charles and camilla attacked

It doesn't matter whether he agrees with the government spending x amount of money on a war. That is a monument to all the men and women who gave their life for our country and has nothing to do with any current government spending policies. To hang on to it holding the flag is a disgrace.
 
rare said:
It doesn't matter whether he agrees with the government spending x amount of money on a war. That is a monument to all the men and women who gave their life for our country and has nothing to do with any current government spending policies. To hang on to it holding the flag is a disgrace.
Click to expand...

Well what about the part where I mentioned governments sending hundreds of thousands to fight in wars, and how much that cost
 
Nitefly said:
The relevant section is this:



That means, as I expected, that people are not going to be borrowing 'merely' £9000 a year as some people are suggesting. I expect more people will be taking out an additional ~£3000 loan availible to them (based on what people currently can get), which as aformentioned covers nothing.

My point being that if people are just above the threshold for a grant that will pay for their accomadation, they are going to have to fork out of their own pocket, or their parents to pay for their living expenses. Some people genuinely cannot afford to go to university without taking out additional loans or working 4 days a week because their parents earn a reasonable amount but have vast outgoing of their own so they cannot afford to supplement their child.

This has admittedly always with a problem with student loans - they just don't cover enough.
Click to expand...

Like you state, it is no different now or even when there were no tuition fees with regard to living expenses.

However, the non repayable grants for those on low incomes have been raised, the threshold has also been raised. Partial grants for incomes up to £41k. Added to this are more scholarships (as you have) and more university funded bursaries (especially those offering courses above the £6k threshold)

All in all, this proposal is better than the NUS graduate tax system which doesn't address this at all or the status quo as places will be limited due to lack of funding.
 
Has nothing to do with the current situation? The Cenotaph has the dates of the first and second world wars ingraved on to it,without either that man would not have the freedom to have a further education. Any idiot caught touching such an important building should face very real consequences in my opinion.
 
Castiel said:
Like you state, it is no different now or even when there were no tuition fees with regard to living expenses.

However, the non repayable grants for those on low incomes have been raised, the threshold has also been raised. Partial grants for incomes up to £41k. Added to this are more scholarships (as you have) and more university funded bursaries (especially those offering courses above the £6k threshold)

All in all, this proposal is better than the NUS graduate tax system which doesn't address this at all or the status quo as places will be limited due to lack of funding.
Click to expand...

The new system does have its merits but as I have stated elsewhere I still think it's too burdensome.

Just watching BBC news at the moment, blimey it looked pretty serious at Westminster :eek: :(
 
rare said:
Has nothing to do with the current situation? The Cenotaph has the dates of the first and second world wars ingraved on to it,without either that man would not have the freedom to have a further education. Any idiot caught touching such an important building should face very real consequences in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I think they should be forced to write to every single household in the country and apologise. That's also an £8mil fine given the price of stamps :D.
 
This news story is based around members of the royal family being attacked. If the goal of the government is to save money, why are they still providing prohibitive amounts of money to the royal family, state visits by foreign dignitaries (remember the Pope's visit. an UTTER waste of money) and the Quangos that have yet to be removed? Those unnecessary expenditure policies should go before education

The education of future generations should still be of importance. I wouldn't raise tuition fees. I would reduce the number of places the government would fund. This would force Unis to be more selective on which students they take, ensuring that the diligent ones get in, as opposed to the lazy individuals who just took American studies to get pished for 3 years, who will still get in with the new scheme, but will be less able to pay off the inflated fees. The Government is cutting off it's own nose to spite it's ugly face at the moment.
 
i can't be bothered to reply to everything posted in this thread but just wanted to say fox is 100% right. do not ignore him and then reply with a stupid uneducated unresearched reply, listen to him. he is absolutely correctly on how it works now, and it's a much much better system for everyone now. the only way they can improve it is to say if the person gets a job worth more then 50k a year or gets a certain grade then they get their fees paid for them so that successful people who get good grades are rewarded, but those who don't try will never be a burden to the country :)

it's so amazingly ironic how many people complain that they aren't being listened to when they themselves are the only ones that are not actually listening.
 
Last edited:
Mojo said:
This news story is based around members of the royal family being attacked. If the goal of the government is to save money, why are they still providing prohibitive amounts of money to the royal family
Click to expand...
  • The Royal family do a massive amount for UK industry
  • ... and diplomacy
  • .... and tourism
  • Given the above they generate massive revenue
  • They cost us <£1 each per person (this is not net)
  • Generate immeasurably more
  • Tradition
  • Finalment, they do more than you :)
 
Nitefly said:
The new system does have its merits but as I have stated elsewhere I still think it's too burdensome.

Just watching BBC news at the moment, blimey it looked pretty serious at Westminster :eek: :(
Click to expand...

I would love to see free and easy access to higher education for all (including me), unfortunately the real world financial/political situation doesn't [yet] allow it. The new proposals, for me anyway, are a reasonable and fair compromise that did not warrant the widespread rioting seen in London today.

Yes, it looks pretty serious sadly.
 
Mojo said:
This news story is based around members of the royal family being attacked. If the goal of the government is to save money, why are they still providing prohibitive amounts of money to the royal family, state visits by foreign dignitaries (remember the Pope's visit. an UTTER waste of money) and the Quangos that have yet to be removed? Those unnecessary expenditure policies should go before education

The education of future generations should still be of importance. I wouldn't raise tuition fees. I would reduce the number of places the government would fund. This would force Unis to be more selective on which students they take, ensuring that the diligent ones get in, as opposed to the lazy individuals who just took American studies to get pished for 3 years, who will still get in with the new scheme, but will be less able to pay off the inflated fees. The Government is cutting off it's own nose to spite it's ugly face at the moment.
Click to expand...

The royal family make a profit to the state because they give the income from the crown estate, which is substantially larger than the civil list payment, to the treasury ;)
 
Dolph said:
The royal family make a profit to the state because they give the income from the crown estate, which is substantially larger than the civil list payment, to the treasury ;)
Click to expand...

The Crown Estate does not belong to the Royal Family, the Monarch has no claim to the Crown Estate Profits. So many people are fooled into thinking this.
 
[TW]Fox;17967500 said:
Bunch of disgusting morons. Anyone who beleives any more than 20% of them are moral guardians standing up for the rights of future students is sadly deluded. They are there to have a massive fight and make themselves feel important and nothing more - none of them are affected by the changes anyway.

Most of them have gone because it suits the rebelious phase in life they are going through, and because its 'cool'.
Click to expand...

100% AGREE.

:mad:
 
doofer said:
The Crown Estate does not belong to the Royal Family, the Monarch has no claim to the Crown Estate Profits. So many people are fooled into thinking this.
Click to expand...
If you're going to be so belligerent, you must get the semantics right.

The Queen (reigning monarch) does own the Crown Estate, but it isn't her private property. Think of it like the Crown Jewels. The government/state doesn't own it either.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom