Student debt to cost 100bn - surely the NHS is in greater need

[Brillopad]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/09/jeremy-corbyns-plan-cancel-student-debt-cost-100bn-says-angela/

Couldn't believe the staggering figure clearing historic student debt is Likely to cost the tax-payer. If this figure is anywhere near correct it should not happen.

[arista]

Student debt has gone wrong
with 6.1 % extra interest added on now,
and Corbyn is going to put more money into the Health Service

Yes Big Debts

[Kizzy]

Should NEVER have happened in the first instance what motive could there be for putting that millstone round the necks of young people?
Sickening that they got away with that, it needs wiping the tory parasites can feed elsewhere hopefully not their usual goto victims the young, poor, disabled and vulnerable.

[Brillopad]

Should NEVER have happened in the first instance what motive could there be for putting that millstone round the necks of young people?
Sickening that they got away with that, it needs wiping the tory parasites can feed elsewhere hopefully not their usual goto victims the young, poor, disabled and vulnerable.

it does not need wiping. Education is free up to the age of 19. If people want to be high earners it is their responsibility to contribute. They are still likely to earn more than most so why on earth should lower earning tax-payers pay their debts. There are other priorities for the tax-payer.

[Kizzy]

Everyone benefits from an educated workforce, they have the skills needed by business therefore they are a benefit to society. They also earn more and pay more tax... win win.

[DemolitionRed]

it does not need wiping. Education is free up to the age of 19. If people want to be high earners it is their responsibility to contribute. They are still likely to earn more than most so why on earth should lower earning tax-payers pay their debts. There are other priorities for the tax-payer.

The highly educated often do become the high earners = more tax to the government.

The highly educated often become future employers = more tax to the government.

Educating people is an investment for the future economy of this country.

[smudgie]

It wouldn't be so bad if they reduced the ridiculous interest rate.
As to students paying for uni education, I can't see why the taxpayer should pick up the bill. You have a choice to go or not, however there should be more proper apprenticeships available to give another option.
More students from lower paid families go now, so it is not a deterrent.

[Brillopad]

The highly educated often do become the high earners = more tax to the government.

The highly educated often become future employers = more tax to the government.

Educating people is an investment for the future economy of this country.

Sorry, I'm not convinced by that. If the majority are likely to have such earning potential they can afford to contribute. If such people are in the minority then I question that the few could support the cost of free education for all.

Plus it has been stated that it would lead to limiting numbers going to uni which would be counter-productive.

I agree that helping those at the lower end of the earning spectrum with apprenticeships is money better spent and likely to lead to more success and improved earning potential for the many.

[Kizzy]

Of course it's not a deterrent, bright less well off kids still have ambition, the ethical question is is it right to exploit them in this way?
It should be criminal to agree terms of a loan and then ramp up the interest if it was anyone other that this corrupt bunch of shysters there would be uproar :/

[Kizzy]

Sorry, I'm not convinced by that. If the majority are likely to have such earning potential they can afford to contribute. If such people are in the minority then I question that the few could support the cost of free education for all.

Plus it has been stated that it would lead to limiting numbers going to uni which would be counter-productive.

I agree that helping those at the lower end of the earning spectrum with apprenticeships is money better spent and likely to lead to more success and improved earning potential for the many.

What is this? Gentrification of our universities...Maybe they could have poor doors for the kids who have to rely on loans? :rolleyes:

[DemolitionRed]

It wouldn't be so bad if they reduced the ridiculous interest rate.
As to students paying for uni education, I can't see why the taxpayer should pick up the bill. You have a choice to go or not, however there should be more proper apprenticeships available to give another option.
More students from lower paid families go now, so it is not a deterrent.

The tax payer shouldn't be picking up the bill because that would have an unnecessary impact on the vast majority of people. Government spending comes first and foremost out of newly created money (the central bank which they own). Tax comes later to partly recover that debt but there is no time scale on QE and providing its not flooding the market, and of course it wouldn't be if it was paying for further education, it could, if the government played its cards right, be a debt written off.

the problem with our present government is, they are not good economic managers. They can of course afford to pay for further education, just as they can afford a better education for our school children, better hospitals for the sick and better pensions to all those people who diligently paid their national insurance contributions all their working lives. What this government is doing is a misleading and socially destructive lie.

[Brillopad]

Of course it's not a deterrent, bright less well off kids still have ambition, the ethical question is is it right to exploit them in this way?
It should be criminal to agree terms of a loan and then ramp up the interest if it was anyone other that this corrupt bunch of shysters there would be uproar :/

I disagree - they are not being exploited. They will likely earn enough to pay for their loan without struggle. If they don't they will have to pay less or nothing. It seems a fair system to me.

100 billion could help more people in other ways.

[Cherie]

Isn't the money saved from paying into the EU going to the NHS :hehe: what's happening to that?

[arista]

Yes Blame New Labour

[Tom4784]

This only ****s over young people anyway! Who cares about them? They're too busy sleeping in to vote or go to Uni anyway! What is an investment? I don't know, All I know is that the young people and new labour are to blame for EVERYTHING.

Isn't the money saved from paying into the EU going to the NHS :hehe: what's happening to that?

It got put into the 'When we need to bribe a party to stay in power' fund. Would Brillo agree that the money spent on that bribe would have been better spent on the NHS, I wonder?

[Tregard]

Student debt clearly discourages people from attending UK universities, which will in turn cause a brain drain, and lead to less people studying things such as, for instance, medical sciences.

What do you do if not enough people are training to become doctors?

[Tom4784]

Student debt clearly discourages people from attending UK universities, which will in turn cause a brain drain, and lead to less people studying things such as, for instance, medical sciences.

What do you do if not enough people are training to become doctors?

Blame Jeremy Corbyn, obviously.

Or muslims.

[Kizzy]

I disagree - they are not being exploited. They will likely earn enough to pay for their loan without struggle. If they don't they will have to pay less or nothing. It seems a fair system to me.

100 billion could help more people in other ways.

How is this relevant to my point about hiking the terms post agreement? That is exploitation pure and simple.

[Brillopad]

Student debt clearly discourages people from attending UK universities, which will in turn cause a brain drain, and lead to less people studying things such as, for instance, medical sciences.

What do you do if not enough people are training to become doctors?

The numbers going to uni will apparently have to be restricted if there is free education for all.

[Brillopad]

Blame Jeremy Corbyn, obviously.

Or muslims.

:rolleyes:.

[Tom4784]

:rolleyes:.

Fixed that for you <3

[Brillopad]

This only ****s over young people anyway! Who cares about them? They're too busy sleeping in to vote or go to Uni anyway! What is an investment? I don't know, All I know is that the young people and new labour are to blame for EVERYTHING.



