Is this new system not a graduate tax by another name ? You can only bay the 10% of salary over a certain amount so unless you earn really big bucks you will never pay it off so you will be paying 10% extra on earnings over 21K for 30 years. Sounds like a tax to me.
Yes, it is.
Most graduates will never pay off their loans. The government will have to pay eventually.
It's essentially another PFI initiative. Taxpayers will foot the bill eventually, and will end up paying more.
Also is it 10% before tax that gets paid to the loan company ?
What I mean is do you get tax relief on the repayments.
so earn 30K pay £900 to loan company get taxed on £29100.
Bazzer
@ Bazzer - yes, I thought the student loan came out of your wages pre-tax?
Check your next payslip, and it should say?
Possibly on a slightly more constructive / positive note there maybe bursaries available:
http://www.farmersguardian.com/ilph-launches-bursary-scheme-for-vet-students/13006.article
http://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/single.htm?ipg=6314
I find the debts students and/or their parents are having to deal with these days staggering. I went to Uni 20 years ago, and back then it was a fairly big deal if you had an overdraft of £400. Student loans came in during my final year and if i recall was something like £500 a year. Fees were nothing like they are today. I'd set up a Child Trust Fund, then at 18 say say here you are, make your own decision.
I may be wrong, but at the time there were aspects of the grant system which needed to be looked at - namely children of divorced parents got a full grant regardless as to their parents financial circumstances, as did mature students over the age of 21.
Regarding degree choice, you went to uni (as well as to drink for 3 years) to demonstrate your intelligence to future employers - hence graduate level better paid jobs. Degrees were largely accademic core subjects and were not chosen unlike today with a future employment path in mind, which i think is far too early. The other aspect of going to Uni was to get "life experience", but these days with travel around the world being easier i'd consider encouraging my kids to travel - and by that i don't mean sitting in a bar in Sydney for 6 months.
I graduated during the last recession and it was pretty impossible to find any job, let alone a graduate job as `we' had been led to believe. Today the job market is different, but with employers having more graduates to choose from i'd not want to be in the position of £30k plus debt around my neck. Having said that, with careful financial management, a large chunck of this can be paid off over ten years with careful financial planning - but who has that in their 20's? 😀
Check your next payslip, and it should say?
Mine was paid off 10 years ago, but no where near as large as some of the debts younger people will have to pay off.
I was lucky enough not to have to pay fees and still had a small maintenance grant topped up by a student loan.
I'd set up a Child Trust Fund, then at 18 say say here you are, make your own decision.
I wouldn't. They're generally charged at a higher management rate than an identical product and they become the legal property of the child at 18. What if you're kid's a drug addict at 18?
Fair point - but in general terms what i mean is give a long term saved lump sum and within reason let them get on with it. Having said that, even a smallish sum from a Trust Fund at least allows them to have total control and learn to sink or swim.
Scamper - even today students are assessed based on the finances of the resident parent where parents are divorced.
If they're talking about help for the poorest they really need to find a better way to test this. Especially a conservative government who are supposed to support the family.
Also the incentive to play the system is going to be far greater if fees go up. I know people whose parents stated they were separated (they owned two houses) so they got more help.
the new repayment scheme will cost your kids LESS than the current one.
current scheme: 10% of everything over £15k - someone earning £25k will pay £1000 per year.
new scheme: 10% of everything over £21k - someone earning £25k will pay £400 per year.
You seem to suggest that paying less for longer is somehow cheaper I think it is more expensive as you pay more back in the long run. Cheaper per year but for longer - Would increasing my mortgage by 5 years save me money?
Would increasing my mortgage by 5 years save me money?
What if you never expected to pay off your mortgage, and the amount left to repay would be written off after 30 years?
Would you want to pay off the whole mortgage off really quickly for large monthly payments, or would you mortgage youself up to the hilt and pay the smallest possible amount each month until it was written off?
What if you never expected to pay off your mortgage, and the amount left to repay would be written off after 30 years?
I am guessing the government have done the sums and this ends up with them netting more cash in the long run !!!
Under the new system you won't necessarily be paying less for longer. At certain levels you'll never pay off the debt under either system. Under the old system (1998-200?) you can potentially be paying for 43 years, the new one is written off after 30. Not to mention the fact that you could be earning 20k so paying off under one system but not the other.
i never expect to clear my student loan debt of £12000-ish, my repayments aren't keeping up with the interest/inflation.
i'd rather be paying 10% of everything i earn over £21,000 for the rest of my life, than the same of £15,000
i'd have more money (long term and short term) under the new scheme.
people who go on to earn 40-50k or more earn enough over the threshold to make good headway into the debt. these people soon clear it under the present system. These people will be paying a tiny bit less, but for much much longer under the new system.
the extra money to make up for the cuts in uni funding will come from higher earners.
I am guessing the government have done the sums and this ends up with them netting more cash in the long run !!!
You would hope so, but...
the extra money to make up for the cuts in uni funding will come from higher earners.
