 |
|
Monday 9th August 2010
Ditch the graduate taxWhat's David Willetts up to? His suggestion that graduates should make a "bigger contribution" towards the cost of higher education has been universally interpreted as an indication that the Universities Minister favours a graduate tax over an increase in tuition fees. But does he? In fact, an increase in tuition fees would also mean graduates making a "bigger contribution" since they'd have to repay higher loans after they'd graduated. So his statement could be read either way. It beggars belief that Willetts, a thoroughbred conservative intellectual, would actually be in favour of a graduate tax. According to the University and College Union (UCU), if graduates had to pay an additional 5% in income tax, a social worker on average wages would end up paying a total of £37,550 over 25 years, a secondary school teacher £46,046 and a doctor £70,526. Under the present system, by contrast, they each pay a flat fee of £9,440 for their degrees. (To read more, click here.)
Comments page 1 of 1 - 2 post(s) Re: Ditch the graduate tax Posted by Pete Tennyson on 10-08-2010 06:06: There is really isn't any sense being talked at all about education by the mainstream politicians. I've just discovered your blog and found more commonsense in half an hour than I'll find in any the manifestos of either party. I don't agree with all of it, but I do with a lot more than most people I ever read. What we have here is education planning by economic amateurs, who seem to assume that all graduates will earn investment banking salaries, and the top people in higher education deserved to be paid them. The fact is that plenty of non-economic amateurs get this sort of planning wrong at least 50% if the time. The sort of people doing it at the moment can be guaranteed to do it 100%! All very scary! Keep up the good work highlighting this sort of thing. PS. I'll send you a longer email, because I think you need a lot more bullets. Pete (BNC JCR Treasurer 1983-4) Re: Ditch the graduate tax Posted by Davidjwbailey on 16-08-2010 14:51: insightful. the error was when B-Liar forced 50% of school leavers into higher education to keep them off the NEETS count. That was a stupid decision as it instantly caused three other problems: 1) unsuitable Polys became Unis but could not deliver, 2) people who could and would have worked profitably or become entrepreneurs went to New Unis and failed 3) the premium on Uni education was destroyed. Now Willets, Cable, et al are chasing the moon on a very silly idea - that of an additional tax on the most valuable members of society to subsidise prospective Hairdressers, Golf Course Managers, Media Studies and Goat Keepers for three idle years. The sooner this one is knocked on the head, and we get back to a sensible idea of what further education is really about, the better for all. Ironically, the 'traditional' method even had more social mobility than B-Liars idiot scheme... |
|
© 2004 - 2012 Toby Young