It got put into the 'When we need to bribe a party to stay in power' fund. Would Brillo agree that the money spent on that bribe would have been better spent on the NHS, I wonder?

1bn compared to 100bn. Er!

[Brillopad]

Fixed that for you <3

Ta.

[Tom4784]

1bn compared to 100bn. Er!

Ah, so you're avoiding talking about an ACTUAL waste of tax payers money while speaking at length about what is essentially an investment IF Labour under JC win an election and can successfully push this through parliament.

Do I really need to spell out the fatal flaw in your logic here? Surely you can see it, right?

[the truth]

Should NEVER have happened in the first instance what motive could there be for putting that millstone round the necks of young people?
Sickening that they got away with that, it needs wiping the tory parasites can feed elsewhere hopefully not their usual goto victims the young, poor, disabled and vulnerable.

labour introduced them? talk to your own party

[jet]

Ah, so you're avoiding talking about an ACTUAL waste of tax payers money while speaking at length about what is essentially an investment IF Labour under JC win an election and can successfully push this through parliament.

Do I really need to spell out the fatal flaw in your logic here? Surely you can see it, right?

Wasted? How? No money is wasted that is going to improve vital services somewhere.

[jet]

It got put into the 'When we need to bribe a party to stay in power' fund. Would Brillo agree that the money spent on that bribe would have been better spent on the NHS, I wonder?

It will be...among other essential services. What the heck do you think it's going to be spent on? :umm2:

[Brillopad]

Of course it's not a deterrent, bright less well off kids still have ambition, the ethical question is is it right to exploit them in this way?
It should be criminal to agree terms of a loan and then ramp up the interest if it was anyone other that this corrupt bunch of shysters there would be uproar :/

Have you even read the article - it stated that free uni education for all would force the treasurey to impose caps on student numbers. How would that benefit the many?

[user104658]

Personally I think everyone should just get building trade apprenticeships instead. Think of all the stuff that would get built! Housing crisis shmousing shrisis, we'd have houses coming out of our ears!

[Tom4784]

Wasted? How? No money is wasted that is going to improve vital services somewhere.

It's a bribe to keep Tories in power, nothing more nothing less.

You can't be against the idea of wiping Student Debts because it'll cost in the short term by using the NHS as an excuse then ignore the fact that money that could have relieved a lot of the stress the NHS is under has been wasted to keep May in Downing Street. That's the issue here with Brillo's point of view.

[jet]

It's a bribe to keep Tories in power, nothing more nothing less.

You can't be against the idea of wiping Student Debts because it'll cost in the short term by using the NHS as an excuse then ignore the fact that money that could have relieved a lot of the stress the NHS is under has been wasted to keep May in Downing Street. That's the issue here with Brillo's point of view.

Once again, how is the money being wasted?

[Marsh.]

it does not need wiping. Education is free up to the age of 19. If people want to be high earners it is their responsibility to contribute. They are still likely to earn more than most so why on earth should lower earning tax-payers pay their debts. There are other priorities for the tax-payer.

Because the only possible reason to want to go to university is to become a "high earner" and that clearly happens for each and every graduate.

[the truth]

they only ever pay it if and when they starting earning over £21k

[Kizzy]

Have you even read the article - it stated that free uni education for all would force the treasurey to impose caps on student numbers. How would that benefit the many?

It would benefit the brightest fairly across the board based on ability, it worked for years didn't it?
So what if they have to impose caps the onus should be on quality not quantity.

[jennyjuniper]

I would have preferred to see a 'partnership' between the government and student. Where the government pays some of the fees, but the student must pay some also. Sometimes getting something for free is not a good thing.
For example in America the 'obamacare' fiasco. Free health care for poor people seems a brilliant idea, until the hospitals, doctors and drug companies hop onto the 'bump up the price because the public purse will pay anyway' bandwagon and an aspirin cost 25 dollars.
Certainly students are our future and should be encouraged and helped, but they should also be encouraged to take personal responsibility for their own futures, starting with the realisation that if you want something badly, you have to work for it.

[user104658]

Free education for all, higher entry requirements across the board, if I'm being honest. Get rid of the situation we have now where many jobs that realistically don't require higher education nonetheless have a "must have a-degree-any-degree" checkbox to tick on the application form, and also make it that you need more than two C's and a swimming certificate to get into University.

Have to admit that I am a bit of an academic snob. I believe that getting into University should be based purely on ability, not financial considerations or anything else, and I also quite strongly believe that academia is being dramatically "dumbed down" with being turned into tuitions fees factories where they will accept pretty much anyone in order to harvest their cash, regardless of whether or not they will actually thrive in higher education.

Also, schools need to stop pushing so hard for 18 year olds to go straight to University out of the school gates! SOME people truly have a lath in mind and a course set at 18. A very small number of people. Most would benefit hugely from having a few years to actually figure out what they want to do, rather than heading off to university "because everyone else is". I definitely would have. I trotted along to Uni "because that's what you do next the teachers said so" and swapped degrees three times, never went to classes, ended up dropping out without a degree because I had zero motivation in the first place. Now that I'm older and wiser (the wisest, let's face it) I would absolutely love to go back into academia, but it's not financially or practically realistic, at least not until my wife graduates and is earning.

However I honestly believe that if I hadn't "rushed" to Uni at 18 and had taken 2 or 3 years to actually think about it, I would have gone in much more focused in the first place.

[Brillopad]

It would benefit the brightest fairly across the board based on ability, it worked for years didn't it?
So what if they have to impose caps the onus should be on quality not quantity.

Suddenly you are getting elitist. I thought Corbynites cared about the many. Or is that only when it suits. :shocked:

[Brillopad]

Because the only possible reason to want to go to university is to become a "high earner" and that clearly happens for each and every graduate.

A third of debt never gets paid for that reason.

[Brillopad]

Personally I think everyone should just get building trade apprenticeships instead. Think of all the stuff that would get built! Housing crisis shmousing shrisis, we'd have houses coming out of our ears!

Sounds like all those pointless degrees that really don't count for much in the real world.

[Tom4784]

Once again, how is the money being wasted?

It's been given to the DUP so they can dress it up as a victory for NI when it's really a victory for them.

The Tories preach austerity and they cut down on funding for the NHS and yet they throw a £1bn bribe to stay in power.

If you don't think the DUP deal is a glorified bribe then you are burying your head in the sand.

[Tom4784]

Sounds like all those pointless degrees that really don't count for much in the real world.

Grrr young people and their qualifications!

[jet]

It's been given to the DUP so they can dress it up as a victory for NI when it's really a victory for them.

The Tories preach austerity and they cut down on funding for the NHS and yet they throw a £1bn bribe to stay in power.

