The case for fees by a 3rd level student

spagboll

I would be in a favour of the full reintroduction of fees provided that every student was guaranteed a structured loan package if they secured any 3rd level place.



A special government run student bank, taking money from the national pension reserve fund, could be created. Graduates would pay back this loan upon reaching a certain income threshold if they secure long term employment, those who don't find work could make repayments via social welfare deductions and those that immigrate could face a yearly passport charges.

I argue that these changes would make 3rd level education more accessible to the poorest in our society. The current €2,000 "registration" fee restricts many from entering college. A less publicised problem is the financial difficulty that students face when wishing to pursue postgraduate study. The student bank could offer its facilities to post grads in the same way it would to under grads.
From first-hand experience I have seen some lecturers that are apathetic about teaching and some students that have no serious interest in their own education. If fees were reintroduced students would be compelled into tackling any weak aspects of their education, be it in themselves of their teaching staff.

The current full maintenance grant stands at €3,250 yet one academic year’s on-campus accommodation at UCD costs €5,026, this is blatantly a disgrace. If fees were reintroducing a serious increase in student grants could be afforded. Most students spend money quickly and frivolously, an increase in grants can be seen as a stimulus package of sorts.
While being no longer liable for paying fees, the government could still invest large capital into our colleges. The rest of the World would look on in awe as we keep churning out top class graduates in what is the biggest crisis in our history!

Ray Burkes Pension

spagboll wrote: »

A special government run student bank, taking money from the national pension reserve fund, could be created.

Follow the money in this idea.
Government > Bank
Bank > Students
Student > College

Think of all the administration and costs at each point.

The graduate tax system is more efficient.

Wolfe Tone

So, people will emigrate and you want to charge them for holding an Irish or EU passport, is that even legal?


Dont bring back fees, I dont want to be ridiculously indebted before I start to work, college costs enough as it is

spagboll

Ray Burkes Pension wrote: »

Follow the money in this idea.
Government > Bank
Bank > Students
Student > College

Think of all the administration and costs at each point.

The graduate tax system is more efficient.

You have a fair point, but thats essentially how it works anyway

Tax take > dept finance > dept education > college

The money taken from the NPRF would be a once off and the bank would generate revenue from repayments and then loan this out, cutting the government from the picture eventually.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

So, people will emigrate and you want to charge them for holding an Irish or EU passport, is that even legal?


Dont bring back fees, I dont want to be ridiculously indebted before I start to work, college costs enough as it is

The government could tax fresh air if they had a method of doing it

What you want and what is sustainable for the country are two different things Wolfe Tone

Ray Burkes Pension

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

So, people will emigrate and you want to charge them for holding an Irish or EU passport, is that even legal?


Dont bring back fees, I dont want to be ridiculously indebted before I start to work, college costs enough as it is

Costs enough for parents. At the moment most 18-20 year olds are still living it up on their parents money for 3 years. An awful lot of people are in college just for the sake of it, and are definitely not concentrating on getting an education. If instead the kids know that they are the ones that are going to pay off these fees at some point in the future, they will treat college differently.

RandolphEsq

I've been in college in UCD for 4 years and with each passing year I notice a steady decline in the quality of presentation of the modules, from lectures to the continuous assessment aspects. Cutbacks are being made left, right and centre, classes are too large, grades are manipulated to make the average appear to be a 'good' grade, the vast majority of students only do the bare minimum. Clearly the college is in dire need of funding.

spagboll

Ray Burkes Pension wrote: »

Costs enough for parents. At the moment most 18-20 year olds are still living it up on their parents money for 3 years. An awful lot of people are in college just for the sake of it, and are definitely not concentrating on getting an education. If instead the kids know that they are the ones that are going to pay off these fees at some point in the future, they will treat college differently.

Agreed

With the reintroduction of fees students will think more seriously about what they want from college

takun

Nice theory, full of holes.

spagboll wrote: »

Graduates would pay back this loan upon reaching a certain income threshold if they secure long term employment,

Where do you set the bar? There was a time where graduates were more or less guaranteed a truly high paying job. No more. A lot of graduate places pay relatively little, a lot of graduates are chasing intern positions which pay nothing.

spagboll wrote: »

those who don't find work could make repayments via social welfare
deductions

Not a runner - if students end up with loads of €20,000+ (and plus quite a bit in some cases), then paying it off from a social welfare payment is really not a reasonable expectation.

spagboll wrote: »

and those that immigrate could face a yearly passport charges.

