Is the student grant funding fair?

steddyeddy

Watching the frontline last night the issue was brought up about student funding. One of the points brought up is that some students might be getting the grant who dont really need it. One of the cases brought up by one of the local authorities was a student who had to be given the grant because "on paper" his parent's income was < 30,000 per annum, yet their parents had 250,000 plus in their back account.

As required of my personal input into this; I know students who're getting the grant yet should'nt be. It definatly happens. My personal view is that students who really need the grant shoul get and those and assests of the individuals should be looked at aswell.

With the students planning another (smaller than last years) protest on Monday this issue is going to increasingly featured in the media. What do people think about funding students in general. My view again would be reducing access to third level for lower socio economic groups potentially reduces overall quality of graduates (reducing the gene pool reduces the gene pool potential).

So guys what does everyone else think?

1ZRed

I know students who get the grant but have so much support from their parents they mostly piss and smoke it away, and I know a fair few student who really struggle to get through college and keep themselves going yet aren't entitled to any grant.

For the majority it really helps out and means they can get into 3rd level education, but I'm sick of people getting refused on the bases that 'on paper' you should be grand and don't need a grant, while never looking at other expenses or circumstances.

Fact of the matter is, it should be assessed and calls should be made for those who are deserving of them to get them, not some students that get it, don't work in college and drink and fuck it away. That doesn't help anyone out, and I think it's selfish when it means some people miss out.

steddyeddy

1ZRed wrote: »

I know students who get the grant but have so much support from their parents they mostly piss and smoke it away, and I know a fair few student who really struggle to get through college and keep themselves going yet aren't entitled to any grant.

For the majority it really helps out and means they can get into 3rd level education, but I'm sick of people getting refused on the bases that 'on paper' you should be grand and don't need a grant, while never looking at other expenses or circumstances.

Fact of the matter is, it should be assessed and calls should be made for those who are deserving of them to get them, not some students that get it, don't work in college and drink and fuck it away. That doesn't help anyone out, and I think it's selfish when it means some people miss out.

Indeed on paper my cousins were'nt entitled to the grant. They went to private school. Their father and aunt very hard and got a second mortage to send their kids through education (I think the stress contributed to my uncle's cancer and death) and their kids didnt get the grant. They had very little savings because all their income went towards their kid's education. Yet people who have large amounts of savings got the grant because they were income poor "on paper".

1ZRed

steddyeddy wrote: »

Indeed on paper my cousin's were'nt entitled to the grant. They went to private school. Their father and aunt very hard and got a second mortage to send their kids through education (I think the stress contributed to my uncle's cancer and death) and their kids didnt get the grant. They had very little savings because all their income went towards their kid's education. Yet people who have large amounts of savings got the grant because they were income poor "on paper".

It doesn't seem to make sense, and sad thing is it's worse it's getting in terms of grants offered and the competitiveness of them, and I'd say it'll be years before they even factor in other circumstances.

Sure why would they? That'd be too much effort and bother and wouldn't be "efficient" enough for who ever makes that call of who gets the grant, I'm sure.

J_E

I didn't get the grant last year despite my family not being in good circumstances and my parents ended up pouring all their savings into my first year of college and I lived a very meagre lifestyle. Couldn't afford to go back this year. Meanwhile I see people who I know can afford the full tuition fees, let alone living costs, and still get the grant. The system is definitely flawed.

Max Power

Maybe if students spent as much time looking for a part time job as they do whinging about the grant they would be better off.

LoonyLovegood

There's some people who don't deserve the grant, and there's some who do. I did go to private school, but my grandfather stayed working so that I could go. I'm sitting typing this on my lunch break in college. I'm not sure if I'll be able to afford to come back after Christmas unless I get this. I'm living off savings at the moment.

Then I see people who get ****loads of money off their parents and are on the grant and I want to punch them.

steddyeddy

FionnMcCool87 wrote: »

Maybe if students spent as much time looking for a part time job as they do whinging about the grant they would be better off.

A lot of them who dont get the grant (and a lot who do) do look for jobs. It's also important to balance working and study.

steddyeddy

CTYIgirl wrote: »

There's some people who don't deserve the grant, and there's some who do. I did go to private school, but my grandfather stayed working so that I could go. I'm sitting typing this on my lunch break in college. I'm not sure if I'll be able to afford to come back after Christmas unless I get this. I'm living off savings at the moment.

Then I see people who get ****loads of money off their parents and are on the grant and I want to punch them.

Those are the ones I'm talking about. They get rent paid for and drinking money yet get the grant. One student proudly proclaims she's "living off mammy and daddy's money" which would be grand if she wasnt getting the grant!

1ZRed

FionnMcCool87 wrote: »

Maybe if students spent as much time looking for a part time job as they do whinging about the grant they would be better off.