If you don't think the DUP deal is a glorified bribe then you are burying your head in the sand.

Why do you keep trying to divert? I didn't mention anything about bribes, or the DUP, I asked you how the money is being wasted, which you repeatedly claim.

[Tom4784]

Why do you keep trying to divert? I didn't mention anything about bribes, or the DUP, I asked you how the money is being wasted, which you repeatedly claim.

Then I'd advise you read my posts more carefully as I've answered that. It's been wasted on a bribe when it could have been used to alleviate some of the stress on public services.

[jet]

Then I'd advise you read my posts more carefully as I've answered that. It's been wasted on a bribe when it could have been used to alleviate some of the stress on public services.

No, you still haven't answered. A 'bribe' isn't a concrete thing, money is...and the money will be used to alleviate some of the stress on public services. Why do you think it won't be?

[Tom4784]

No, you still haven't answered. A 'bribe' isn't a concrete thing, money is...and the money will be used to alleviate some of the stress on public services. Why do you think it won't be?

You can't say it's not an answer just because it's not the one you want to hear.

[jet]

You can't say it's not an answer just because it's not the one you want to hear.

lol Okay, you made a blunder but I'll let you off the hook and not ask you again. Just try not to make silly comments that you can't back up....

[Tom4784]

lol Okay, you made a blunder but I'll let you off the hook and not ask you again. Just try not to make silly comments that you can't back up....

Aww, you're trying to bait out a negative response from me, that's adorable

The Tories bribed the DUP with taxpayer money, you've got no proof that the money given to the DUP will go to public services, that's just something you tell yourself like how you pretended that the DUP's terrorist links weren't that bad because 'they didn't kill anyone' while in the same breath demonising JC for having less links to terrorism than the party you are throwing your support behind.

[jet]

Aww, you're trying to bait out a negative response from me, that's adorable

The Tories bribed the DUP with taxpayer money, you've got no proof that the money given to the DUP will go to public services, that's just something you tell yourself like how you pretended that the DUP's terrorist links weren't that bad because 'they didn't kill anyone' while in the same breath demonising JC for having less links to terrorism than the party you are throwing your support behind.

There you go again, making comments that have no truth to them. I have never supported the DUP. You forgot to mention the bits where I said I disliked them. lol
How does saying nobody in the party killed anyone (unlike Sinn Fein) mean I support them? It means just what I said - they are not as bad as Sinn Fein.
Truth - unless you disagree and support Sinn Fein/IRA like ole Corbyn?

[jet]

you've got no proof that the money given to the DUP will go to public services, that's just something you tell yourself.

Are you serious?

So where do you think it will go then? No diverting this time please!

[joeysteele]

I have no objection to funds going to N Ireland but if funding was there why haven't the govt and DUP got it there before
Rather than it only come about 'conditionally' for DUP votes in the UK parliament.
That is what stinks to high heaven as to this deal.
Also Arlene Foster appears to have a cloud over her financial dealings possibly too.

As for the student debts it is an aspiration of Corbyn's to end this sorry state of students leaving Uni with over £50,000 of debts round their necks already in life.
However it is a longer term thought motion rather than an overnight venture.

Student debts are rising big-time,I was fortunate to have funding and family to get me through Uni.
Many do not.

Also,while true,it only has to be paid back once a certain salary is begun.
It still remains a debt and so gets taken into account when applying for mortgages etc.

It is time this culture, made far worse by the coalitions trebling of fees and then the other moves mentioned as to interest,was now addressed.
Hopefully with moves downward as to levels of student debts and seeing them off altogether.

[DemolitionRed]

1bn compared to 100bn. Er!

Where did this £100billion figure come from?

[jet]

Where did this £100billion figure come from?

In the article -

Jeremy Corbyn’s plans to cancel all historic student debt would cost £100billion, his education spokesman has revealed...

[user104658]

Jet your position seems to be arguing that bribery is OK so long as the bribe money is then "spent on good things". At some point you're going to have to accept that not everyone feels that way. A bribe / extortion is immoral in politics no matter what it's spent on, in the opinion of many, so constantly arguing that it's all good because it will be spent in good ways for NI is going to prove fruitless for you. It isn't that people aren't hearing you or that they don't understand that. It's that it's irrelevant. Whether they spend it on mustard gas or a cancer cure for kittens, is totally besides the point when it comes to discussing the morality of bribery in the first place, or whether a government spending money on bribes is justifiable.

[jet]

Jet your position seems to be arguing that bribery is OK so long as the bribe money is then "spent on good things". At some point you're going to have to accept that not everyone feels that way. A bribe / extortion is immoral in politics no matter what it's spent on, in the opinion of many, so constantly arguing that it's all good because it will be spent in good ways for NI is going to prove fruitless for you. It isn't that people aren't hearing you or that they don't understand that. It's that it's irrelevant. Whether they spend it on mustard gas or a cancer cure for kittens, is totally besides the point when it comes to discussing the morality of bribery in the first place, or whether a government spending money on bribes is justifiable.

Where have I said bribery is okay? Quote me? I was arguing the point and ONLY the point that the money won't be wasted (as someone posted it will be) as it will do good.

As for morality - people get all moralistic only when it suits them. Supporting a known terrorist sympathiser is totally immoral in my view, but obviously it matters not a jot to many. They just conveniently refuse to believe it and morals be damned.

[Kizzy]

Suddenly you are getting elitist. I thought Corbynites cared about the many. Or is that only when it suits. :shocked:

Not sure you understand the context, it's not shocking to expect a certain standard of education especially as it is costing you thousands per year...:/
Only Corbynites care about the many...What do you care about then the few?

[Brillopad]

Jet your position seems to be arguing that bribery is OK so long as the bribe money is then "spent on good things". At some point you're going to have to accept that not everyone feels that way. A bribe / extortion is immoral in politics no matter what it's spent on, in the opinion of many, so constantly arguing that it's all good because it will be spent in good ways for NI is going to prove fruitless for you. It isn't that people aren't hearing you or that they don't understand that. It's that it's irrelevant. Whether they spend it on mustard gas or a cancer cure for kittens, is totally besides the point when it comes to discussing the morality of bribery in the first place, or whether a government spending money on bribes is justifiable.

You talk of bribery - the cost of Bribery for Corbyn's young voters is more than 100bn. It stinks.

[Brillopad]

Not sure you understand the context, it's not shocking to expect a certain standard of education especially as it is costing you thousands per year...:/
Only Corbynites care about the many...What do you care about then the few?

You said it 'quality not QUANTITY' (as in many). Like May (grammar schools) you want opportunities for the brightest, not the many.

[jet]

You talk of bribery - the cost of Bribery for Corbyn's young voters is more than 100bn. It stinks.

