Reintroduce college fees.

j1smithy

I was going to put this in the edu forum, but the responses would have been far too predictable. College fees are yet again back on the agenda and now a student loan system is proposed where students will have to pay the fees back after they finish. I've only recently graduated and I'm very grateful to the government for paying for the vast majority of my education. However I wouldn't be entirely opposed to the new system ensuring it is set up fairly ao an income basis and doesn't put grads under extreme financial pressure. Not everyone has gone to uni so i think it might be a better system than what we currently have in place. What do other AHers think, particularly those that didn't attend third level and those that did while fees were in place?

DanGerMus

I'd be in two minds about it to be honest. Sure it would probably lessen the failure/drop out rates by keeping people that weren't really interested out and allowing colleges to concentrate on the genuine people.
But you're talking about taking a step back imho to making it harder for the poorer but capable who really need it and it changes nothing for the rich who can afford it either way.
The current system is fantastic putting everyone on a level playing field so everyone can take a chance but it's costly and in the face of economic downturn abandoning it would just be another example of the less well off feeling the real hit.
What it really comes down to is whether the government feel the country can afford it now that its facing a massive deficit.

[AHMODE]:sorry what i really mean is bah bloody students have it too easy living off me hard earned taxes... hippies. Leave em pay for their own buckfast and marreehuana

Xavi6

That have that HETAC system over here in Oz and all I can say is I'm glad I didn't have to do it (although I did go to private college and paid fees at the time).

Basically how it works is you pay for Uni once you finish. Once you get into a certain wage bracket they take big sums out every few months until you've paid the lot off. Can be a right pain in the arse if your wage has just barely slipped into the category. Basically you're in debt to the government for the first significant portion of your working life.

Instead, I say keep the free education and give more grants to those who have to go to private college.

DanGerMus wrote: »

The current system is fantastic putting everyone on a level playing field so everyone can take a chance but it's costly and in the face of economic downturn abandoning it would just be another example of the less well off feeling the real hit.

Not entirely true. The system punishes those who are not good all rounders academically.

Cunny-Funt

Indeed, it would be a step backwards.

DanGerMus

Xavi6 wrote: »

Not entirely true. The system punishes those who are not good all rounders academically.

I'm refering more to the support system that is in place once you're in third level not our education system as a whole.
If your talking about the leaving cert and CAO/points system though fair point.

mahamageehad

if fees came back i would honestly have to drop out.
im already in debt rom paying for accom etc!!

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

hahahaahahahah

you haven't got a clue what debt is.

Ostrom

The Irish times report predictions seemed reasonable, 4.5 million potential gained in fees based on a combined 120,000 income per houehold with a scaled system similar to the way the grant threshold works.

I'm more concerned about the ridiculous in house solutions and admin costs.

We took in 10% more undergrads this year after a senior management order to cut middle teaching by quarter of a million across the board. The combined incomes of 2 new senior admin positions created at our own institution amount to roughly that figure.

I'm in favour of graded fees, but a lot could be resolved with a HSE/civil service style management audit

pickarooney

If they are going to bring back fees, at least give people 5-6 years to save up for their kids' education rather than forcing young people into debt before they've had a chance to put their college education to good use by pissing around South East Asia for a year.

mikemac

Despite the “dumbing down” controversy, the Leaving Cert is a fair test over a wide range of subject.
Much better then what they have in UK.

The CAO system is fair, you’re only a number and it’s the best way to allocate places. Bringing interviews for medical students is a good idea too.

Within 3 years of graduating, a graduate will probably be on 41% tax. They’ll pay the taxes for their college education back 100 times over by the time they retire.
If people from some backgrounds struggle with the Leaving Cert, there are countless AQA (all qualified applicants) courses on around the country, there is the VEC or sure do a trade with FAS and you get paid to do it.

Keep the system as it is.

BroomBurner

You just have to look to the UK to see how that system of loans to get through college has created so much debt and financial ruin for young people, simply because they had the nerve to try to educate themselves. I seriously hope Ireland will learn from the mistake of the UK and not bring this in.