Yeah that's so true and easy to do if you're a student in a 35+ hours a week with a lot of work to get done as well as trying to have some sort of down time and a life of your own.

And even if you're not in college the job front is desperate, and you have to account for your area and the work available there.

I found it desperate to get work and nobody wanted me because I hadn't enough experience but how do you think I could ever get it?

My sister used to have that same "just get a job" attitude with me until her work became so stressful and the working conditions became so bad she tried to find herself another one. Even with a 1.1 degree and about 5 years experience she realised its much easier said then done and ate her words. She's still in the same job because she couldn't find another one.

That bullshit idea that students are whiny wasters is an unfounded joke.

Casillas

When in University I saw people really struggle to survive, whilst waiting for the grant.

Others just drank it all..

The system isn't fair and grants don't always go to those who need them.

Myself - student loan and part-time job, got me through. Try getting either of those these days.

I don't think savings or investment should be taken into account. These are long term things and not something parents should be expected to dip into. If their regular income falls under a certain threshold then their children should be entitled to the grant.

steddyeddy

1ZRed wrote: »

Yeah that's so true and easy to do if you're a student in a 35+ hours a week with a lot of work to get done as well as trying to have some sort of down time and a life of your own.

And even if you're not in college the job front is desperate, and you have to account for your area and the work available there.

I found it desperate to get work and nobody wanted me because I hadn't enough experience but how do you think I could ever get it?

My sister used to have that same "just get a job" attitude with me until her work became so stressful and the working conditions became so bad she tried to find herself another one. Even with a 1.1 degree and about 5 years experience she realised its much easier said then done and ate her words. She's still in the same job because she couldn't find another one.

That bullshit idea that students are whiny wasters is an unfounded joke.

Plus a thousand. My studies are far far tougher than and job I ever had.

Death and Taxes

FionnMcCool87 wrote: »

Maybe if students spent as much time looking for a part time job as they do whinging about the grant they would be better off.

Says one who clearly either didn't attend collge or didn't need the grant!:mad:

AnonoBoy

It would seem a lot of students take the student grant for granted.

gutenberg

The grant is definitely in need of reform, and I definitely wouldn't want to see it taken away from people who really need it.

I also think that postgraduate funding from the student grant system should be scrapped. I know it has been substantially reduced already, but I don't see how it's fair that people continue to be supported into postgraduate study, where everyone is liable for fees; a person may do ok without a grant for their undergraduate course, but be completely unable to undertake postgraduate studies because this is when tuition fees kick in. Supporting people at bachelors degree level should take absolute priority, as getting people into college is the first crucial step, and then a system of postgraduate funding should be put in place based on merit.

LoonyLovegood

steddyeddy wrote: »

Those are the ones I'm talking about. They get rent paid for and drinking money yet get the grant. One student proudly proclaims she's "living off mammy and daddy's money" which would be grand if she wasnt getting the grant!

I know a fair few like that and it's so annoying. I was hoping to go out for a friends birthday tonight. My laptop needed a repair so that's not going to happen. I hate people saying students should get a job, it's gotten to the stage where I walked into a shop yesterday and the woman just said "I'm really sorry, we've no work going." Didn't even need to open my mouth.

sfwcork

WhenI was in college I couldnt get a grant.Both partents were working,nothing special but my mother is a public sector nurse

I lived with a mate.His father was a farmer nd had machinery.He had just arned 20k from a film he done and was given a full grant of over 350 quid .And that was years ago when 350 quid got you alot further

Pigwidgeon

I'm paying full fees this year in college, I'm entitled to the grant, my family is well within the limit, I'm actually under the threshold for the special rate but as my mum is not receiving any social welfare payments, we're automatically disqualified from getting the special rate. I worked all summer, saving every cent I earned to try and pay my fees so that I wouldn't be a burden on my parents. I've continued working part time throughout college, working on average 30 hours a week to try and fund myself. If I end up getting the grant it would make an unbelievable difference to me, it would mean I could cut back my hours in work and be able to focus on college more.

I know so many people who just blow their grant money, and even brag about spending their cheques within a number of days/weeks, when I use mine to last me throughout the year. I was talking to a girl in my course yesterday who said she didn't want to get a job, she was happy doing work experience because if she had a job she'd have to start paying for things herself and giving money up at home. I couldn't believe her attitude. My response was I've been working since I was 16, and haven't taken a cent off my parents, I'd much prefer my independence and not to put the strain on my mum, I'm old enough now to contribute. She needs to get a serious reality check.

sfwcork

I think a big issue is that the grant goes straight into the students bank account

theyre is zero control of it. I think they should pay the accomdation direct to ensure its spent on wht it should be.