But it's harmless ole Corbyn doing the bribing, so it's OK. Get with the programme Brillo. :laugh:

[user104658]

If we're going to be pretending that manifesto promises during an election campaign are in the same league as offering money to another political party, there's little point continuing this discussion.

[jet]

If we're going to be pretending that manifesto promises during an election campaign are in the same league as offering money to another political party, there's little point continuing this discussion.

People shouldn't make promises unless they know they can 100% keep them.

He's backtracking already:
Ms Rayner said: "Jeremy said that that's an ambition, it's something that he'd like to do. It's something that we will not announce that we're doing unless we can afford to do that.


He bribed young people into voting for him over something he wasn't even sure would be affordable or sensible.

[jet]

Free education for all, higher entry requirements across the board, if I'm being honest. Get rid of the situation we have now where many jobs that realistically don't require higher education nonetheless have a "must have a-degree-any-degree" checkbox to tick on the application form, and also make it that you need more than two C's and a swimming certificate to get into University.

Have to admit that I am a bit of an academic snob. I believe that getting into University should be based purely on ability, not financial considerations or anything else, and I also quite strongly believe that academia is being dramatically "dumbed down" with being turned into tuitions fees factories where they will accept pretty much anyone in order to harvest their cash, regardless of whether or not they will actually thrive in higher education.

Also, schools need to stop pushing so hard for 18 year olds to go straight to University out of the school gates! SOME people truly have a lath in mind and a course set at 18. A very small number of people. Most would benefit hugely from having a few years to actually figure out what they want to do, rather than heading off to university "because everyone else is". I definitely would have. I trotted along to Uni "because that's what you do next the teachers said so" and swapped degrees three times, never went to classes, ended up dropping out without a degree because I had zero motivation in the first place. Now that I'm older and wiser (the wisest, let's face it) I would absolutely love to go back into academia, but it's not financially or practically realistic, at least not until my wife graduates and is earning.

However I honestly believe that if I hadn't "rushed" to Uni at 18 and had taken 2 or 3 years to actually think about it, I would have gone in much more focused in the first place.

Good thoughts, I agree with a lot of this. I know you don't like clappys (or so you say haha) so I'll give you one. :clap2: :hee:

[Kizzy]

You said it 'quality not QUANTITY' (as in many). Like May (grammar schools) you want opportunities for the brightest, not the many.

Since when should 'the many' mean poor students alone? I didn't ever allude to that, you seem to think I have the same 'us and them' chip you are displaying here.
'The many' mean the brightest irrespective of income. Why is this so hard for you to comprehend? there has always been a benchmark for entry :shrug:

To clarify, I should like to see free uni places FOR ALL.

[Tom4784]

There you go again, making comments that have no truth to them. I have never supported the DUP. You forgot to mention the bits where I said I disliked them. lol
How does saying nobody in the party killed anyone (unlike Sinn Fein) mean I support them? It means just what I said - they are not as bad as Sinn Fein.
Truth - unless you disagree and support Sinn Fein/IRA like ole Corbyn?

So some links to terrorism are okay but not others? The hypocrisy of this post speaks for itself. You can't disparage someone for supposedly having links to terrorism and then conveniently ignore similar (and more solid) links from a party just because they are opposed to Corbyn.

It's hypocritical beyond belief and now you'll probably respond to this be bleating on about Corbyn to mask the fact that you don't have a response about the DUP.

Are you serious?

So where do you think it will go then? No diverting this time please!

I've never diverted anything, you are just overly emotional and cannot hold a debate because you don't accept responses you dislike. You treat any answers you dislike as diversionary tactics. Until you become more mature then discussing anything with you is a complete waste of time.

It's not going to go to the NHS, it's not going to the Police. Hospitals, police forces and other vital services around all four states of the UK are suffering from budget cuts yet the Tories bribed the DUP with £1bn, denying that taxpayer money from services across the UK just to stay in power.

That money only went to NI to keep the Tories in power, it wouldn't have happened otherwise like Joey said. Also reiterating what TS said, a bribe is a bribe, you can't justifty the means by the ends. To support this coalition and the bribe that created it is essentially supporting Pay to Play Politics except it's taxpayers money that's being used and not private funds.

That's my last response to you, I already know what you are going to respond with (both posts) and we're just going to go around in circles because you don't accept opinions you don't like.

[jet]

So some links to terrorism are okay but not others? The hypocrisy of this post speaks for itself. You can't disparage someone for supposedly having links to terrorism and then conveniently ignore similar (and more solid) links from a party just because they are opposed to Corbyn.

It's hypocritical beyond belief and now you'll probably respond to this be bleating on about Corbyn to mask the fact that you don't have a response about the DUP.

Now where did I say that? I really do think you have difficulty with comprehension, and I'm not just being sarcastic here. Or maybe you are once again using diversion tactics.
Please post a quote where I say or imply some links to terrorism are okay.
You won't be able to, because I don't think ANY terrorism is okay.

Now let me spell out for you why I say Sinn Fein are worse than the DUP, imo.
Sinn Fein are the official political party of the terrorist IRA. The DuP are not the official political party of any terrorist organisation, and never have been.
Sinn Fein still have murderers in their party in high positions representing N. Ireland. The DUP have not, and have never had murderers in their party representing N. Ireland.
Got that?

I support neither the DUP nor Sinn Fein. I support neither Torys nor Labour. I have supported and been loyal to the SDLP for more than 30 years, the N. Irish party with no links to terrorism that I know of.

I am not in the least concerned about the DUP or whatever terrorist links they had because none of their members have a chance of becoming the Prime Minister of the UK. Your terrorist supporter Corbyn does, and not just with the IRA either, and I think that is why you twist others words and use diversionary tactics because you know his solid links to terrorism are true and you feel guilty about not caring.

[jet]

I've never diverted anything, you are just overly emotional and cannot hold a debate because you don't accept responses you dislike. You treat any answers you dislike as diversionary tactics. Until you become more mature then discussing anything with you is a complete waste of time.

It's not going to go to the NHS, it's not going to the Police. Hospitals, police forces and other vital services around all four states of the UK are suffering from budget cuts yet the Tories bribed the DUP with £1bn, denying that taxpayer money from services across the UK just to stay in power.

That money only went to NI to keep the Tories in power, it wouldn't have happened otherwise like Joey said. Also reiterating what TS said, a bribe is a bribe, you can't justifty the means by the ends. To support this coalition and the bribe that created it is essentially supporting Pay to Play Politics except it's taxpayers money that's being used and not private funds.

That's my last response to you, I already know what you are going to respond with (both posts) and we're just going to go around in circles because you don't accept opinions you don't like.