Imagine getting through your four year course and starting your first job being thousands of euro in debt?! It would be years before you could buy a house (further disintegrating the housing market), you would have to buy second hand cars, which is in itself not a problem, but would cause a knock-on effect for car dealerships and their employees.

The government needs young, professional people to happily go about spending and saving their newly earned riches to keep the economy going. If they were all in debt, I can't see how it would be good for anyone.

Wagon

It's a bad idea. As a previous poster said, it cuts off people with a financial disadvantage, who may have much more important things to use that money for when they finish college. It's also a sneaky way for the government to jut rob it's citizens. With so much pressure put on people to go to college these days and the limited options in careers you seem to have if you don't go, it'll keep those who want a better future trapped in their joba they may hate.

This is just another typical move by the government that they haven't looked ahead on and seen the bigger picture. Someone finishes school and they have options. Which is cheaper? Doing a 4 year degree course and paying the government back about 14000 euro after you finish? Or a plane ticket? Like what happened in Poland, the younger Irish generation will leave for a few years (possibly more) and try to earn a living elsewhere. I literally just finished college but I probably wouldn't have been able to afford it if there were fees introduced.

If you want to stop people dropping out of college, then don't put so much pressure on them to go immediatly after they finish school where they are only 17 - 18 and expected to choose a career. Let them go in their own time. There are a LOT of mature students who want to attend (full time and part time). The government needs to get it's secondary schools sorted out, and give students a bit of proper direction on what they can do in life. It's not the colleges usually. Many students work hard in the leaving and do well and attend a course they picked last minute because they felt they "had" to. Overall, a really bad idea that will end in disaster.

Mahatma coat

Most foreigners are amazed when I explain the Irish system to them, ie no only did it not cost me anythying to Faff about in college for 5 years I also got paid to be there.

most people who have been through the type of system proposed have huge debts into their thirties just from Uni.

if there had been fees in my day I would be a plumber now

SheroN

It's a bad idea. They're always on about trying to sell the country based on it's "highly educated young people", it's a step backwards.

KerranJast

If they bring back fees for people who can afford it, it would mean more money to help poorer people get to college. There's be a huge increase in private secondary schools since fees were abolished as middle class parents started taking the money they would have spent on college fees and paying for private schooling to give their kids even more of an unfair advantage over poorer children. Also if the majority of us were honest we'd admit we'd have been well able to afford paying off our fees over a few years once we got employment. Both myself and the majority of my peers easily spent 3-4 times the amount of money spent on food and college stuff combined on "socialising" during a typical college term.

SimpleSam06

No. The only reason the government is discussing reintroduction of college fees is because they royally wrecked the country with mismanagement of the economy over the last eight years, and now they are looking to the up and coming young people of the future to bear some of the burden of their incompetence.

Also no because you are putting a tremendous financial strain on people coming out of college and into a recessionary environment where it will be hard to find employment in the first place, never mind deal with enormous levels of debt just to have a chance at decent employment.

Not to mention a highly educated workforce represents our best and perhaps only bet at getting out of this recession more or less intact.

Lets cut the salaries of the Taoiseach (a third of a million euros annually) and the rest of the politicans as well, that should free up a few bob.

No way in hell.

Tawny

I was in the second year of loans in the UK - and am currently 16000 in debt not including interest.

I have to earn more than 15stg a year to have to pay it off, and it doesnt look like that is gonna happen any time soon. But the debt will be hanging over me until im 65!

I havent been particularly sucessful in getting a decent job, or maybe I didnt do the right course. I did a course I loved but I totally regret it now.

We got crap career advice and no one pointed out that Id find it very difficult to get a job that pays something decent with my course.

If I had of known this I would have probably ended up doing a course I didn't enjoy to make sure I'd get a job that is well paid, which isn't something that colleges should encourage at all.

I hope Ireland doesn't follow the UK example anyway (not sure what the difference is with the Australian one) I feel like Im totally screwed.