The government will complain that its 1 too many transaction though

sfwcork

Nice attitude Pigwidgeon

Its a pity that around 10-20% of student have your attitude

steddyeddy

Sloan Proud Mourner wrote: »

I don't think savings or investment should be taken into account. These are long term things and not something parents should be expected to dip into. If their regular income falls under a certain threshold then their children should be entitled to the grant.

I dont see how thats fair. I made sacrifices to get into college and so should parents. The fact issue parents with high savings are getting the grant for their children and on top of that some parents dip into their savings anyway to pay for their kid's rent, food and education. Some students are using their grant as a top up to use for drinking ect.

So students are availing of their parent's saving and still getting a grant so I see no reason that the savings shouldnt be taken into account.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

I dont see how thats fair. I made sacrifices to get into college and so should parents. The fact issue parents with high savings are getting the grant for their children and on top of that some parents dip into their savings anyway to pay for their kid's rent, food and education. Some students are using their grant as a top up to use for drinking ect.

So students are availing of their parent's saving and still getting a grant so I see no reason that the savings shouldnt be taken into account.

I disagree, they can chose to dip into them if they want to make life that bit more comfortable for their children but getting the grant means they don't have to dip in as much or at all possibly. Just because someone has savings doesn't make it fair they have to use them all up and then maybe not have them down the line when they need them.

By the way myself or my sisters never got a cent of a grant during our undergrad degrees. Our money came from a combination of summer jobs and money from parents so I'm not a person who got a grant.

steddyeddy

Sloan Proud Mourner wrote: »

I disagree, they can chose to dip into them if they want to make life that bit more comfortable for their children but getting the grant means they don't have to dip in as much or at all possibly. Just because someone has savings doesn't make it fair they have to use them all up and then maybe not have them down the line when they need them.

By the way myself or my sisters never got a cent of a grant during our undergrad degrees. Our money came from a combination of summer jobs and money from parents so I'm not a person who got a grant.

I'm not talking about people who's savings are in danger of running out. Rather those with savings of over 200,000 say.

awec

What's the grant supposed to be for?

Louthdrog

Was at a 21st Saturday night and a friend arrived to the table with €170 worth of shots. I later found out that his new found wealth was due the student grant coming through for him the day before.
Made me fairly angry. My family lies just above the line for the grant "on paper" but it has taken an almighty effort from my parents, my granny and myself to get me into my final year of college. A grant would go a seriously long way.
Also remember a girl in my class proudly boasting that her grant in first year was used to pay off the remainder of the loan on her brand new volkswagon golf. Something really needs to change about it all.

Boombastic

Sloan Proud Mourner wrote: »

I don't think savings or investment should be taken into account. These are long term things and not something parents should be expected to dip into. If their regular income falls under a certain threshold then their children should be entitled to the grant.

What are these parent saving for that's more important than ensuring their child gets a good education and can complete third level?


Another house??

robman60

I'm not in college yet, but from my brother's experience I know it's not fair.

Some students on grants had about €110 per week for "living" (drinking) expenses between mammy and the grant, while my brother was scraping by on about €35 a week. Not a chance we're grant applicable due to parent's income, nor do I believe we should be, but I also feel the majority of others on grants shouldn't be getting them.

It also sickens me to see people getting the grant and then boasting "I'd say I was in about 5 hours this week, too hungover" or whatever. I genuinely did hear this from a lad who went on to fail his first year exams unsurprisingly.

woodchuck

Having a student grant system is fair. OUR student grant system is not fair. Like everything else in this country it needs a complete overhaul.

GAAman

Cydoniac wrote: »

I didn't get the grant last year despite my family not being in good circumstances and my parents ended up pouring all their savings into my first year of college and I lived a very meagre lifestyle. Couldn't afford to go back this year. Meanwhile I see people who I know can afford the full tuition fees, let alone living costs, and still get the grant. The system is definitely flawed.

Very similar situation myself a few years ago, I had to get a local TD's help along with threats of legal action and going to the papers to get a paltry half award while people in far better circumstances handed the full amount :mad:

Lyaiera

Boombastic wrote: »

What are these parent saving for that's more important than ensuring their child gets a good education and can complete third level?

Their retirement? Or should people work until they're dead?

Anyway, why should parents be expected to pay for another adult's education? Society should pay for it, it's a benefit to us all. I don't see why someone's parents should be expected to pay for a college education. And a college education (or further education) is pretty much expected these days. Once you're 18 you're owed nothing by your parents (unless you're still in secondary school, I think.) Anything between a person and their parents at that stage is an agreement between adults, not between a carer and their responsibility.

Boombastic

Lyaiera wrote: »

...................
Anyway, why should parents be expected to pay for another adult's education? ..................

because they chose to have children and want the best outcome for their offspring?

Lyaiera

Boombastic wrote: »

because they chose to have children and want the best outcome for their offspring?