If ever there was a measure designed to make people vow never to come back and bring the skills they gain while working abroad home with them, this is it. And I suspect the tenancy to emigrate would closely correlate with the amount of money owed - with poor consequences for the solvency of the lending bank.

spagboll wrote: »

I argue that these changes would make 3rd level education more accessible to the poorest in our society.

Really no. This just pushes the inequity further up the line. Now you have poorer students, from poorer families, leaving college with significantly larger debts than richer ones, whose families will have paid part (or even all) of their fees and college costs for them.

The less financially burdened are always going to have an advantage - and a significant one - in the labour market. So in effect you are disadvantaging the very people you want to repay money to the fund.

spagboll wrote: »

If fees were reintroduced students would be compelled into tackling any weak aspects of their education, be it in themselves of their teaching staff.
...

Most students spend money quickly and frivolously, an increase in grants can be seen as a stimulus package of sorts.

You are ascribing a high level of prudence to one part of the student population, and the opposite to another. Not sure it will break down neatly along those lines. From almost everything I've ever seen, the students who are most dependent on grants tend not to make up the majority of the ones who flitter their money away on happy hours.

spagboll wrote: »

The rest of the World would look on in awe as we keep churning out top class graduates in what is the biggest crisis in our history!

And then reap the benefit of our efforts by employing them when they emigrate, permanently, to avoid repaying their loans. And that's aside from the question of whether or not our graduates are uniformly top-class as it is.

Wolfe Tone

Ray Burkes Pension wrote: »

Costs enough for parents. At the moment most 18-20 year olds are still living it up on their parents money for 3 years. An awful lot of people are in college just for the sake of it, and are definitely not concentrating on getting an education. If instead the kids know that they are the ones that are going to pay off these fees at some point in the future, they will treat college differently.

Thats rubbish, I had to work real hard to get the points I needed and I am living off my savings, luckily I can stay for free with a relation near the college, books are madly expensive and Im struggling to get the money together for next years reg fee, my folks are both unemployed

Idbatterim

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0219/politics.html

12k in debt big deal! in the scheme of things and given what you are getting and the extra income you will earn over your lifetime with a 3rd level qualification, its nothing. Its not exactly the states where when they leave college they could be hundreds of thousands in debt, and when I was over there and spoke to college students they didnt bat an eye at the amount, as they knew it was a great investment! What is Gilmore's proposal? further cut welfare? public service pay and conditions? or higher PAYE, USC etc and make it even less worth while to work? the state now owns several banks, they could be told they have to lend to college directly, once the student complies with whatever criteria...

spagboll

Where do you set the bar? There was a time where graduates were more or less guaranteed a truly high paying job. No more. A lot of graduate places pay relatively little, a lot of graduates are chasing intern positions which pay nothing.

The level is set so that graduates don't pay when they are in these low paying jobs, that's the point of having such a level

Not a runner - if students end up with loads of €20,000+ (and plus quite a bit in some cases), then paying it off from a social welfare payment is really not a reasonable expectation.

In such cases small repayments could be taken based on the presumtion that the graduate is to remain on social welfare for life, ie worst case sceanario the loan is repaid similar to small morgage

If ever there was a measure designed to make people vow never to come back and bring the skills they gain while working abroad home with them, this is it.

With regard to passport charges, some will renounce their citizenship on securing a 2nd citizenship, this will be in very small numbers

Really no. This just pushes the inequity further up the line. Now you have poorer students, from poorer families, leaving college with significantly larger debts than richer ones, whose families will have paid part (or even all) of their fees and college costs for them.

To a poor student this plan allows for them to study any course in any college provided they secure a place, with a decent grant, their prospects on graduation will be good

The less financially burdened are always going to have an advantage - and a significant one - in the labour market. So in effect you are disadvantaging the very people you want to repay money to the fund.

To an extent this is true. But I'm sure you appreciate the state of our finances

You are ascribing a high level of prudence to one part of the student population, and the opposite to another. Not sure it will break down neatly along those lines. From almost everything I've ever seen, the students who are most dependent on grants tend not to make up the majority of the ones who flitter their money away on happy hours.