(Ive moved to Ireland though so if I never need to go back to UK to work I might get away with it....)

stovelid

I'd definitely support fees for families on very large incomes.

Even though I'm sure it helped some working-class students, it was a electoral gift to middle-class voters by and large.

ergonomics

I'm in my 4th of year of college and have roughly €12000 worth of debt. I can barely afford loan repayments and my credit rating is ruined, I would imagine. I have worked as much as I reasonably can since I started college and have never been without employment since I was about 16. Even through exams, and the Leaving, I have to work because I cannot afford to stay in college otherwise. My parent's can't afford to support me either. As a result of working so much my grades have suffered but I'm getting by. If I didn't have to work I'd imagine I'd do a lot better adacemically. I can only imagine how I'd be if I was trying to pay fees as well.

If fees were introduced and I was back in school I definitely wouldn't go to college. I'd be so afraid of getting so far in to the course only to become so broke that I'd have to drop out with no qualification and buckets load of debt. Graduates pay statistically more tax than non-graduates and this is how the Government earns back it's fees, although graduates have to continue paying higher tax even after their education is paid for. Despite this only a small percent on these taxes are used for 3rd level funding.

ejmaztec

You might be ok re-paying a huge loan with a good money-earning degree, but people will be thinking twice about going for something like an art (do you want fries with that) degree, because most of them would be still paying the loan off when they retire.

SimpleSam06

stovelid wrote: »

I'd definitely support fees for families on very large incomes.

Yeah, that'll learn em for daring to do well in life. Also it will send a clear message to anyone else with the brass neck to think about making something of themselves. Officer thinking there.

Believe me, the last thing you want is a weaker middle class.

stovelid

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Yeah, that'll learn em for daring to do well in life. Also it will send a clear message to anyone else with the brass neck to think about making something of themselves.

Nah, I'm not against people doing well or think making something of yourself should be punished. College fees would not be a large amount of money to the income bracket I'm talking about.

Why should people on low incomes have to win out against lower expectations and sh*tter schools to get into college and then have to pay (and worry about) about the same fees as people whose children had it easy the whole way. Kids whose secondary schools probably cost as much as University?

And if you're saying that every wealthy person in this country somehow hauled themselves from poverty to make it, you're seriously deluded.

Free fees were introduced as a sop to middle-class voters. Who else produces the majority of college students? Introducing fees for low-income /borderline income families will put this group off going to college, or if they do, will opt for 'sure-fire job' courses.

Without free fees I couldn't have went to university. We should be making it as easy as possible for 'first in their family background' people to get into university and stay there.

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Believe me, the last thing you want is a weaker middle class.

They seem to be obliterating themselves on cheap credit quite successful without any help anyway.

Ste.phen

I still think my idea would be workable:

1) 'Charge' people fees
2) Interest free loans for all
3) Cancel the loan completely when the person graduates

Has the advantage of recouping money from the droppout brigade (whom i found to represent >50% of people that start college based on the 2 courses I did), but keeps it nice and free for the people who graduate (who provide extra knowledge to the economy, hence the reason it's free at the moment anyways)

ejmaztec

stovelid wrote: »

Nah, I'm not against people doing well or think making something of yourself should be punished. College fees would not be a large amount of money to the income bracket I'm talking about.

Why should people on low incomes have to win out against lower expectations and sh*tter schools to get into college and then have to pay (and worry about) about the same fees as people whose children had it easy the whole way. Kids whose secondary schools probably cost as much as University?

And if you're saying that every wealthy person in this country somehow hauled themselves from poverty to make it, you're seriously deluded.

Free fees were introduced as a sop to middle-class voters. Who else produces the majority of college students? Introducing fees for low-income /borderline income families will put this group off going to college, or if they do, will opt for 'sure-fire job' courses.

Without free fees I couldn't have went to university. We should be making it as easy as possible for 'first in their family background' people to get into university and stay there.

But the elitist few who run this country don't want everybody to get a third level education. They simply want enough to take over their jobs when they retire, so that the under-educated can carry on being the elitists' bitches.