And you are overly cold and and cannot hold a debate because you can't answer simple questions directly. I asked 'how is the money being wasted'? and you bleated on about bribes and diverted, diverted, diverted over and over again. Until you become more mature and aware of what is actually being asked it is pointless discussing anything with you.

Are bribes wrong? Of course. But I'm pretty sure it is not the first time any government has used them to ensure they have the seats or anything else they needed, whether that was behind closed doors payouts or other 'secret' deals which benefited the party they needed whatever it was from. You really don't believe that politics is as pure as the driven snow do you? I mean, look at ole terrorist lover Jeremy and how he is the new Santa. That's politics for you.
At least this deal was upfront and out in the open. Get over it.

[Tom4784]

I'll give you one last reply.

Now where did I say that? I really do think you have difficulty with comprehension, and I'm not just being sarcastic here. Or maybe you are once again using diversion tactics.
Please post a quote where I say or imply some links to terrorism are okay.
You won't be able to, because I don't think ANY terrorism is okay.

Now let me spell out for you why I say Sinn Fein are worse than the DUP, imo.
Sinn Fein are the official political party of the terrorist IRA. The DuP are not the official political party of any terrorist organisation, and never have been.
Sinn Fein still have murderers in their party in high positions representing N. Ireland. The DUP have not, and have never had murderers in their party representing N. Ireland.
Got that?

I support neither the DUP nor Sinn Fein. I support neither Torys nor Labour. I have supported and been loyal to the SDLP for more than 30 years, the N. Irish party with no links to terrorism that I know of.

I am not in the least concerned about the DUP or whatever terrorist links they had because none of their members have a chance of becoming the Prime Minister of the UK. Your terrorist supporter Corbyn does, and not just with the IRA either, and I think that is why you twist others words and use diversionary tactics because you know his solid links to terrorism are true and you feel guilty about not caring.

You said it yourself 'They are not as bad as Sinn Fein'. One would think that proven terrorist links would be enough to condemn them as you would Sinn Fein but the DUP opposes JC so obviously you can excuse their links and will do so through any means necessary. My reading comprehension is fine, your short term memory? Might need some work because you are literally saying what I said you were saying in my last post 'The DUP aren't murderers so it's k.'

I've asked this a thousand times and never actually got a good answer but I'll ask it again. In the world of politics where one wrong statement or scandal will end your career, how is it that, if these accusations towards JC have any merit, he's still in power? He has most of the media and a lot of the sheep constantly looking to bring him down on top of actual enemies that COULD bring him down yet this scandal which if true would end his career overnight hasn't managed to do so in the months since the story blew up. Why?

It's because it's likely been misrepresented and overblown, you can't have the enemies that JC has and be involved in a legitimate scandal and still stay in power.

And you are overly cold and and cannot hold a debate because you can't answer simple questions directly. I asked 'how is the money being wasted'? and you bleated on about bribes and diverted, diverted, diverted over and over again. Until you become more mature and aware of what is actually being asked it is pointless discussing anything with you.
Are bribes wrong? Of course. But I'm pretty sure it is not the first time any government has used them to ensure they have the seats or anything else they needed, whether that was behind closed doors payouts or other 'secret' deals which benefited the party they needed whatever it was from. You really don't believe that politics is as pure as the driven snow do you?
At least this deal was upfront and out in the open. Get over it.

I've answered directly, you are just a brick wall when it comes to answers you dislike and you proved it in this post. Also it's obviously very mature to repeat what I said verbatim but you should honestly work on the context since repeating what I said without the correct context in place makes that barb a bit of a flop. Nice try though I'd give it a 'You tried' gold star.

Your second paragraph is hilarious, it's you trying to justify bribes yet, if it was JC doing the bribe, you'd be calling for his head, oh and since you are very predictable I'll answer the point you'll inevitably try to attack me with in your followup post. No, I would not defend JC if the tables were reversed and he bribed the DUP instead. The DUP should never be anywhere near power because they are a bunch of bigots and such a deal would be a betrayal of values from Corbyn.

When it comes to politics, my only allegiance is to the NHS, it is the only issue I truly care about. My agenda alligns with Labour at this point but it won't likely stay that way because I personally think party loyalty is for fools.

There's nothing more to be said but since you like having the last word I'll let you have it since I know you need to feel like you've scored points against me. Consider it my gift to you, as empty as it will be. I'm happy enough just being the better person and walking away, which is exactly what I'm doing now.

[the truth]

the left will bankrupt us yet again...as for the nhs they lost us 10s of billions due to insane middle management , endless cover ups, mass outbreaks of mrsa, allowing the nhs to waste billions on vanity surgery boobs jobs liposuction etc gp out of hours work ended, illegal wars, now after inventing tuition fees they want to end them and cost the economy £100 billion a year. labour brought in endless nonsense degree courses and wanted everyone to go to uni....what nonsense. they even allowed for a degree course in david beckham studies? not everyone goes to uni not everyone will be a doctor or a lawyer...some people have different skills talents ways of leanring and no labour fans not everyone is the same, everyone is different

[jet]

I'll give you one last reply.
You said it yourself 'They are not as bad as Sinn Fein'. One would think that proven terrorist links would be enough to condemn them as you would Sinn Fein but the DUP opposes JC so obviously you can excuse their links and will do so through any means necessary. My reading comprehension is fine, your short term memory? Might need some work because you are literally saying what I said you were saying in my last post 'The DUP aren't murderers so it's k.'
.

No, that is what YOU were saying I said, because you can't find a quote where I actually said that as it doesn't exist. I said they weren't as bad as Sinn Fein, because its true, that is all. I condemn ALL terrorists links.


You obviously don't think Sinn Fein are worse than the DUP...
So you think that having murderers in high profile positions in a political party is on a par with a party that don't? Wow.
So you think a party that is the official one of a terrorist organisation is on a par with one that isn't? Wow.

You obviously excuse Sinn Fein/IRA because of their links with Corbyn. I have never seen you condemn them when I pointed out their gruesome links to terrorism but you constantly condemn the DUP because they oppose Corbyn.

[jet]

I've asked this a thousand times and never actually got a good answer but I'll ask it again. In the world of politics where one wrong statement or scandal will end your career, how is it that, if these accusations towards JC have any merit, he's still in power? He has most of the media and a lot of the sheep constantly looking to bring him down on top of actual enemies that COULD bring him down yet this scandal which if true would end his career overnight hasn't managed to do so in the months since the story blew up. Why?

It's because it's likely been misrepresented and overblown, you can't have the enemies that JC has and be involved in a legitimate scandal and still stay in power.