A well writen pedantic point, which likely shows your more interested in ripping apart anything that I say than having a discussion

And then reap the benefit of our efforts by employing them when they emigrate, permanently, to avoid repaying their loans.

Passport charges or similar mechanism


I don't have all the answers, but I do really think a system like what I have mentioned is the only way insure our education system improves in the coming years without excluded some people

Thanks for all your replies

Idbatterim

Thats bollocks, I had to work real hard to get the points I needed and I am living off my savings, luckily I can stay for free with a relation near the college, books are madly expensive and Im struggling to get the money together for next years reg fee, my folks are both unemployed

It certainly is not b****cks! It might not apply to you and alot of people, but I'd hazard a guess it applies to a sizeable percentage!

spagboll

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Thats bollocks, I had to work real hard to get the points I needed and I am living off my savings, luckily I can stay for free with a relation near the college, books are madly expensive and Im struggling to get the money together for next years reg fee, my folks are both unemployed

I don't think he was refering directly to you

Focus on the big issue, your opinion is actually very important in this conversation, you wholesale against fees like Labour and SF

Killer Pigeon

RandolphEsq wrote: »

I've been in college in UCD for 4 years and with each passing year I notice a steady decline in the quality of presentation of the modules, from lectures to the continuous assessment aspects. Cutbacks are being made left, right and centre, classes are too large, grades are manipulated to make the average appear to be a 'good' grade, the vast majority of students only do the bare minimum. Clearly the college is in dire need of funding.

Yeah, socialism, it's a nice idea but it destroys everything ...

... saying this I'm also in UCD atm, and I'd probably have to drop out if fees are reintroduced. I have 32 hours of lectures/labs/tutorials a week so it would be hard for me to work during the week and also keep up with study and assignments. That means I'll have to work all day weekend (if I'm lucky enough to find the work) and I'll be on the bare minimum wage due to lack of experience - that's not going to help pay off the fees. Let's suppose I take out a loan to pay for it all, fair enough I pay after I've graduated but what if there are no jobs in the country, then what - how do I pay off the loan? Oh and don't forget the $interest$.

I've heard stories about people in the US who can't afford to pay off hundreds of thousands of dollars worth in fees because they can't find employment.

How about if you want to start a family and take out a mortgage on a house a couple of years after you graduate? How are you supposed to pay for everything?

takun

spagboll wrote: »

A well writen pedantic point, which likely shows your more interested in ripping apart anything that I say than having a discussion

Actually I think it is a topic very worthy of discussion and which I am very interested in discussing.

I just don't think a loan system is the way to go. I did once and it does at first seem to have merits, but almost everything I've read about this issue tends to show that it does not produce the expected result - that is to say that the same inequities continue in systems which use a student loan mechanism and the demography of the student population changes little.

I didn't intend to be pedantic - I am sorry if you think a well-written point means that - perhaps it just means I am one of those top-quality graduates who have been churned out

spagboll

takun wrote: »

Actually I think it is a topic very worthy of discussion and which I am very interested in discussing.

I just don't think a loan system is the way to go. I did once and it does at first seem to have merits, but almost everything I've read about this issue tends to show that it does not produce the expected result - that is to say that the same inequities continue in systems which use a student loan mechanism and the demography of the student population changes little.

I didn't intend to be pedantic - I am sorry if you think a well-written point means that - perhaps it just means I am one of those top-quality graduates who have been churned out

dam your law degree

RandolphEsq

Killer Pigeon wrote: »

Yeah, socialism, it's a nice idea but it destroys everything ...

... saying this I'm also in UCD atm, and I'd probably have to drop out if fees are reintroduced. I have 32 hours of lectures/labs/tutorials a week so it would be hard for me to work during the week and also keep up with study and assignments. That means I'll have to work all day weekend (if I'm lucky enough to find the work) and I'll be on the bare minimum wage due to lack of experience - that's not going to help pay off the fees. Let's suppose I take out a loan to pay for it all, fair enough I pay after I've graduated but what if there are no jobs in the country, then what - how do I pay off the loan? Oh and don't forget the $interest$.

I've heard stories about people in the US who can't afford to pay off hundreds of thousands of dollars worth in fees because they can't find employment.

How about if you want to start a family and take out a mortgage on a house a couple of years after you graduate? How are you supposed to pay for everything?

Graduate tax. You pay when/if you can. Simple as