If they could get away with it, the Irish government would be forcing people to pay for 1st and 2nd level as well, not that us parents don't have to pay towards this "free" education anyway, through fund-raising etc .. to pay for equipment that should have been provided in the first place by this "rich" country.

SimpleSam06

stovelid wrote: »

Nah, I'm not against people doing well or think making something of yourself should be punished. College fees would not be a large amount of money to the income bracket I'm talking about.

What income bracket are you talking about?

stovelid wrote: »

Why should people on low incomes have to win out against lower expectations and sh*tter schools to get into college and then have to pay (and worry about) about the same fees as people whose children had it easy the whole way. Kids whose secondary schools probably cost as much as University?

First of all, I'm not advocating fees for anyone, I'm strongly against the idea. What you're talking about is punishing people with "wealth" because they can somehow "afford it" on top of their 40% tax rates. People from poorer backgrounds often have great difficulty getting into college anyway, for a variety of reasons. These mysterious super-wealthy you seem to have in mind wouldn't care, their kids are going to college regardless. Inflicting fees on the middle class is a ruinous idea, since at any given time a family could be paying out thirty grand a year in tuition fees alone if they have three kids in at the same time.

Your plan would pretty much guarantee that higher education would be easiest to get into for the mega rich, and damn hard for anyone else.

stovelid wrote: »

And if you're saying that every wealthy person in this country somehow hauled themselves from poverty to make it, you're seriously deluded.

Oh, thats alright then, punish them for their parents' actions. That makes much more sense.

stovelid wrote: »

Free fees were introduced as a sop to middle-class voters. Who else produces the majority of college students?

You say this as though its a bad thing. However free fees were introduced, the overall effect to the country has been hugely positive.

stovelid wrote: »

They seem to be obliterating themselves on cheap credit quite successful without any help anyway.

Only those unwise enough to buy into the boom, and thats far from everybody. Legislating against them applies the same stick to everyon'e's back, however.

lostinnappies

not only are they trying to sqeeze money out of the irish people any way possable, but now (inspite of a recession) they want to squeeze more money out there ... what are they hoping to achieve. Its hard enough once you qualify to earn enough to support yourself, the outragous bills and have some sort of life without having a student loan on top of it.

kevmy

TBH I think bringing back in 3rd level fees is a mistake and I would be against it. Education is not "free". Most people have to move away and rent, either that or buy a car. Then you have food, books, social life etc. Adding on an extra 3-8 grand a year would prevent people from going to college. And at the end of the day we do want as many people as possible going to college.

Also this flat income cutoff thing is bollix anyway.
Take a guy thats making 121,000 annually and he has 3 kids in college. One is doing medicine and the other two are doing science subjects. For these three kids your talking approx 20,000 in fees. Thats a whole sixth of his income.

Then take another case where another guy is making 110,000 (and thus below the cutoff). He has one kid in college studying Arts. The kids fees would be about 4 grand thats one 27th of that guys income.

Any system they will bring in will be unfair just as the present grant system is unfair towards part time farmers. At least the present system is somewhat fair.

As for colleges not getting enough cash, look at NUIG which has €40 million plus to spend on new buildings over the next few years.

SimpleSam06

lostinnappies wrote: »

what are they hoping to achieve.

They're afraid the builders with the brown envelopes at the Galway races down through the years might start asking for refunds.

Dinter

This is exactly what an economy needs when it's already slowing down.

Make it harder for students to complete courses which will make us oh, so much more attractive to foreign investment.

Tbh the only thing I've ever received from this State that was of value was an education.

Lockstep

Given how important a well educated workforce was for the Celtic Tiger, I'm dead against it.

Free education sends out the message that education is not a right and that it needs to be paid for by the individual.


I certainly don't have a few thousand euros to spend in the year for my education alone. Other countrys with free third level seem to be doing just fine.

lostinnappies

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

They're afraid the builders with the brown envelopes at the Galway races down through the years might start asking for refunds.

ha ha id well believe it

JC 2K3

You guys are missing the bigger picture. And unsurprisingly are attributing this to the government's greed.

