One would assume such a system would discriminate on academic ability rather than the proposed system's discrimination on ability to pay. It's not for you or I to second guess what individual universities would do in hypothetical situations. It is worth pointing out that so far, the most vociferous opposition to the government's plans have come out of the top Universities, in particular Cambridge and Imperial.
Which group would be more inclined to receive the education required to compete in a system with very limited placements. Those with or those without. A system which limits places, limits opportunity and those with the necessary finances will be able to provide the best education and facilities to their children to ensure their academic future, would that be true of the vast majority of poorer families. I think not.
Cambridge University has not been vociferous at all. It made a statement concerning the need to reduce the funding gap between Science and Humanities subjects along with the need for shared responsibilities regarding funding between the individual and the pubic (i.e The Taxpayer). Both things I support. They made no statement in opposition or acceptance of the Tuition Fee proposals.
We've already had the discussion and it's clear that tuition fee increase massively benefits the privileged and a handful of the poorest students. I don't know how anyone could argue different, if everyone going to university had to take the loans out - essentially making it a graduate tax, I'd agree it would be an acceptable system. As it is however the privileged will just pay the tuition fees upfront, escaping a lifetime of debt and uncertainty.
You don't know because you don't seem to understand it. The Rich may be able to pay upfront (however there are moves to install a fee for doing so to offset any losses), but this is the case anyway with the current system and also with a graduate tax system also (as has been pointed out, not allowing payment up front in a graduate tax system would be illegal under human rights legislation or foreign student would need to be taxed also which is impossible).
Where is the uncertainty in a system which only charges if you earn enough money and then only 9% as a graduate tax, it has all the benefits of a graduate tax system with the added safety of both Fee and Repayment Period caps.
Also the debt is not burdensome in the way you suggest as you well know.
http://www.factsonfees.com/new-system.php
Let's not forget that the government are scrapping EMA too, making it even more difficult for poorer children to stay in education after 16
Not true either, research showed that over 80% of those in sixth form education would continue to study regardless of whether they received EMA or not. The Government is re-targeting the money to help those in most need.
However, I support the EMA and the way it encourages students to attend and if bribery is what it takes to in-still some sense of responsibility then the £520m spent on bribery is well spent.
![[J.D.C]](/styles/overclockers/avatars/3.png){kind=avatar}
