It wouldn't surprise me if we've started the storing of a major debt write off anyway. A recession, higher unemployment, and an increase in underemployment and many tuition fees won't be payable at all. I'd very much expect a significant change to tuition fees in the next decade.
I suspect that no matter who wins, the country is in for a torrid time for the next generation. I will be very surprised if suddenly making competitors out of every close country doesn't have a catastrophic effect on the economy and employment within the country. There is only one of the main parties that is likely to do anything to help people that are affected by the calamity to come though.
So am I, however the decreasing numbers can't pay enough in to cover these things plus the criminal waste of other public money. Take your pick which party you want to think wastes the most, you can't get a cig paper between them on this issue.
To be fair this is the first election in my voting life time where that isn't true. There is real choice this time. Whatever the outcome I think we have to acknowledge that.
Wonder if those that support tuition fees would be equally happy for them or their kids to pay for all their schooling from primary onwards. After all it benefits them doesn't it in an equal way? Funny how those who are against state support for degrees benefitted from it themselves or at least had the opportunity to do so. From personal experience I benefited from a free university education. I would never have gone to uni from a poor mining family under the current funding. It would be 100 percent closed to me. I have been an upper rate tax payer for pretty much all my working life as opposed to my peers from the same council estate who if they have jobs at all have not been. If you do not invest in the future you will have no future.
Surely further education is a personal choice and not compulsory . Also I don't think it can be put in the same bracket as essential services .
Except it is compulsory to go into higher education if you want to work as a Doctor, Dentist, Nurse, Architect, Engineer, Lawyer and numerous other roles that are needed within society. Further education at 16-18 is optional - kids can go into apprenticeships instead. Should the kids pay for that? Is society better or worse if only the children of the rich can afford to take up those roles?
It's essential if we're to be innovators and leaders in new technology not to mention doctors, engineers etc
People forget that many industries cut apprenticeships in the first place, in order to enhance profitability. They then had the cheek to blame education for not providing a skilled workforce.
If you class nurses, doctors, teachers, vets, dentists etc. as providing essential services then surely it follows that educating people is essential. We'd be royally screwed if no-one fancied paying over 40k to train themselves up.
Yep me too, I may need the help of this doctor/lawyer/teacher/nurse/dentist at some point in the future.
Lawyer? Why include them with the others? They get trained up - presumably at the expense of all of us - to traipse off and line their own pockets. The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.
Bit off subject but just saw this on facebook and it is related to voting for Tories. This is Sheryll Murray, the canditate for South East Cornwall:
Off you go bob. Another example of a down to earth politician. They really are all the salt of the earth
A good lawyer is the difference between losing half of everything in a divorce and everything of everything in a divorce... Lawyers aren't just the ambulance chasing shysters, some of them do proper work I suppose it is a good thing that there are food banks in Cornwall... She might need one next week - especially when it takes a month or so for her unemployment benefits to kick in!
Can we thank the people who voted to leave the EU for decades of uncertainty and playing with our children's future?