Your second paragraph is hilarious, it's you trying to justify bribes yet, if it was JC doing the bribe, you'd be calling for his head, oh and since you are very predictable I'll answer the point you'll inevitably try to attack me with in your followup post. No, I would not defend JC if the tables were reversed and he bribed the DUP instead. The DUP should never be anywhere near power because they are a bunch of bigots and such a deal would be a betrayal of values from Corbyn.




And I've asked a thousand times why he hasn't sued or refused to condemn the IRA. There has been plenty of press and TV about Corbyn's IRA support but his fanatics don't care, so what is the point of pushing it? It only makes them support him more cos they think the poor ole harmless luvvie is being persecuted.
Time will expose him for what he is.

Milliband and Brown both tried to get the DUP on board, (tut tut). You wouldn't like him going near the DUP though, I know that. Sinn Fein, his buddies, with their resident murderers, would fit better with his values.

[Brillopad]

But it's harmless ole Corbyn doing the bribing, so it's OK. Get with the programme Brillo. :laugh:

Yep, one rule for one and all that. :hehe: That 100bn is pure bribery - anyone that tries to convince otherwise is being disingenuous or a fool.

[user104658]

they want to end them and cost the economy £100 billion a year.

:facepalm: honestly, no wonder some people get themselves so worked up, when they aren't reading or comprehending the figures properly. It does not cost the economy 100 billion per year. That would be an insane amount. It's a flat figure of all the debt that already exists that would be being written off. A one off thing.

The per-year figure for scrapping tuition fees is £9 billion.

[user104658]

Yep, one rule for one and all that. :hehe: That 100bn is pure bribery - anyone that tries to convince otherwise is being disingenuous or a fool.
It's no more bribery than any other party manifesto promise. All parties make those. All parties try to appeal to certain people. Is it bribery? If you want to be pedantic, I suppose it is, but no more than tax cuts / concessions offered to any other section of society by any other party in a manifesto. Any manifesto is a document full of bribes and treats designed to entice voters, most of which will never happen. To suggest that only Corbyn / Labour have made election promises is ludicrous.

It is not the same as exchanges of money between political parties to secure votes in parliament. I'm convinced that no one really believes that its the same.

[Kizzy]

Disgusting exploitation.

When Grace Parkins opened her first statement from the Student Loans Company she wasn’t prepared for what she saw. After four years studying she discovered she was now more than £69,000 in debt.

Parkins was one of the first generation of students to sign up to £9,000 a year tuition fees. Like many recent graduates, she had no idea she was also racking up £8,000 of interest on her student loan while still at university. Students currently pay interest of 4.6%, even while they study, and this will rise to 6.1% in September. “That should have been made much clearer,” she says. “I didn’t expect that at all. All I really knew was that I wouldn’t be repaying until I earned £21,000 and my outstanding debt would be written off after 30 years.”

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jul/11/student-debt-graduates-tuition-fees

[Brillopad]

It's no more bribery than any other party manifesto promise. All parties make those. All parties try to appeal to certain people. Is it bribery? If you want to be pedantic, I suppose it is, but no more than tax cuts / concessions offered to any other section of society by any other party in a manifesto. Any manifesto is a document full of bribes and treats designed to entice voters, most of which will never happen. To suggest that only Corbyn / Labour have made election promises is ludicrous.

It is not the same as exchanges of money between political parties to secure votes in parliament. I'm convinced that no one really believes that its the same.

DUC and Sinn Fein are political parties are they not. If there is nothing in the rules that says they cannot form an alliance with a government then to keep bleating on about any of them doing so is just tactics. Take it up with the political rule-makers. I have no doubt in my mind if JC had been in the position of having to form an alliance with Sinn Fein he would have. Other Labour leaders have done so with the DUC.

As for the 'bribe' - the DUC are supporting and working with Government - it is an alliance - therefore they are entitled to some kind of consideration when money is allocated.

[user104658]

DUC and Sinn Fein are political parties are they not. If there is nothing in the rules that says they cannot form an alliance with a government then to keep bleating on about any of them doing so is just tactics. Take it up with the political rule-makers. I have no doubt in my mind if JC had been in the position of having to form an alliance with Sinn Fein he would have. Other Labour leaders have done so with the DUC.

As for the 'bribe' - the DUC are supporting and working with Government - it is an alliance - therefore they are entitled to some kind of consideration when money is allocated.

That isn't what happened. They wouldn't work with the government until the government agreed to the extra money. That is a bribe. They were PAID OFF to form an alliance as they were deliberately holding out. Stop pretending otherwise.

Also stop calling them the DUC it makes me giggle. Quack.

[Kizzy]

DUC and Sinn Fein are political parties are they not. If there is nothing in the rules that says they cannot form an alliance with a government then to keep bleating on about any of them doing so is just tactics. Take it up with the political rule-makers. I have no doubt in my mind if JC had been in the position of having to form an alliance with Sinn Fein he would have. Other Labour leaders have done so with the DUC.

As for the 'bribe' - the DUC are supporting and working with Government - it is an alliance - therefore they are entitled to some kind of consideration when money is allocated.

Who?

[joeysteele]

Who?

:joker:

Well Sinn Féinn don't even take their Westminster seats so no deals would or could be done with them.
There shouldn't be either.
Equally the DUP should not be in any national UK govt deal either.

They were sounded out by Gordon Brown as to how strong any opposition to Labour they had in 2010.
Their 8 MPs then hardly any relevance to either major party at that time.

This moaning at Sinn Féinn is pointless, they were and are a vital element to the peace process in N Ireland and if they were not part of it,the peace process could not likely even exist.

[the truth]

Too many expensive useless meaningless degree courses, too many easy grades being given out for a levels, some just for course work , mostly downloaded. Uni should only be for the very intelligent. Not promised to everyone. The fees however should be slashed. To ensure these costs are found elsewhere, we need a stronger economy though and far less public sector waste. This means less corrupt wasteful councils, slashing middle management across the pubic sector and nhs. Hold these councils more responsible for going over their budgets and punish them for the insane waste and mismanagement of public funds and resources,

[Livia]

How about we reorganise the academic year around the fruit and veg picking seasons?! Kill two birds with one stone...

I was disgusted when Labour introduced tuition fees and I was disgusted when the Tories trebled it. Education should be free.... and it could be made affordable by reducing the number of meaningless degrees on offer.

[jet]

:joker:

Well Sinn Féinn don't even take their Westminster seats so no deals would or could be done with them.
There shouldn't be either.
Equally the DUP should not be in any national UK govt deal either.

They were sounded out by Gordon Brown as to how strong any opposition to Labour they had in 2010.
Their 8 MPs then hardly any relevance to either major party at that time.

