1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

University fees

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Thesaff, Oct 12, 2010.

  1. RDM

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 1, 2007

    Posts: 20,177

    Would would I buy something today when I can wait a week and get it cheaper? Why should I manufacture something today when I can manufacture it for cheaper in a weeks time? That is why deflation is horribly bad for an economy. The amount of lethargy it introduces kills growth and investment.

    As long as wages rise at a similar rate then inflation is fine.

    And yet, despite that, we have considerably more buying power than we did 40 years ago...
     
  2. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Dec 28, 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    Sorry for editing the previous post, i kept refreshing the page to see if you had replied. But you had not. Odd.

    This happens, no matter what you do, this happens. Even if you ranked up inflation to 5% prices would still go down in some instances due to normal market dynamics. Example, the fact that i know a specific graphics card is going to be available for £80 in a years time does not stop me paying £200 today for it. You would manufacture something at the cheapest rate that is available. I don't agree that the apparent outlook of a reduction in manufacturing costs would "kill the economy". I would like to hear an example on that one.

    Inflation is never fine. Never mind the fact that wages never seem to be rise at the rate of inflation. Even if they did, it still destroys savings. The only way that inflation is good, is if you have a lot of debt and you can hold on to it with no interest, long enough for inflation to make it insignificant.

    How so ?

    We might have more things that are available to buy and technology is cheaper than it was in the 70s, but if you take things that were considered reasonably priced in 1972 and compare it to today, inflation adjusted, you would find that buying power has decreased.
     
  3. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Dec 28, 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    It is difficult to compare because you have to consider that technology has reduced prices significantly due to improved manufacturing methods and advanced cost savings measures and other factors. The standard of living will rise in spite of inflation. The argument is though that without inflation we would have had a stable currency and we would be in a far better situation. Shouldn't currency stability realy be the target and not inflation or deflation ?
     
  4. RDM

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 1, 2007

    Posts: 20,177

    Isn't this you confusing price changes with overall deflation? If everything was getting cheaper all the time then it introduces a massive amount of lethargy into the system. The other problems it introduces is the impact it has on anyone with debt. Their debt starts to get more expensive, which has a knock on effect to investment. Companies don't want to borrow to expand because their debt will get more expensive over time. Look what happened with the last big house price crash and now apply that to pretty much everyone rather than just the unlucky ones that bought at the top of the market.

    As the UK currently has a lot of debt then deflation would be a very bad thing for our economy.

    It hasn't though. We can afford more than in the 70s. We have more "stuff" we do more "things". What was considered poor in 1970 would be abject poverty now. What age were you when you first went on a foriegn holiday for instance?
     
  5. Dj_Jestar

    Caporegime

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 28,539

    Location: Back in East London

    Sorry, to qualify my initial post I meant the target is to keep inflation from rising above 2%. It's very difficult to stop inflation, if not impossible. :)

    Yes, they are failing to do this. (Just this morning reports showed inflation at 3.3-3.5%) but it's not an easy task..
     
  6. Castiel

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 26, 2010

    Posts: 63,651

    Because my dear friend I am not biased about this issue in the way you are, as I have already said if you check on previous posts I have made on other threads revolving around the Police you will find that I have castigated the Police on several occasions, including the Ian Tomlinson case and Jean Charles de Menezes. I am also on record as stating that the Police in general can be arrogant and authoritarian far too often and with out due cause. This doesn't sound like someone indoctrinated by the State does it!

    This suggests quite clearly I am not biased or indoctrinated into any specific prejudice either way. I am objective on the individual cases as they arise. I do not do as you do and simply attack the Police because you have a prejudged ideology that states categorically the Police are bad.

    You have attempted to twist the topic onto you stating that I am unwilling to consider things, when I have not stated a specific policy regarding my thoughts on the Police. You are obviously struggling to justify yourself.

    The argument is about the statement you made, which said and I quote;

    This is obviously exaggerated hyperbole with no basis in fact and when called on it you accused people of right wing agenda's and calling for the blood of students, you back this up with post obviously made in jest that did not suggest killing or maiming students as you made out.



    Then I pointed out that I view the actions of the police individually and not collectively, which is exactly how I view the action of the Students. I do not automatically assume all students are violent, I give the police the same benefit. This is called being objective. Your reply to this was to laugh and state that it is not objective and that because I was in the military I was brainwashed by the State and thus I am biased by state sponsored indoctrination of the armed forces.

    I am neither making assumptions or specific unfounded personal remarks. You were humourless with regard to Tombstones posts on snipers, and you are either insane or full of it IF you really believe that I am a reactionary given my decidedly un-reactionary posting history.

    I am glad you admit that you are biased and that your assumptions are unfounded and based on that unsubstantiated bias. I, however do not need to admit to any unsubstantiated bias in this case as I have not shown any.
     
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2010
  7. Castiel

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 26, 2010

    Posts: 63,651

    There is always John Christie and Billy McCaughey to consider.:p


    Seriously though, the Jean Charles De Menezes case was a debacle from start to finish, the Officers should have been convicted of his murder, for me the argument revolving around him being mistaken for a terrorist and that he did not follow instructions given to him is full of holes and frankly it is a travesty that they got away with it.

    However, that does not mean that the Police are specifically ordered to incite violence at demonstrations on the behest of the Government as Thesaff is implying.
     