The more I read about this the more I realise its a tax by the back door.
The main reason I would dissuade any of my children from doing Engineering at Uni was that I suffered a 40 hour LECTURE week for 3 years, whilst everyone I knew was doing 16 tops. Outside study on top plus coursework, projects etc. You'd struggle to do that and hold down a part time job as looks to be necessary now.
When you leave and realise sales earn more than you with no degree and a fairly scant idea of what they are selling, you realise you've been wasting your time.
For me the distinction between engineer or not was not chartered status (which seems to have a degree of baggage) but whether you did a Beng or Meng rather than a Bsci .. maybe naively I assumed all other unis put the same demands on their Beng students.
Of course I could move jobs, but I put up with it because I like where I live and having a short commute
100% agree. I could earn 10K more by commuting to that London everyday, and it's entirely feasible to do so.. but my quality of life is more important.
On the Engineer debate.... At work I design something in Inventor, export the solid models to cad/cam software,then create the toolpaths and then the code which is then sent to the cnc machines. I then go and set the machines machine the componet then fit all the parts together.
As I only have a city and guilds qualification does this make me not a engineer?
If anyone is thinking of doing chemistry then I'd look into a sponsored degree. Two of my previous employers have offered them.
Here we pay about 15k rising to 20k over 6 years and you do your degree one day a week. Most come out with firsts (as they have developed a work ethic/professional attiture over 6 years in a proper job) they also have a job and no debts. Not sure if it will continue if the company has to up it's payments.
try working in science!
starting slaries are easily below the 21k threshold
Really? With degree or PhD though?
I am guessing the government have done the sums and this ends up with them netting more cash in the long run !!!
More likey as with most governments, they won't be around to worry about/pay for it in 30 years...
Anyone hear the Jeremy Vine interview with the Lib Dem MP this afternoon? Quite amusing listening to him stammer his way through his pathetic explanation about election pledges....
bazzer - MemberThe more I read about this the more I realise its a tax by the back door
correct!
but if the government were honest, and said so, then it would set a very dangerous precedent; paying income taxes based on which services you use.
i went to university - should i pay a graduate tax?
i don't smoke - should i get a reduction for not trying to kill myself at great expense to the nhs?
should criminals pay extra income tax to cover the costs of their incarceration?
i don't have kids, why should i pay for schools?
etc.
it's all a bit daft, and would get terribly complicated.
for the record, i don't mind paying taxes, it's an important thing to do if you want to live in a society that isn't based on stone-age tribal war, and trading sea shells for goats.
should criminals pay extra income tax to cover the costs of their incarceration?i don't have kids, why should i pay for schools?
Now there's a thought - prison loans and school loans.
On the Engineer debate.... At work I design something in Inventor, export the solid models to cad/cam software,then create the toolpaths and then the code which is then sent to the cnc machines. I then go and set the machines machine the componet then fit all the parts together.
As I only have a city and guilds qualification does this make me not a engineer?
IMO - you are doing doing the leg work of an engineering technician - which is in short supply in certain areas. This is problem - engineering is the bit between design and implementation/manufacture. Are you determining loads, doing calculations for stress/fatigue and comparing against material allowables, selecting appropriate and cost effective manufacturing processes, sizing sections/welds/radii appropriately and staying within the relevant BS/ISO/Eurocode? In what you've described above, all of that is missing/done by someone else, no? Don't get me wrong, all of what you've described are valuable (and of value) skills that I don't have - I can do all the calcs/write all the reports in the world, but if there is no-one to go to actually cut some metal then it's useless.
This is really off-topic and probably the subject of another incendiary thread 😉 Go to Germany and you have to do a 7 year degree to be called an "engineer".
The Germans might be great Engineers, but their Siemens software is the largest thorn in my side right now (from an IT admin point of view).
Step5, Step7, etc..
Bristolbiker, customer(internal) comes to me tells me that they want a gizmo to do xy and z, I do everything execpt apply for the patent.
My point was that in Germany and France it caries a different social meaning to what it does/has become here.
Legspin - then you're original post missed out a whole hill of other stuff you must being doing to perform due diligence on the design you are going to sign off and supply, so fair enough.
Bristolbiker, customer(internal) comes to me tells me that they want a gizmo to do xy and z, I do everything execpt apply for the patent.
But do you go through the processes bristolbiker describes or do you wing it ? do you and could you justify the design decisions you make with sold engineering principles ? That is the difference between a technician and an Engineer.
Bazzer
1 a person whose job involves designing and building engines, machines, roads, bridges, etc.
see also chemical engineer, civil engineer, electrical engineer, lighting engineer, mechanical engineer, software engineer, sound engineer
2 a person who is trained to repair machines and electrical equipment
They're sending an engineer to fix the phone.