This moaning at Sinn Féinn is pointless, they were and are a vital element to the peace process in N Ireland and if they were not part of it,the peace process could not likely even exist

Yes, it was so good of them to agree to give the IRA the heads up to stop killing people when they finally realised it was getting them nowhere and their arms were becoming seriously depleted. They were bribed with amnesty from prosecution and freeing all their murderers from prison, alongside many other benefits. Imagine Labour having to bribe people to stop murdering - yet it was worth it to save many more lives.
ALL the parties were a vital element in the peace process. It could never have worked without everyone agreeing. John Hume, the SDLP leader, got the Nobel Peace Prize, as did David Trimble, the Unionist Party leader for their work. Did any Sinn Fein members? Of course not, and we all know why. Martin McGuiness did an excellent peace time job but it should never be forgotten that as an IRA Chief he ordered the murder of many people.

[Kizzy]

Yes, it was so good of them to agree to give the IRA the heads up to stop killing people when they finally realised it was getting them nowhere and their arms were becoming seriously depleted. They were bribed with amnesty from prosecution and freeing all their murderers from prison, alongside many other benefits. Imagine Labour having to bribe people to stop murdering - yet it was worth it to save many more lives.
ALL the parties were a vital element in the peace process. It could never have worked without everyone agreeing. John Hume, the SDLP leader, got the Nobel Peace Prize, as did David Trimble, the Unionist Party leader for their work. Did any Sinn Fein members? Of course not, and we all know why. Martin McGuiness did an excellent peace time job but it should never be forgotten that as an IRA Chief he ordered the murder of many people.

There were murders on both sides, please don't attempt to suggest unionists were entirely blameless. Blood was spilt, that's a given.

For me there is no entirely right or entirely wrong for either extreme, it had to end and thankfully it did. This deal smacks of exoneration, no wonder it sticks in Sinn Feins craw.

[Withano]

Who?

:joker:

[jet]

There were murders on both sides, please don't attempt to suggest unionists were entirely blameless. Blood was spilt, that's a given.

For me there is no entirely right or entirely wrong for either extreme, it had to end and thankfully it did. This deal smacks of exoneration, no wonder it sticks in Sinn Feins craw.

I was replying to Joeys comment about Sinn Fein - you know, the one I bolded.
It's a given that Loyalists weren't entirely blameless surely?

Sinn Fein would have no right to have anything stick in their craw after the bribe they accepted to halt the killings.

[Kizzy]

I was replying to Joeys comment about Sinn Fein - you know, the one I bolded.
It's a given that Loyalists weren't entirely blameless surely?

Sinn Fein would have no right to have anything stick in their craw after the bribe they accepted to halt the killings.

Then what is your issue? Out of interest was there any Operation Demetrius for unionists?...

[waterhog]

I think education education education is a good thing. I am still studying poetry and I am not better then when I first started and I have spent more then 100 bn so I hope that puts things in perspective :joker:

[jet]

Then what is your issue? Out of interest was there any Operation Demetrius for unionists?...

I think you already know the answer to that - yes, there was for some Loyalists, but it was mainly Republicans interned.

The IRA started the Troubles with their bombing campaign - killing thousands, among them innocent women and children. Peace descended when they stopped. Does that say anything to you?

Internment was introduced at a time when the bombing was vicious, it was thought it would curtail their activities and save lives, but it only made things worse. The Loyalists's main way of operating was not with bombs but to shoot mainly innocent Catholics in retaliation, (which is of course wrong), but not killing masses of people including children in restaurants, bars, during fun days out, in the street etc with bombs.

I lived here during it all, I suffered at the hands of the IRA as did thousands of others. I have never once seen you outright condemn them or their official political party, Sinn Fein, (and you are not the only one, tbf) yet you love to criticise the DUP. Is that because they don't like Corbyn, the iRA supporter? Or do you sympathise with them like he does?

[joeysteele]

How about we reorganise the academic year around the fruit and veg picking seasons?! Kill two birds with one stone...

I was disgusted when Labour introduced tuition fees and I was disgusted when the Tories trebled it. Education should be free.... and it could be made affordable by reducing the number of meaningless degrees on offer.

I think you make interesting points in most of your post.

Like you I was furious Labour introduced tuition fees at 3k absolutely.

The Con plan to at least double them in 2010 lost the Cons my vote.
Unbelievable disgust then followed from me when they legislated not doubling them but 'trebling' them, then got Lib Dem support to do so too.

[user104658]

I have never once seen you outright condemn them or their official political party, Sinn Fein, (and you are not the only one, tbf) yet you love to criticise the DUP. Is that because they don't like Corbyn, the iRA supporter? Or do you sympathise with them like he does?

Can't speak for Kizzo but I will anyway coz she always agrees with me.

Anyway, my position is this;

I absolutely am "anti-IRA" and I would be utterly horrified of Sinn Fein got a whiff of power in a Westminster coalition. I would have just as many criticisms, I;d be speaking out just as loudly against it.

However... they don't. The DUP are in that position. Sinn Fein is not. So it's a moot point. You seem really focussed on this "Why aren't you criticising Sinn Fein like you are the DUP???". The answer is short and simple; Sinn Fein are not in a Westminster coalition, being wined and dined by the government of the wider UK. If and when they are, if people aren't criticising it, then you will have questions to ask. Until then, it's just simply irrelevant.

[jet]

Can't speak for Kizzo but I will anyway coz she always agrees with me.

Anyway, my position is this;

I absolutely am "anti-IRA" and I would be utterly horrified of Sinn Fein got a whiff of power in a Westminster coalition. I would have just as many criticisms, I;d be speaking out just as loudly against it.

However... they don't. The DUP are in that position. Sinn Fein is not. So it's a moot point. You seem really focussed on this "Why aren't you criticising Sinn Fein like you are the DUP???". The answer is short and simple; Sinn Fein are not in a Westminster coalition, being wined and dined by the government of the wider UK. If and when they are, if people aren't criticising it, then you will have questions to ask. Until then, it's just simply irrelevant.

Concerning Kizzy, I never addressed her, she inserted herself into a reply I was giving to Joeys post about the DuP/Sinn Fein and she asked me disingenuous questions that were nothing to do with the coalition either.

I only mentioned them in the first place in this thread because of an accusation Dezzy threw at me.
But tbh I don't feel the need to wait for a good or current reason to criticise Sinn Fein or the IRA, although in this case it was not my intention.

[Vicky.]

I'm not sure uni fees need to be abolished totally. But I do think they are at ridiculous levels. This would be one pledge I wouldn't mind seeing Corbyn back down on..or at least tweak a little bit. I think other areas need more attention first though, given student loans don't even start getting paid back until higher wages are reached, so they aren't like...real debts which have to be paid even when you fall on hard times.

Having said that...I find it most peculiar that people that support the endless Tory cuts to the likes of the NHS and such..suddenly care about NHS funding.

