Well the government says we are part of Europe and we should be more European in attitude, they are just following government policy and following the french i am sure the government will praise this being more European

 

But not everyone did pay their fair share did they? The Tories had a great idea and made the implementation of it as bad as the idea was good. They got everything they deserved!!!!

 

From that post I take it you never even went to school?

 

left after did my gcse and payed my way for all my choices in life

 

why should tax payers pay for their education give one good reason why if they want to get a degree they should not have to pay for it

 

I wonder how many of the "protesters" involved in damaging property or assaulting police and any one who got in the way are actually students? The naive lambs who organise these demonstrations are a Godsend to the "carry a banner for anything if I can fight the police / government" dross. They can hide behind the façade of hard done to students who remain none the wiser and take the bad press from the majority of the public. As has already been said, today's scuffle wasn't a riot, the Poll tax , now that was a riot...

 

the fact is most brits love a good scrap and only need an excuse as seen in many different sinarios in the past as above most prob not even students

 

Thought so!!!!

 

Because then we end up with only kids from wealthy families going on to university?

 

That is part of Tory pilicy though isn't it?

 

And the Scottish.

 

I don't know enough about Tory policy to answer that

 

My mum is still waiting for an answer from Dave re updating the Barnett Formula (she spends all her spare time firing off letters to various MP's, be interesting to know how many people on here do that actually).

 

LOL - the news commented this morning " A breakdown in intelligence". Referring to the coppers lack of intel, but pretty much somes the whole thing up perfectly.

 

Those students are from Glasgow so what the #### are they complaining about???

I also don't understand the 'we can't afford to go to uni any more' plea given that nothing has to be paid upfront; you only pay when you've got a decent job. Maybe if they went to uni and studied something useful.........

 

A strange situation indeed.....

When I read the story it was like this:



But if you look at the actual detail there's a handful of rozzers holding back a few rioters but in the background the majority of people are photographers....

Then later I started to view the arrest shots:






.... and it became apparent that they were all young women (the last may have been a carpet muncher), what happened to all the ***** smashing windows? Looks like they were ignored in favour of a group of young women out for a coffee and a bit of shopping therapy?

 

+1

 

The BBC picked some total boneheads to interview on the news last night. The student union rep from one of the London universities advocating the use of violence, stating that this is just the beginning and suggesting that workers would support the students. This would be the workers who you expect to pay higher taxes to subsidise your education would it, you deluded girl?

To be fair, the TV coverage showed great restraint from the police with a great deal of adversity. And they managed not to kill anyone this time.

 

I never said tax payers should foot the bill and my previous post says I find the violence disgusting. However there is a question as to HOW we do pay for university education.

We do need educated people in this country. If everybody did what you did and left school at 16 then who will teach our kids, design our bridges, treat our sick, discover new treatments, invent ground breaking carbon technology?

You will benefit from the higher education of society as well. Did you say you were in the armed forces? If so, who do you think designs the gun you hold? The missiles you fire? The submarines, aircraft you use?

Do you think these things are driven forward by people with a GCSE who have difficulty stringing an intelligible sentence together?

Who will teach your kids?

Who will operate on you should you (god forbid) sustain an injury whilst fighting?

So higher education doesn't just benefit the individual it benefits everybody.

We therefore need a fair way of funding this. I'm not saying that it should all be paid for from taxes but equally the argument from people like you that those that don't go to University shouldn't subsidise those that do to any extent also makes little sense

 

Logical debate on radio 2 now and 12-30 on sky news.Should be interesting!

 

Nothing wrong in marching to show your feelings in a demonstration. Criminal damage and injury is another thing and those guilty of that should feel the full weight of the law over it.

Les

 

Whilst I'm in agreeance, I feel the current issue is there are too many people not suitable for HE going into it. There is also a severe lack of industry input in recruitment training (their attitude is let someone else do the donkey work, and we'll employ them later - problem is 80% of them do this).

We need to sort the wheat from the chaff. For example, you ask who will teach our future kids? Many school leavers want to go into teaching - that's fine if they can spell and have the intellectual capacity to do so, but we (tax payer or otherwise) shouldn't be allowed to carry them through and lower the bar to achive the goal of getting more teachers out there. Nobody wants to see an idiot teaching their children for the sakes of getting more teachers on the payroll.

Any substandard students should be rejected as soon as possible and made to realise they need to take a different career path. It is unfair to carry a student on a course for three or more years on the false promises that all will come good in the end.

But when there droves are dippy flitters who do wasteful or useless arty farty courses or courses of which are in huge demand (nursery care for instance), we should not bear the brunt to pay for a substandard student to take an over-subscribed course in a substandard university thats gives no real benefit to core industries.

Another example is industry is constantly crying out for high-level engineers. But its a two fold issue - there are LOADS of engineers out there. But many are useless because the university accepted useless students, or have useless courses, and the second fold is industry is unwilling to invest in tutition to bring people up to their required standards. The recruitment industry's constant obsession with buzz words has also contributed to the whole generalisation/watering/dumbing down of the term "engineer", which hasn't helped matters either.

What I propose is get various sectors who are demanding a certain level of graduate to partly fund courses (say 50%), and goverenment to partly fund key yet under-subscribed courses (say, 25% ). But only via leading level univerisities capeable of educating to a high standard in that sector and with strict rejection/admission criteria. Any student who falls short of the bar can continue, but only through their own personal funding.

Firm but fair IMO. Some people are destined to work in Mac'Ds, but refuse to accept it. Whilst their is no issue with that mantra, we the tax payer should not pay for them.

Currently a univerisity's main incentive for funding is based on getting as many students on the roster. With little regard of their courses being up to scratch or setting firm standards. If they kick out a student or make admission criteria too strict, they loose their tuition fees for subsequent years, thats obviously bad for business. So the current incentive is to string along as many students as possible right up until the end of their education, then boot them out with a mickey mouse degree, or worse a decent degree, but without the capeability to fulfill any job role in the related sector. This is unfair and short of ripping off students...and the economy.

 

Was it the same girl on BBC Breakfast this morning?

The NHS President (Aaron?) was backpedalling hard. She was stiring for all she could.

 

To be honest I didn't catch her name as I was foaming at the mouth. If she looked like what the DCI would describe as a "rug muncher" then maybe

 

Thats a good arguement why to have higher education and cant agree more. All of the equipment i use on operations that has saved my life many times was designed by boffins who went uni which im glad of i would rather have a sientist design my kit than the bloke behind the counter at mc donalds but my point was why should we subsiduse their higher education when (if they have done a degree worth while) they will end up making decent money anyway and can afford to pay off what their education cost

 

Students = parasites. Cut their grants to zero and cut their oxygen supply at the same time.

 

*Breaking News*


Students in London protesting about higher tuition fees are complaining of police brutality and heavy tactics being used in order for them to disperse.

Police are believed to have used shower gel and job adverts.

 

I saw a very interesting interview on TV with a senior Met Police officer who said the they didnt have the resources in man power to respond when the demo kicked off, how convient when you are just about to have your budget slashed and they attack the head office of the people cutting your budget? I think quietly the Met Police will get more money now!