3 a person whose job is to control and repair engines, especially on a ship or an aircraft
a flight engineer
the chief engineer on a cruise liner
4 (North American English) (British English engine driver) a person whose job is driving a railway/railroad engine
5 a soldier trained to design and build military structures
There you go, from the oxford english dictionary. You do not have to be sat at a PC all day to be an engineer, this chartership talk is nonsense. The above is the only actual FACT about this matter on the whole thread. Engineer is a job title not a status.
Engineer is a job title not a status.
Indeed, though incorrectly applied in some cases. 'Doctor' is another case in point, though perhaps with the perception the otherway around.
The above is the only actual FACT about this matter on the whole thread.
I would disagree, and also suggest that that statement, by implication is the nub of the problem, via the OED back to the IMechE [i]et al[/i], as discussed some pages ago.
There you go, from the oxford english dictionary. You do not have to be sat at a PC all day to be an engineer, this chartership talk is nonsense. The above is the only actual FACT about this matter on the whole thread. Engineer is a job title not a status.
Totaly agree with but it still involves doing some engineering, else I could call my self a tree surgeon even though I go no where near a tree.
I am not so precious at all about the whole charted thing, I watched someone who was totally incompetent sail through the chartering process with the IEEE.
If for instance you were designing a seat stay for a bike, if you could do the calcs to ensure it was stiff enough and strong enough then you are an engineer. If you know what will be strong and stiff enough because someone told you or you just copy something else, your not.
Simple 🙂
Bazzer - if you missed it, I appear to have vented on the whole chartered thing a few pages ago. Feel much better for it too 😉
Yes however "engineering" is not purely design. It's many things and it is a shame that some universties have the idea that it is only design. I've worked for the largest global building services consultancy and you'd be shocked at the level of understanding of systems by some of the chartered and hugely qualified staff. Note the word understanding and not knowledge. As these people have never actually wired in a circuit, looked under the cover of a boiler or gassed up a chiller they do not fully understand how they work and how would be best designed, installed or used. IMO.
If a design was too problematic or difficult, it would go out as "design and build" and the contractors (mainly non degree, non chartered) would design it.
I appreciate that my area of engineering is quite specific and may not apply to different fields and that the term engineer has become overused (environmental engineer for cleaner etc) but all this "you're not an engineer you're a technician" is tripe. IMO.
@ bristolbiker
The old Doctors not having a Phd thing !!!
See I don't really care what people call me as long as they pay me for my skills.
I don't worry about if my neighbours think I am part of a profession or not. If I am honest I don't think I am its a career/job not a calling 🙂
I would have thought the industries where professional qualifications are important is mainly down to getting someone to insure you 🙂
But that said me trimming my hedges does not make me a tree surgeon 🙂
you'd be shocked at the level of understanding of systems by some of the chartered and hugely qualified staff
Believe me I wouldn't 🙂
One of the best software "Engineers" I know does not have a degree. I also know some shocking ones with Phd's 🙂
engineer you're a technician
I don't think it really matters, I would take a 100K software technician job over a 50K software engineer one 🙂
As you have correctly pointed out there is no legal meaning to the term engineer in this country.
Ok, so I've only read the first page of posts so this might have been said already...
As a secondary school teacher i know that basically schools receive funding based on the number of students they have, multiplied by a per capita rate. Those rates very roughly are:
£1k per student in years 7 to 11 (ie.up to the end of GCSEs)
£3k per Sixth form student
Staff to student ratios are much lower in schools than they are at Universities, so why on earth do Uni's need so much more cash? Its all a bloody big con. 👿
Staff to student ratios are much lower in schools than they are at Universities, so why on earth do Uni's need so much more cash?
Do you have facilities for studying and research into Nano Science at your school ?
Bazzer
So can I be a Software Engineer then?
Headfirst - not many secondary schools need things like particle accelerators, scanning tunnelling microscopes, clean rooms etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.
So can I be a Software Engineer then?
Well you can call yourself one and no one will arrest you 🙂
Can you get a job as one will depend on if you can get an interview and then convince people you can do the job 🙂
Edited to add, you probably would not be the worst person I have interviewed 🙂
Yes however "engineering" is not purely design
I'd go further and say as an engineer you need a sound understanding of design.... but creating an object which fits in the space envelope, meets the aesthetic and functional brief etc is the role of the designer - the role of the engineer is to confirm that the object is fit for purpose. Repeat that loop as necessary until a satisfactory solution pops out the bottom. I accept the lines in many sectors are blurred as one or other role has sufficient knowledge to do both job at once at the same time.
Headfirst - not many secondary schools need things like particle accelerators, scanning tunnelling microscopes, clean rooms etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.
Surely they've paid for them by now? 😉
I see your point, but isn't a fair bit of high-end scientific research funded through other means rather tuition fees? ie. direct govt research grants or funding by private business?
At my school we've got 750 students in Years 7-11 and 500 in the sixth form. We've got roughly 100 FTE teaching staff. How do uni numbers compare when factoring in funding too? I can see how uni's are more expensive to run than schools but not too the magnitude that the difference in funding suggests.
I'd go further and say as an engineer you need a sound understanding of design
Absolutely.