[Vicky.]

Free education for all, higher entry requirements across the board, if I'm being honest. Get rid of the situation we have now where many jobs that realistically don't require higher education nonetheless have a "must have a-degree-any-degree" checkbox to tick on the application form, and also make it that you need more than two C's and a swimming certificate to get into University.

Have to admit that I am a bit of an academic snob. I believe that getting into University should be based purely on ability, not financial considerations or anything else, and I also quite strongly believe that academia is being dramatically "dumbed down" with being turned into tuitions fees factories where they will accept pretty much anyone in order to harvest their cash, regardless of whether or not they will actually thrive in higher education.

Also, schools need to stop pushing so hard for 18 year olds to go straight to University out of the school gates! SOME people truly have a lath in mind and a course set at 18. A very small number of people. Most would benefit hugely from having a few years to actually figure out what they want to do, rather than heading off to university "because everyone else is". I definitely would have. I trotted along to Uni "because that's what you do next the teachers said so" and swapped degrees three times, never went to classes, ended up dropping out without a degree because I had zero motivation in the first place. Now that I'm older and wiser (the wisest, let's face it) I would absolutely love to go back into academia, but it's not financially or practically realistic, at least not until my wife graduates and is earning.

However I honestly believe that if I hadn't "rushed" to Uni at 18 and had taken 2 or 3 years to actually think about it, I would have gone in much more focused in the first place.

Posted without reading any replies just before, up to here and...this reply is magnificent tbh. This is a huge problem with unis (and a lot of other areas of life)...cash matters more than ability.

I kind of understand now why it could be a good idea to abolish fees actually, as yes, there would probably be more demand which would lead to people being turned down...but is this necessarily a bad thing? More applications in this case just mean that it truly would go on ability rather than money.

[Withano]

Not to get too patriotic.. but isnt the education levels in the UK one of its greatest assets? Why cant we prioritise that, other countries do.
Corbyn was always gonna tax the wealthy corporations that were raking in their cash, something the tories will never put in place - Labour have the money to move - the tories do not.
This is more of a hypothetical argument, it has been since the OP, but I do believe further education should be free, it works well in many other countries.

[Kizzy]

Concerning Kizzy, I never addressed her, she inserted herself into a reply I was giving to Joeys post about the DuP/Sinn Fein and she asked me disingenuous questions that were nothing to do with the coalition either.

I only mentioned them in the first place in this thread because of an accusation Dezzy threw at me.
But tbh I don't feel the need to wait for a good or current reason to criticise Sinn Fein or the IRA, although in this case it was not my intention.

It's a debate forum I'll insert myself where I see fit, My questions were not disingenuous they were entirely relevant. The 'they started it' response was pretty disingenuous if I'm honest. This is going way off topic now and TS has made a great point to end on, Sinn Fein are not in power here nor should they be, that should be duplicated for the unionists too due to their past affiliations.

[Brillopad]

It's a debate forum I'll insert myself where I see fit, My questions were not disingenuous they were entirely relevant. The 'they started it' response was pretty disingenuous if I'm honest. This is going way off topic now and TS has made a great point to end on, Sinn Fein are not in power here nor should they be, that should be duplicated for the unionists too due to their past affiliations.

You just want the Tories out and your precious Corbyn in - get rid of the DUP and you could get May out - is that your plan. No agenda there then.

[DemolitionRed]

In the article -

How does that work when 80% of all student debt is never paid anyway?

[Brillopad]

How does that work when 80% of all student debt is never paid anyway?

Where did you get 80% from - I read it was a third (33%).

Those that benefit the most from no fees will be the high earners (mostly middle class) who would have been in a position to pay their debts.

So the average lower paid worker will be paying their debts for them through taxation whilst those Middle-class high earners get steadily wealthier. Thinking about the many my arse.

[Kizzy]

You just want the Tories out and your precious Corbyn in - get rid of the DUP and you could get May out - is that your plan. No agenda there then.

Can you stick to the topic and stop attacking my politics please? These hairbrained theories of yours are getting silly.

[Brillopad]

Can you stick to the topic and stop attacking my politics please? These hairbrained theories of yours are getting silly.

My hairbrained theories! I think you have cornered the market on conspiracy theories.

[Tom4784]

My hairbrained theories! I think you have cornered the market on conspiracy theories.

'I know you are but what am I?'

[Kizzy]

Where did you get 80% from - I read it was a third (33%).

Those that benefit the most from no fees will be the high earners (mostly middle class) who would have been in a position to pay their debts.

So the average lower paid worker will be paying their debts for them through taxation whilst those Middle-class high earners get steadily wealthier. Thinking about the many my arse.

No thought to the poor unfortunates getting ripped off on the interest on these loans?

[Tom4784]

No thought to the poor unfortunates getting ripped off on the interest on these loans?

They don't matter, they're probably dirty liberals that don't get out of bed until the afternoon anyway.

[the truth]

They don't matter, they're probably dirty liberals that don't get out of bed until the afternoon anyway.

yes the left will always get the hard working masses to pay for other peoples lifestyle choices....for example... breed for benefits, idiotic degree courses, plastic boobs on the nhs etc

[Kizzy]

A university vice chancellor has defended his £230,000 salary amid accusations by a former higher education minister that institutions’ top managements are operating a “cartel”.

Bill Rammell, VC of the University of Bedfordshire, said he did “a very demanding job in a competitive market” and denied claims that soaring tuition fees were going to fund a bloated layer of managers at the expense of students and academic staff.

But Andrew Adonis, a former HE minister, said salaries for top management should be slashed across the sector to show “leadership” and to help reduce fees, which he now believes were a mistake.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/university-vice-chancellors-salaries-tuition-fees-a7840401.html

[the truth]

A university vice chancellor has defended his £230,000 salary amid accusations by a former higher education minister that institutions’ top managements are operating a “cartel”.

Bill Rammell, VC of the University of Bedfordshire, said he did “a very demanding job in a competitive market” and denied claims that soaring tuition fees were going to fund a bloated layer of managers at the expense of students and academic staff.

But Andrew Adonis, a former HE minister, said salaries for top management should be slashed across the sector to show “leadership” and to help reduce fees, which he now believes were a mistake.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/university-vice-chancellors-salaries-tuition-fees-a7840401.html
Same as council bosses under labour and mass middle management across the entire local government and nhs trusts under labour....cost the tax payer billions. Surprised you werent just as angry about that? Or were you less angry because that was labour?

[Kizzy]

Same as council bosses under labour and mass middle management across the entire local government and nhs trusts under labour....cost the tax payer billions. Surprised you werent just as angry about that? Or were you less angry because that was labour?

I am as it happens :/