The biggest difference between myself and the people I spent time with money wise was the more people went out and drank the "poorer" they were. There was a direct correlation between those that drank the most and those that had no money at the end of the term... Different experiences breed different results.
Student support grants likely to be axed
- Thread starter thebennyboy
- Start date
The biggest difference between myself and the people I spent time with money wise was the more people went out and drank the "poorer" they were. There was a direct correlation between those that drank the most and those that had no money at the end of the term... Different experiences breed different results.
So you didn't work either during term time or the three months of summer?
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 3,547
- Location
- North Wales
I wouldn't have coped if i had to work during term time, but yes maybe i could have worked the summer but i shouldn't have to.
You must be one of those so called "tax payers", ** Personal attacks and insults are not acceptable behaviour ** Also, "students getting drunk" is used too often and often is found to only be done by a small minority of students. I shall say again, you should NOT be obliged to work during term time to fund your studies.
Last edited:
That's why you work during the three months of summer...
Unfortunately many people just spunked all that money up the wall on drinks in the first term...
Edit: and if you're doing a serious subject then you'll probably be doing an internship one summer or even a year in industry, meaning you have plenty of money in your third and fourth years anyway. You work the summer before you start for the £1000-2000 to supplement your first year, the three months of summer for your second year then do the internship thing and pay for your third and/or forth.
Last edited:
Why shouldn't you have to? You're an adult, you can't expect to be supported for 3 months without working.
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 3,547
- Location
- North Wales
I already said i could have worked during summer. What more do you want? I'm talking about term-time where at no point should you be obliged to work alongside your studies just to stay afloat, not everyone would be able to cope with the workload.
Unfortunately a lot of poorer people are probably being put off by the claims made about the increasing tuitions fees. Yes it's 9k a year, but you don't have to pay it up front so lack of income isn't an issue. You see it on this forum enough "I won't be able to go to uni because I can't afford the new fees".
I agree, you shouldn't need to work term time if studying full time. But what you wrote made it sound like you don't think student's should be expected to work during the summer holiday's, that's ridiculous.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 11,433
- Location
- Derbyshire
I'm not particulary bothered by this.
I worked throughout my degree in engineering, aside from final year where I obtained sponsorship.
My maintenance loan would not even cover my room, but I made do.
Whilst I can only comment on younger students, giving a teenager several thousand in cash rarely results in a useful purchase. Usually 'lol new Xbox and 42 inch TV'.
Also the comments on the £9000 fees putting people off, well you're significantly better off with the new fee system due to the £21000 repayment threshold.
You barely pay anything back!
I am on the £3000 fees and am on the £15000 (it has gone up a few k iirc over time) threshold.
I worked throughout my degree in engineering, aside from final year where I obtained sponsorship.
My maintenance loan would not even cover my room, but I made do.
Whilst I can only comment on younger students, giving a teenager several thousand in cash rarely results in a useful purchase. Usually 'lol new Xbox and 42 inch TV'.
Also the comments on the £9000 fees putting people off, well you're significantly better off with the new fee system due to the £21000 repayment threshold.
You barely pay anything back!
I am on the £3000 fees and am on the £15000 (it has gone up a few k iirc over time) threshold.
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 3,547
- Location
- North Wales
The main problem with the 9k fees is that it's going to cost the taxpayer a lot more as a lot of people will never pay off all their debt. I read that it's actually costing the taxpayer more than it was with 3k fees. I'll try and find the article on it. At no point will this government change it back though as it would make them look bad, it's a total joke.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 3,547
- Location
- North Wales
No, that's not what i meant. I've not had much sleep so i'm not wording things terribly well.
Yes, they are (being put off)
We can argue about how seeing the loan as a millstone is or isn't correct, but it's not an irrational position to be put off of having a "debt" to your name which is worth the sort of money that you've grown up believing is almost mythical (when having to spend £250 on a new washing machine means not eating meat for 3 months, and wearing shoes too small for you for a year, a debt of £30k+ is quite intimidating).
We should be working to reduce anything which is a barrier to social mobility and opportunity for otherwise talented individuals. It's to the country's benefit.
Suspended
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 5,707
- Location
- Buckingamshire
Not if that comes with a cost to the tax payer. The talented and motivated will always succeed in life, in spite of any obstacles.
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 3,547
- Location
- North Wales
He is a entitled taxpayer who thinks every student should just pull 9k /year out of their arse and have no financial assistance from the state.
Why shouldn't you have to?
You're also forgetting many of us went to uni. In fact I went to two different ones for two different degrees. I know what we did at undergrad and how often we went out. I also know how hard it is working 30 hours of contact a week + another 20-30 just doing the set work for 50 weeks non stop. In my experience "students getting drunk" is a pretty fair representation for both universities and as I said before, there is a direct core platoon in my experience between those that drink the most and those that were the poorest.
Ignore him. I cannot express my opinion of him on here.
Hitting the people whom are most in need of help, under the guise of 'cutting the deficit' is rubbish. It is an ideological approach from this Government and will only get worse.
Seriously, how did people vote for them. Cannot wait to move elsewhere.
Hitting the people whom are most in need of help, under the guise of 'cutting the deficit' is rubbish. It is an ideological approach from this Government and will only get worse.
Seriously, how did people vote for them. Cannot wait to move elsewhere.
Yet the numbers have gone up since then...
The ones who are put off should look at the detail - it's a good deal. If they can't understand that, maybe it's not for them anyway.
Oh I don't know, getting saddled with tens of thousands of debt before you even start your working career, doesn't sound so good to me.
Now, when I was getting paid to go to University, could claim Housing Benefit and there were no fees, that was a good deal!
- Joined
- 23 Dec 2013
- Posts
- 3,547
- Location
- North Wales
They at least pledged to get fees down to 6k. They also pledged more support for poorer students.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labours-3k-university-tuition-fee-5245471
IMHO the whole student funding system needs a serious overhaul, it shafts the middle classes terribly. Student finance honestly believed my parents could sub my loan by 2k /year, yeah cus a middle class family can just **** out 2k /year when things are already tight.
Last edited:
Agreed, unfortunately the media weren't (and aren't) on the same page, which was the gist of my post. There was and is way too much complaining about things being unaffordable rather than pointing out you don't need to pay it back until you are earning above a certain (fairly high) threshold. Think of it as a capped tax and it makes far more sense. You pay it when you are successful.
This needs to be pushed far more than it is, but unfortunately the media aren't helping, which means teachers and advisors are on the back foot before they even start.
All the tovernem t have done IIRC is move more of the university funding from the government directly to student loans. Yes, a significant portion won't be paid off but the actual monetary cost to the government is minimal, it's just pushed down the road (with hopefully extra income in future years).
Yet the numbers have gone up since then...
The ones who are put off should look at the detail - it's a good deal. If they can't understand that, maybe it's not for them anyway
Two different opinions on whether it has decreased or increased numbers (the other poster). I have no idea either way, but do agree, if people don't understand they don't have to pay until they get a good income then maybe they shouldnt have it.