One in five university graduates becomes a millionaire

Monserrat said:
Yup. I graduated in 2002 B(Eng.) Electronic Engineering and I've been stuck in £12.5k-£13.5k jobs ever since because none of the grad agencies gave me that break. No one will be interested now, as I'll soon be on the wrong side of 40. When my dad graduated, he was 1 in 20. The problem nowadays is that us graduates are 1 in 2, common as muck.
Click to expand...

It was something that everybody should have seen coming.

Getting 50% of school leavers into university was not going to make 50% of school leavers instantly as academic as the top 5% that went on to university in the 80s.

The result is that about 5% of grads walk into decent jobs and the others struggle. So get a good degree from a good uni and it is easy. Get a degree from "Bradford bus station of technology" now Bradford Cosmopolitan University and your degree is not worth the time efort AND expense that was put in.

I feel really sorry for all the grads with great big loans that were basically lied to.
 
anything I don't mind said:
It was colleague who saw the online bank balance but i assume it was a current account but now you say that probably a savings account. He does invest in gold mining and other things though.

I don't think my colleague was lying though.

everyone in zimbabwe is a millionaire
Click to expand...

Could always have just sold a house, would explain why he was looking at his account while at work.
 
Monserrat said:
Yup. I graduated in 2002 B(Eng.) Electronic Engineering and I've been stuck in £12.5k-£13.5k jobs ever since because none of the grad agencies gave me that break. No one will be interested now, as I'll soon be on the wrong side of 40. When my dad graduated, he was 1 in 20. The problem nowadays is that us graduates are 1 in 2, common as muck.
Click to expand...

Maybe not for the coveted 'graduate scheme' perhaps but then again you ought to be able to do better than 13k - unless you really like the location/work/work environment to the point where the salary is ok to take a big hit on.

You've got a degree in a non-trivial subject which (being engineering) likely required putting in significantly more hours than most courses. Age might prevent you from joining the other 21 yr olds on some large graduate scheme but then again I'm not sure missing out on such a thing is necessarily something to be bothered about... people with no real direction in life but with a desire to apply for various 'graduate jobs' with big companies simply because they just want a job, any vague so called 'graduate job' that pays well, are setting themselves up for a good chance of having a rather dull experience. Better to pick a general area you think you would like and pursue it... if you don't get in via the standard route try a non-standard route.

For example a big load of directionless drones who've recently graduated decide that working for one of the fabled 'big 4' would be super cool... Supposing you did, instead, have the desire to become an accountant but for whatever reasons (potentially just being unlucky) you didn't make the cut at 'the big 4' - there is no harm trying smaller accountancy firms, failing that just getting a job in accounts/finance at any firm & studying for say ACCA in your spare time, failing that just doing *any* job and studying for the exams might sort you out. There is a huge turnover at these places and a big chunk of the people who drifted into taking the 'graduate job' simply failing the first relevant exams and getting kicked out... no reason why a part qualified motivated candidate who studied in his own time, paid for his own exams can't apply later given that a decent % of the more fortunate wasters they've already spent thousands on have failed/quit etc...

I'm not saying become an accountant, rather just using it as an example, I'd also put out the idea that the harder the quals the better your chances of getting people's interest if you manage to pass the first few off your own back... its just a case of demonstrating you have the skillset. I'd wager that even now if you say sat and passed the first few actuary exams off your own back and then applied to some Insurance companies etc.. you'd probably get some interest (obvs it would be worth checking something along these lines on any relevant forums) - Or if you wanted to become a developer and started contributing to open source projects, creating apps etc.. let employers see your work then you could get some interest. Main point is I don't think missing a grad scheme is a particularly big hurdle if there is a particular career/interest you want to pursue.
 
Monserrat said:
Yup. I graduated in 2002 B(Eng.) Electronic Engineering and I've been stuck in £12.5k-£13.5k jobs ever since because none of the grad agencies gave me that break. No one will be interested now, as I'll soon be on the wrong side of 40. When my dad graduated, he was 1 in 20. The problem nowadays is that us graduates are 1 in 2, common as muck.
Click to expand...

For 12 years you have never gotten above £13k?????

A full time checkout assistant in Tesco earns more than £13k. While more graduates means the bar is lowered somewhat when it comes to how valuable a degree is, an Engineering Degree is not one of the devalued degrees as a rule, and even outside engineering it is a substantial qualification. I find it hard to accept that it is just because there are more graduates today that is the underlying reason why you have never moved out of supermarket assistant wages.

What are your actual stipulations as regard what you will do and what do you do that means you earn so little?
 