  8. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Dec 28, 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    Ok how or why would everything go cheaper all the time, when we talk about inflation that is a target set by the central bank. Without the central bank would we have inflation ? If so, what would cause that ? There must be some sort of mechanism at work that would cause all the prices to deflate. You might find that certain prices deflate because of very specific reasons. example, a raw material used in a product becomes more available and more cheaper so they have cut costs. They then can pass that cost cutting on to the consumer in the form of a lower price. But if there is no external need from other market dynamics then they would keep it at the same price and reap the benefits. That is how i understand it. How will all prices deflate at once ?

    Yes but this is not thanks to inflation or the monetary system, that is thanks to capitalism and the free market. ie one man innovating and sell goods and services. The inflation and monetary system has hindered its success.
     
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2010
  9. Thesaff

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Sep 27, 2010

    Posts: 1,031

    Location: Leeds

    Was going to reply to rebutt some post that was made but going around in circles is not a thing i do gladly, well i did but then i edited it out here.
     
    Last edited: Dec 16, 2010
  10. Thesaff

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Sep 27, 2010

    Posts: 1,031

    Location: Leeds

    My time as a doorman saw numerous events such as this going on, not to say that some of the drunken idiots did not bring the violence upon themselves, by trying to bottle a police officer. Some of the officers were well known amongst the doormen for being violent, but on the other hand so were the some of the doormen. What riled me was the hiding behind the uniform in the knowledge that their account of the incident would be the one that was believed and the poor unfortunate soul who had the misfortune to meet such an officer had little recourse for justice.
     
  11. Castiel

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 26, 2010

    Posts: 63,651

    You realised your baseless accusations are indefensible I see.:p
     
  12. RDM

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 1, 2007

    Posts: 20,177

    A central bank deflation target would mean that money becomes worth more over time. If it is worth more, you can buy more with it. Therefore things get cheaper. Pretty much every single historic occurence of long term deflation has led to serious recession and the social issues that come along with that. With the amount of personal debt that would become much much worse in today's society.


    And deflation would hinder it considerably more as there would be less incentive to invest in a company when you know that their profits will shrink due to deflationary pressures. Inflation helps investment because it makes it more worthwhile to invest your money and make it grow, rather than just let it accumulate and be worth more at zero risk.
     
  13. stockhausen

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 30, 2006

    Posts: 9,836

    @ Groan & RDM - aren't you rather drifting off topic here :confused:
     
  14. RDM

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 1, 2007

    Posts: 20,177

    Yes. Yes we are. Is that a problem? If so feel free to RTM it. :)
     
  15. Thesaff

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Sep 27, 2010

    Posts: 1,031

    Location: Leeds

    So its all done and dusted, but where did they get these figures from?
    Will it put off poorer students?

    With the scrapping of the EMA and the tuition fee at the peak of what those from poorer backgrounds would find off putting, i would hazard a guess that participation from those types of students will decrease not immediately but definitely over the next five years. Especially if the tuition fees increase, which many universities will be clamouring for as their overall budget is set to be slashed by as much as 20%.
    Is this such a bad thing?
     
  16. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,206

    Location: Plymouth

    We should not pander to people unable to make rational decisions. That includes poor students who somehow think that an income linked liability in the form of a loan that has no repayment requirements and no interest for low earners prevents them going to university.

    If they are incapable of understanding that this is essentially a capped graduate tax, then they really aren't university material.
     
  17. clv101

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 9,892

    Location: Bristol

    That's the key question, is it such a bad thing? In 1961 4.4% of people went to university in the UK, in 2011 it's projected to be 44%. That's a dramatic rise, however is a slower rate of rise than in the rest of the world, especially our direct economic competitors. At 44% going to university we have a relatively low proportion of our population going to university, is that a good or bad situation?

    If we don't send as many people to university, we let the proportion slip down to 40% or 30% what does the economy do with the increase in relatively uneducated people aged 18-21? The high unemployment level in this age group and recent graduates suggests an increased many of them won't be able to find jobs. Surely it is better to be at university than be unemployed?
     
  18. anything I don't mind

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Dec 28, 2009

    Posts: 13,054

    Location: london

    RDM's fault.

    This is why central bank planners just fail. They are unable to aim for a stable currency it is either contract the money supply or quantitative ease, inflation or deflation with the central bank. Why don't they aim for stability ?

    The problems with money being worth more over time are no where near as bad as inflation. Sure rampant deflation could cause problems, but if it was at a similar rate as to what inflation is at the moment then that would not cause incentive problems for investments. If it fluctuated, ie deflated for five years then inflation for 3 years etc. That would be better than one way or the other in the extreme. we all know hyper inflation is bad, so would hyper deflation. But i think if we had private currencies that were not tied to nationalism and not fiat. They would fluctuate and the "winning" currency, or the most popular one, the one that everyone would choose. Would be the currency that is the most stable. The currency that fluctuates the least.
     
  19. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,206

    Location: Plymouth

    Are you still confusing university with tertiary education as you did earlier in the thread?
     
  20. clv101

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 9,892

    Location: Bristol

    Indeed - I see the proposed system as a finite, personalised, graduate, tax. It addresses most of the problems with a graduate tax but keeps the benefits.

    I honestly can't think of a better way of funding higher education IF you assume the public sector is going to reduce its contribution by around 40% meaning the total public funding drops to just 40%. If that's taken as red, then the fees system is a good way to deal with it.

    The question comes back to that 40% figure - it's pitifully low, one of the lowest rates of public finance in the developed world. The average of OECD countries is 66% the EU19 average is 82%. Only the US (32%), Japan (32%) and Korea (23%) have less than our new 40% figure.