09 Dec 10
2 edits
Originally posted by utherpendragonYep, this is what happens when the state takes over everything with the premise that everyone will get free goodies. Then when they have full control they simply wean the populace from the nanny state teet and the populace is left with nothing.
Anybody else watching this?
They are covering live on Fox.
Its starting to look a little rough.
The cops just did a Calvary charge into the crowd.
09 Dec 10
Originally posted by utherpendragonThe protests have been going on for a while, I don't believe they deserve the all the attention they have been receiving from the media. These students are either vandals exploiting the occasion to make a mess and get away scot free or are completely ignorant about the government's efforts in cutting spending and how this benefits the country. They're mere victims of the misguided culture of entitlement, living oblivious of the unreasonable nature of their demands.
Anybody else watching this?
They are covering live on Fox.
Its starting to look a little rough.
The cops just did a Calvary charge into the crowd.
Hopefully the police will deal with them competently.
09 Dec 10
Originally posted by AThousandYounghttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11483638
What are they protesting?
"The government has pushed through plans to allow universities to charge up to £9,000 per year, raising the cap from its current level of £3,290. Universities wanting to charge more than £6,000 would have to undertake measures, such as offering bursaries, summer schools and outreach programmes, to encourage students from poorer backgrounds to apply.
The government would continue to loan students the money for fees. The threshold at which graduates have to start paying their loans back would be raised from £15,000 to £21,000. On 8 December, the goverment announced this threshold would rise annually with inflation - not just every five years, as had been planned.
Each month graduates would pay back 9% of their income above that threshold.
The subsidised interest rate at which the repayments are made - currently 1.5% - will be raised. Under a "progressive tapering" system, the interest rate will rise from 0 for incomes of £21,000, to 3% plus inflation (RPI) for incomes above £41,000.
If the debt is not cleared 30 years after graduation, it will be wiped out."
....
"What does the plan mean for students?
Students doing three-year courses charged at £6,000 will leave university with about £30,000 of debt - if fees go up to £9,000, debts will be closer to £38,000.
The government says the lowest-earning 25% of graduates will pay less than they currently do. But most others will pay more - the highest earners almost double what they currently pay.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies says that, for about half of gradates, the plan is essentially a 9% graduate tax for 30 years, because they will not finish paying off the debt by the 30-year cut-off point.
Assuming fees of £7,500 for a three year degree, plus maintenance loans, its modelling shows that the top 10% of graduate earners will clear their debts, on average, in about 15 years. But a middle-earning graduate would need to earn, for example, an average of £48,850 a year for 26 years to pay off their debt.
The IFS also says about 10% of graduates will pay back, in total, more than they borrowed."
.....
Seems like a very fair proposal to me, and this is why I fail to see the reasoning behind these protests.
09 Dec 10
Bah, students are learning. They used to do hunger strikes. Which I always thought was hilarious. It would start with say 100 students hunger striking. Over the course of a week, they'd slowly start dropping out because they couldn't hack it. Finally there would be a last 1 or 2 who would stay the course and start to get a little attention. And usually they were the ones who were really had no idea what it was they were protesting, they were just pissed off, and joining what everyone else was doing. Finally the last 1-2 would finally drop out because they had no idea what they really stood for.
Why can't they all just go back to hunger protesting.
09 Dec 10
Originally posted by joneschrA hunger protest doesn't really make for good TV...
Bah, students are learning. They used to do hunger strikes. Which I always thought was hilarious. It would start with say 100 students hunger striking. Over the course of a week, they'd slowly start dropping out because they couldn't hack it. Finally there would be a last 1 or 2 who would stay the course and start to get a little attention. And usuall ...[text shortened]... no idea what they really stood for.
Why can't they all just go back to hunger protesting.