Last edited:
OK so if it's not squiffing things with assuming you own you while property, then this article is really saying that there are 2m people in the country that, if they sold everything they own tax free and found a way to empty their savings, investments and entire pension tax free, they could live in a box on the street with nothing but £1m in cash?

Sounds legit.
 
Skeeter said:
OK so if it's not squiffing things with assuming you own you while property, then this article is really saying that there are 2m people in the country that, if they sold everything they own tax free and found a way to empty their savings, investments and entire pension tax free, they could live in a box on the street with nothing but £1m in cash?

Sounds legit.
Click to expand...

With someone else having paid their mortgages.
 
alx said:
Surely u'd assume they'd sell their house for the same price, clear their mortgage and keep their deposit/what they'd paid off?
Click to expand...

Ey?

As I understand it these millionaires are calculated based on asset value without accounting for any debt.
 
This story sounds like such a spin joke.

Working age 21 - 66 = 45 years of being a worker ant.
1,000,000 / 45 = £22,222pa

Obviously not accounting for expenditure, but story implies

80% of graduates earn less than 22kpa
 
BunnyKillBot said:
This story sounds like such a spin joke.

Working age 21 - 66 = 45 years of being a worker ant.
1,000,000 / 45 = £22,222pa

Obviously not accounting for expenditure, but story implies

80% of graduates earn less than 22kpa
Click to expand...

£22.2k after tax into assets or savings (there is some tax relief in some cases for savings). The rest of earnings on top of the £22.2k after tax is spent on other things like food, holidays etc.
 
delta0 said:
£22.2k after tax into assets or savings (there is some tax relief in some cases for savings). The rest of earnings on top of the £22.2k after tax is spent on other things like food, holidays etc.
Click to expand...

Net worth is a faulty indicator of wealth. If i earn a million, and frivolously spend a million on holidays and helicopters rides, I am still a millionaire, even if I have nothing to show for it.

For the purposes of this 'story', they are not wrong to disregard mortgage debt because the debt is a swimming pool with a promise to fill.

20% of all adults who hold at least one university degree now have wealth totalling at least £1 million
Almost 10% of all adults now have wealth totalling at least £1 million

David Willetts, the universities minister told The Telegraph that the figures were “more evidence of why going to university is a very good deal”.
It shows why it’s fair to ask graduates to pay back the cost of their higher education
Click to expand...
**** me spins a hoy
 
Last edited:
You know what 'they' say about statistics. The spin doctors have been working their magic here to try and stop students crapping themselves about fees.
 
alx said:
Must have misunderstood your previous comment, what did you mean by someone else paid their mortgages?
Click to expand...

You said if they liquidate their assets they are millionaires and I was pointing out that if they have a mortgage that needs to be accounted for and therefore they aren't.

The 'ey' was just because I couldn't understand the point you were making. If you own a house worth £1m you are according to this measure a millionaire. If you have a £750,000 mortgage you are still a millionaire according to this, but if you sell that property, you only have £250 (not accounting for fees/taxes)
 
Skidder said:
The 'ey' was just because I couldn't understand the point you were making. If you own a house worth £1m you are according to this measure a millionaire. If you have a £750,000 mortgage you are still a millionaire according to this, but if you sell that property, you only have £250 (not accounting for fees/taxes)
Click to expand...

Not you're not a millionaire by this method. It's poor reporting by the telegraph, but the ONS data takes into account liabilities on the property as I pointed out earlier in the thread.
 
Right, so ignoring the crass reporting by the telegraph focusing on the top end for no particular reason, and going straight to the source, this is the relevant table.



First things first, note that this is individuals by total household wealth, unless you believe that 4% of under 16 year olds are self made millionaires:



So anybody living with their parents, house sharing, or otherwise happening to be living with somebody rich, is skewed towards being a statistical millionaire even though they clearly are not. Total household wealth is not an indicator of personal wealth, and unsurprisingly, a married couple is more likely to have a higher household wealth at the top end, because its the combined wealth of two people not one!



Secondly, note that the numbers between £100,000 and £450,000 are alarming similar. Which means that if you are a normal person, neither exceptional brilliant or exceptionally rubbish, you are no better or worse off for having a degree. In fact, the non-educated people are BETTER OFF between these ranges, presumably because they have a 'head start' in terms of real world experience.



Take this and more, add in a 'black swan' level of scientific understanding (smart people are more likely to go to university in the first place, correlation not causation), add some bottom line media spin, and you have a **** storm of misunderstanding. The politicians are out of touch. The public have no clue about reality. This country is ******
 
Last edited:
Those tables remind me of this graph :D
tGhIv5o.png
look how the number of murders committed using firearms falls after the law change!

OH wait! now look at the numbers at the side of the graph :D
Those sneaky ********
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom