I’ll also make the obligatory statement that my parents were very working class (no bank of mum and dad whatsoever), and I too consider myself clever

Introductions over.

Education is probably the greatest gift a child can receive. Nothings beats it in terms of setting people up for a healthy/fulfilling/happy life. University was the place that really made me as a person, due to mixing with amazing people that share a passion for their subject. That’s infectious positivity that stays with you.

The new government policy will reserve this treat for the rich.

Whilst you could jump to the conclusion that that is simply the Tory agenda, I disagree; there’s no ideological distinction that actually translates into non-negotiable policy differences between any of the three main parties, no matter what the LibDems say. (This topic is a brilliant case in point). Mervyn King’s private notes on Cameron/Osbourne suggest their main motive in all matters is electability (Source: Wikileaks). The Tories think that the demographic they will hurt most by the new policy (under 18s) are unlikely to be able to react in terms of mass voting power. So if you’re deciding what to cut on the grounds of offending the least voters, the policy makes sense. At least, as a short-term move.

If you disagree that the Tories will view this policy as hurting a minority of voters (perhaps you are are thinking that parents will be equally offended?), think again. Most (repeat “most”) UK parents don’t a strong mental concept of financial obligation for the majority of their child’s education, unlike US parents.
– In the US, the culture is for the high-price of degrees to be parentally front-loaded, i.e. parents _save_ in advance for the majority of their college education resulting in an average student debt of just $15k.
– In the UK, the culture is for the degree to be individually back-loaded, i.e. the student pays the majority of the cost after graduating in the form of debt repayments that will average £25k (Source: BBC).
Personally (and now we’re very much into realms of personal viewpoints), I’ve found Baby Boomers to be surprisingly unaware of how lucky they have been to be part of a rising tide, particularly on property, but also in terms of employment, pensions, and state benefits. On paper, that generation has done very well. They don’t/didn’t realise that the government would expect them to be storing up that _relative_ excess of wealth to pay for their children’s education.

In summary, to get to anything like a sustainable steadystate with the new policy, at a minimum we need to adopt a US-like approach of parents saving long in advance for their children’s education. But the culture gap is just too big, to the point that most people can’t even get their head round the idea of paying so much out of their own pocket. In future, a large number of would-be students (in conjunction with their parents expectations and means) will simply give up their hopes of a democratising education.

Anyway, FreeviewHD’s pretty nifty.

I too don’t come from what most would call a wealthy family – just a fairly average working class family with both parents going out to work. Of course, back then I was (thankfully) oblivious to family finances, but I assume it must have been a tough time for my parents since I had two older brothers who went to university. I, and my parents, were exceedingly lucky that I got generous sponsorship (as part of an apprenticeship) by a large local employer – so I was relatively well off bull still finished Uni with a hefty overdraft that took years to clear.

I agree, it’s not boastful to admit to being clever, but it can be difficult to do so without sounding arrogant. For much the same reason, I don’t generally tell people I don’t know that I went to Oxford as that tends to immediately put a lot of people off and they seem reluctant to continue in conversation with someone who they obviously perceive as an “egg head”. A much quicker conversation stopper is mentioning Mensa, but I digress …

I agree absolutely with your comments on fees. These days I can imagine the costs for a family of three children running close to the value of the family home. Makes paying off the mortgage in 25 years seem like a walk in the park ! I’m fairly certain that all three of us wouldn’t have gone to uni under the current cost setup.

In my opinion the whole “justification” for these fees is bogus. If graduates really do earn more than non-graduates, then the simple matter is that they’ll pay more income tax, not to mention the indirect taxes (such as VAT on the extra spending the higher income supports.) The argument that the state shouldn’t subsidise them to earn more in the future doesn’t wash once you realise that it’s an investment – subsidise a graduate & get more tax take in the future. That’s only direct taxes of course.

One brother works abroad but is domiciled in the UK for tax purposes. So not only is he paying handsomely in income tax, he’s also directly benefitting the balance of payments by bringing money into the country.

The other brother is having an old cottage renovated. Had he graduated with these large debts, then he’d almost certainly be a rung down on the property ladder, and the work for local businesses (again benefitting the economy) probably wouldn’t have happened – and that’s a chunk of VAT the Chancellor would also be missing out on.

As for me, I’d probably never have paid a penny off my loan yet – having had a number of jobs which have been “experience rich, cash poor ! And as a result I certainly wouldn’t be in a position to own my flat.

And I think back to Tony in all those press conferences talking endlessly about “Education, Education, Education” being the bedrock of the country’s economy – while all the time, amongst his other failings, Gordon next door in No 11 was busy trying to make education seem as unattractive as possible !

Lastly, on the subject (sort of). Something else I never hear much about is the almost 100% tax on self improvement – I think it probably will be back over 100% soon. If I were lucky enough to work for an employer that pays for training, he’d be able to reclaim all the VAT and it wouldn’t attract National Insurance (Employers or Employees) or Income Tax. Since I don’t work for such a generous employer I;d have to pay for training myself. That means for every £1 cost of the course, the taxman takes another pound in VAT, NI, and Income Tax and so it takes £2 of what my employer earns to pay for £1 of training.

Frankly, I think that’s a scandal, and when you contrast our taxation here with other EU countries, it’s no wonder so much is going abroad. For commercial pilot training, even if done with a UK training body, the bulk of it goes abroad (the US and Spain are popular destinations). At least a commercial pilot, if they make it to Captain, can look forward to a decent wage in the future to pay off their £60k to £100k training bill !

In the more mundane IT world, it’s certainly a factor making self improvement harder than it needs to be, and hence helping to suppress Uk skill levels.