There are two important facts here:
1) It's university presidents that initially called for fees to be reintroduced, nothing to do with the government. Universities are simply not getting the funding they need with the current system in place.
2) Since fees were abolished, greater access to education hasn't occurred. Although you might think that it means a lot more disadvantaged students have had the opportunity to attend college, this isn't the reality. In fact, its main impact has been to increase the numbers of students attending private secondary schools, i.e. middle class parents spending the money they would have spent on their child's college education on something totally unnecessary, snobbish and class dividing.

Now I don't know if introducing fees is that good an idea, but it wasn't the godsend its made out to be and if they are reintroduced, it has nothing to do with government greed.

ongarite

I would be in favour for the re-introduction of fees. The third-level institutions needs serious investment to produce the type of graduate that this country needs for the future.

The "well-educated workforce" we need for the future is going to be different in the future and will need highly funded third-level institutions to churn out these people.

They aren't going to get the money from the government so fees are the only way they can compete on international scale.

cocoa

ergonomics wrote: »

I'm in my 4th of year of college and have roughly €12000 worth of debt. I can barely afford loan repayments and my credit rating is ruined, I would imagine. I have worked as much as I reasonably can since I started college and have never been without employment since I was about 16. Even through exams, and the Leaving, I have to work because I cannot afford to stay in college otherwise. My parent's can't afford to support me either. As a result of working so much my grades have suffered but I'm getting by. If I didn't have to work I'd imagine I'd do a lot better adacemically. I can only imagine how I'd be if I was trying to pay fees as well.

If fees were introduced and I was back in school I definitely wouldn't go to college. I'd be so afraid of getting so far in to the course only to become so broke that I'd have to drop out with no qualification and buckets load of debt. Graduates pay statistically more tax than non-graduates and this is how the Government earns back it's fees, although graduates have to continue paying higher tax even after their education is paid for. Despite this only a small percent on these taxes are used for 3rd level funding.

I'm sorry but I really can't understand how you could be in so much debt after 3 years. Your average running costs, including reg fee, rent, food etc. of one college student per year are between 7 and 8 grand, which puts your income at 4 grand a year or less? I seriously don't mean to attack you personally, I just don't understand how you could work up such a debt while having jobs since you were 16.

SimpleSam06

JC 2K3 wrote: »

1) It's university presidents that initially called for fees to be reintroduced, nothing to do with the government. Universities are simply not getting the funding they need with the current system in place.

Initially yes. Is it them calling for it now? Oh and heres a big surprise - publicly funded beaurocracy calls for more funding for publicly funded beaurocracy. Film at eleven.

JC 2K3 wrote: »

2) Since fees were abolished, greater access to education hasn't occurred. Although you might think that it means a lot more disadvantaged students have had the opportunity to attend college, this isn't the reality.

You're going to need to back that statement up if you want it to be given any credence. The fact of the matter is that opportunities were given to many, some of whom are posting on this thread, that they otherwise would never have had.

JC 2K3 wrote: »

it has nothing to do with government greed.

lol

ongarite wrote: »

I would be in favour for the re-introduction of fees. The third-level institutions needs serious investment to produce the type of graduate that this country needs for the future.

Yup, so cut the hell out of the many other crufty public sector sections and put it where its needed.

ongarite wrote: »

The "well-educated workforce" we need for the future is going to be different in the future and will need highly funded third-level institutions to churn out these people.

Talk about throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Who will attend your highly funded institutions if half the country is barred from entry by default?

ergonomics

cocoa wrote: »

I'm sorry but I really can't understand how you could be in so much debt after 3 years. Your average running costs, including reg fee, rent, food etc. of one college student per year are between 7 and 8 grand, which puts your income at 4 grand a year or less? I seriously don't mean to attack you personally, I just don't understand how you could work up such a debt while having jobs since you were 16.

