as I possibly can with these answers), and even THEN, I got like 1.5 on the economic scale.

The latest yougov voting intention pole has labour ahead for the first time in ages, so the initial reaction to Ed seems good. I'm not sure if that will last though.

http://today.yougov.co.uk/politics/govt-trackers-update-27th-sept

That's probably more due to the ongoing conference and all of the promises that various people are making.

Though I must say, I'm still surprised that the middle class who make up a large minority of Labour's voting base aren't upset by this.

It doesn't really work like from what I'm aware.

Universities are government funded, and so increasing the tuition fees for top universities wont increase their funding as a result.

I believe he government pays the same amount per undergraduate student to each university. It's some where in the region of £12,000 per annum, whether it's Oxford or Wolverhampton. The student (or a sponsor) is required to pay a certain percentage of that amount with the rest being paid for by the government, and the percentage you pay is dependant on the tax bracket that either you or your parents are in.

So funding will remain as it is.

And I don't see raising tuition fees as improving the standard of student that goes as you would alienate a large amount of genuine quality students who would go for cheaper Universities. It would be far better to accept a student based on qualifications as opposed to what their parents earn. Entrance to good Universities already requires hard entrance examinations and more or less perfect results from GCSE level (14 - 16 years old). I think all raising the tuition fees would do is alienate those with the qualifications, but not the money.

I can see a lot of parents being unwilling to fork out £10,000 (or £7000 as experts suggest would be the upper value of what people would pay), even if they fit into the top tax bracket. I know personally that my parents would fit into the top tax bracket, but £10,000 (or £7000) per annum is still a lot of money for them to pay for my education. Instead I can see some parents encouraging their children to go to more affordable universities.

So I think funding would remain the same, and the quality of student would decrease under such a system.

But then again smarter people than me support this idea, so who am I to say really?

...

We can get tuition assistance, which results in free (or very cheap, not sure any more) degrees for poor students as I kind of explained earlier, and you can get maintenance grants of up to £500 part way through the year if you can basically prove that you've been living off 10p packs of noodles and have no potential income from any source.

So a person supported by a rich family basically has to pay thousands of pounds more than a poor student which is the main concern, and would probably be less likely to quality for a maintenance grant. I think the amount you can apply for with a loan may also be government by your parents tax bracket now too.

To the people saying they are glad Ed won and that they liked him best, are you basing that on anything? Very view of the electorate know anything about him.  Having met the man and discussed issues of concern with him, I left thoroughly unimpressed.  He was worse than useless.  He gives glib comments with no substance, probably so that his comments can't be challenged.  

This man is hardly a worthy ambassador for his country: he doesn't look like a serious politician and he doesn't speak with any authority or knowledge.  That's hardly surprising considering his experience.  For whatever reason he has been handed power.  I can only assume it is because the people who placed him there felt he was the candidate who could be most easily manipulated.  

Whilst he will have his own agenda which his new position will allow him to further, I'm glad he got the Labour leadership.  It makes Labour even more unelectable and provides Cameron and Clegg more time to sort out the mess 'New Labour' got Britain into.