I'd really rather not get into the ins and outs of my debt on a public forum. Suffice to say my parents have NEVER given me a single cent towards college. Any money they gave me has to be paid back. I also work for minimum wage, earning about €100 a week. It's very easy to get that much debt and most people I know are in a similar position.

Bottle_of_Smoke

If they have a finance system whereby you repay the loans when you're earning a certain amount after graduation(like in the UK) then absoloutely everyone should have to pay fees.

cocoa

ergonomics wrote: »

I'd really rather not get into the ins and outs of my debt on a public forum. Suffice to say my parents have NEVER given me a single cent towards college. Any money they gave me has to be paid back. I also work for minimum wage, earning about €100 a week. It's very easy to get that much debt and most people I know are in a similar position.

fair enough. That's one area where the system makes no sense. Even though you're recognised as an adult and have no other ties to your parents, it's assumed they'll pay for your education and rent etc while in college, so there could, hypothetically, be a person on grants, getting money from their parents who is way way better off than someone who did not qualify for a grant and receives no money from their parents.

Prof.Badass

Education shouldn't be a economic commodity. The number of people going to college will drop, just like it did in the uk. Our economy is dependant on our highly skilled workers, it's one of the very few things we've got going for us. Especially now, with everything else going on it would not be wise in the long-run.

btw if this goes ahead prepare for a lot of protests. We'll need a month of solid rioting to get it repealed (just like that other thing in france):D

get your glass smashers ready (steal them from a bus)

NinjaTruncs

Igy wrote: »

I still think my idea would be workable:

1) 'Charge' people fees
2) Interest free loans for all
3) Cancel the loan completely when the person graduates

Has the advantage of recouping money from the droppout brigade (whom i found to represent >50% of people that start college based on the 2 courses I did), but keeps it nice and free for the people who graduate (who provide extra knowledge to the economy, hence the reason it's free at the moment anyways)

I think this is a very good idea. When i was in college more than half the class had dropped out by christmas of first year, and many of the drop outs weren't lower class people who couldn't afford to pay for fees, they were middle class who just couldn't be arsed going to class.

IronMan

I'd be in favour of re-introducing fees. The finest universities in the world are in the states, where there is fees.
This allows them to do ground-breaking research, hire the finest scholars and academics, and offer a full bursary of scholarships for those from disadvantaged areas.

In Ireland we have a system where every Tom, Dick and Harry aspires to college, they faff around for 6 months and drop out at Christmas. Our colleges are producing graduates that do not compare to those from other countries. This is because of lack of government funding, and this crazy notion of free third level education, a form of socialism for the rich.

Having to pay fees, by taking out a loan also introduces financial repsonsibility, a greater apprecaition of what you are working towards in life, and a path to genuinely better yourself, rather than pissing about to scrape a pass Arts degree after four years of college funded drinking.

Tawny

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

If they have a finance system whereby you repay the loans when you're earning a certain amount after graduation(like in the UK) then absoloutely everyone should have to pay fees.

Yeah but....

Through the Uk system, well before I am able to afford a house I will be paying back my loan, so that house will have to wait even longer.

And I will be well past the menopause before I can even think about affording children. Do we get free IVF treatment here?

And then sure I'll be drawing my pension (state - I can't save for a private fund as all my money will be spent paying of my loan) by the time my artifically conceived kids may want to go to college, so then they will have loans too....

SV

I wish there was fees, at least then I would have some form of incentive to actually finish.

getfit

IronMan wrote: »

I'd be in favour of re-introducing fees. The finest universities in the world are in the states, where there is fees.
This allows them to do ground-breaking research, hire the finest scholars and academics, and offer a full bursary of scholarships for those from disadvantaged areas.

In Ireland we have a system where every Tom, Dick and Harry aspires to college, they faff around for 6 months and drop out at Christmas. Our colleges are producing graduates that do not compare to those from other countries. This is because of lack of government funding, and this crazy notion of free third level education, a form of socialism for the rich.

Having to pay fees, by taking out a loan also introduces financial repsonsibility, a greater apprecaition of what you are working towards in life, and a path to genuinely better yourself, rather than pissing about to scrape a pass Arts degree after four years of college funded drinking.

Ok - so we want a system like America where the biggest bank balance guarantees a University place and most graduates end up with debt of tens of thousands - many with debts of over 100k....
Also, our system allows every Tom Dick and Harry aspire to College - horrific, disgraceful, the shame of it.... How dare College seem open to everyone!!!!!

Yes people drop out and take the piss for 6 months and if they choose to go back to College or repeat the year they must pay the fees themselves for the time they wasted.... Yes the Govt money can be wasted fue to drop outs who never go back, but that's business.... Not all a companies investments pay off - same for the Irish Govt investing in educating it's people!!!

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

it's not the irish government investing in people, it's other peoples parents paying for you to go to college. How is it fair that someone with no children, or children not going into college should have to pay a large portion of their earnings into tax so that you can go to university?

getfit

MistressMord wrote: »

it's not the irish government investing in people, it's other peoples parents paying for you to go to college. How is it fair that someone with no children, or children not going into college should have to pay a large portion of their earnings into tax so that you can go to university?

An awful lot of everyones taxes go on things they or their family will not use....

stovelid

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

What income bracket are you talking about?

Well wealthy was probably incorrect, but how about families who earn a joint/total income of, say, 120k or more,(wasn't this ceiling recently suggested by the government?), pay fees? I'm sure families in this wage bracket (with 17 years advance warning) can put children through college with little trouble. If people in this income bracket still feel the pinch, perhaps they could squirrel away the 1900+ euro a year they get (for 19 years) for each child in children's allowance, despite their income.

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

You say this as though its a bad thing. However free fees were introduced, the overall effect to the country has been hugely positive.

Hugely positive for sections of the middle-class that are indebted up to their tits and want a way out of college fees, yes.

SimpleSam06 wrote: »

Inflicting fees on the middle class is a ruinous idea, since at any given time a family could be paying out thirty grand a year in tuition fees alone if they have three kids in at the same time.

Three students in college simultaneously is a genuine, but worst case scenario. Anyway, pre-1992/93?, I don't recall colleges closing down for lack of students when, like most other countries, fees had to be paid, despite the number of kids in the family.

I do agree, though, that children from poorer income backgrounds don't go to college for a variety of reasons, often not to do with the actual cost of university fees.

cocoa

stovelid wrote: »

Well wealthy was probably incorrect, but how about families who earn a joint/total income of, say, 120k or more,(wasn't this ceiling recently suggested by the government?), pay fees? I'm sure families in this wage bracket (with 17 years advance warning) can put children through college with little trouble. If people in this income bracket still feel the pinch, perhaps they could squirrel away the 1900+ euro a year they get (for 19 years) for each child in children's allowance, despite their income. .

You don't plan on introducing fees for another 17 years then? And again with the 'children'. The majority of people entering universities are adults, and viewed as such by the state. There is no onus on a parent to put an adult through college even if it is 'with little trouble'. Why not ask anyone in that wealth bracket to pay for adults to go through college? Sure it's no trouble to them...

stovelid

cocoa wrote: »

The majority of people entering universities are adults, and viewed as such by the state. ..

Pay your own fees so.

cocoa

stovelid wrote: »

Pay your own fees so.

grand so, fix your own economy.

PeakOutput

there is no problem with people who can afford it paying fees in college imo

i am a student and i know this isnt a popular opinion but whatever

what i dont trust is the government putting the threshholds high enough

the editor of our college paper did an article the other day in supposrt of the no fees campaign and basically argued that people earning 100K a year cannot afford to pay fees which i think is crap

there is a need for the government to save money at the moment and i think the upper class's are the people who should be covering this 'cost' if the government lay out their exact plans before implementing it and the threshold is no less than 100K then i would be in support of it otherwise im not going to risk them putting the thresholds the same as their ridicolous grant threshholds