I suppose you expect them to buy you a house for your wedding too? :rolleyes:

Larianne

FionnMcCool87 wrote: »

Maybe if students spent as much time looking for a part time job as they do whinging about the grant they would be better off.

I think many students do look for part-time work. My university has job email that goes out every so often. I have applied for a few of them. I think though, being on a course with pretty much full time hours hinders you in getting a part time job in some cases. The jobs I applied for I had more than enough experience (I'm a mature student) yet I didn't get an interview.

sfwcork wrote: »

I think a big issue is that the grant goes straight into the students bank account

theyre is zero control of it. I think they should pay the accomdation direct to ensure its spent on wht it should be.

The government will complain that its 1 too many transaction though

I'd definitely be in favour of it been giving in voucher form or part voucher form, or some type of system. Two students I know who received grants ended up going on holidays to Jordan for Christmas and the other went travelling around India the following summer. These people DO NOT need grants. But they know how to work the system. That's the problem.

So to answer your question steddyeddy, no it's not fair. It needs a total reform.

Boombastic

Lyaiera wrote: »

I suppose you expect them to buy you a house for your wedding too? :rolleyes:

wtf??

steddyeddy

Boombastic wrote: »

wtf??

Can I come to you'r wedding Boombastic and maybe stay at you'r new house?

FionnMcCool87

I get a grant. I'd say I get €250 more than I need, but that's only because I think that if you're eligible for the grant you should be living frugally. I know one or two people who don't get it who I think should get it, and I know many, many, people who get it that just don't respect it or need it at all. In fact I know one person who gets a hell of a lot (special rate) while also being supported by her parents who are managing to live quite comfortably on benefits, and uses it to pay primarily for clothes, makeup and cocktails. You'd swear she was Paris Hilton the way she goes about with money. Then there's also people I know who, while I can see why they'd need their reg fees paid for them, I can't understand why they need the maintenance when they're able to live so comfortably. So the means testing definitely needs to be restructured from scratch.

FionnMcCool87 wrote: »

Maybe if students spent as much time looking for a part time job as they do whinging about the grant they would be better off.

This, however, is a pretty ignorant post. As I said, I think I should reasonably be getting €250 less than I do, but if I was getting €400 less I'd have to drop out. And I hold down a job where I work any hours I can get to fit around college. Sometimes that's 40+ hours a week, sometimes it's 5. I'm no Oliver Twist, I do live somewhat comfortably, but this "lazy students" thing is ridiculous. There are lazy people. Students are people. That doesn't mean all students are lazy.

Boombastic

steddyeddy wrote: »

Can I come to you'r wedding Boombastic and maybe stay at you'r new house?

It depends-will your parents pay for the drink?:D

Life is not fair that just the way it is.....No system is going to get it completely right the best you can hope for is that its the least un fair system.

Human natter being what it is people will always find ways around any system.

leaveiton

I get the grant, but I will honestly say that while it is a huge help to me, I definitely don't need it as much as some people who qualify for it, or indeed people who don't qualify for it.

It's definitely needed to help me pay the student contribution, but the amount I'm receiving in maintenance is quite high considering the fact that I live at home. I actually feel quite guilty getting so much when there are other students struggling to pay rent or buy food. Maybe some extra element of means testing based on the student could help combat this?

Don't get me wrong though, I'm very glad of the money that I get and I don't piss it away, I'm spending it on things like books, printing, the odd lunches, etc. My parents are well below the income limit and it would have been difficult to pay the €2250 student contribution without the grand. It wasn't a case of looking under the limit on paper when in reality we'd be well able to fund things or anything like that. It just seems unfair that I would get the same amount in maintenance as someone who lives away from home.

Chinasea

I think a student loan should be the way to go and you pay back if/when you get a job (with terms and conditions needless to say, but no sneekey ones).

UCDVet

Lyaiera wrote: »

Their retirement? Or should people work until they're dead?

Anyway, why should parents be expected to pay for another adult's education? Society should pay for it, it's a benefit to us all. I don't see why someone's parents should be expected to pay for a college education. And a college education (or further education) is pretty much expected these days. Once you're 18 you're owed nothing by your parents (unless you're still in secondary school, I think.) Anything between a person and their parents at that stage is an agreement between adults, not between a carer and their responsibility.

Maybe.

I'd argue that lots of education *doesn't* benefit anyone. Some programs of study, for some students, are a net loss for society. Why should we continue to fund them?

I'd also argue that education doesn't benefit everyone equally. I'm pretty sure a doctor or high earning business man benefits more from their education than the guy waiting tables at SuperMacs.

I don't see why the people who benefit most from an education (the students) shouldn't pay for it.

Shryke

UCDVet wrote: »

Maybe.

I'd argue that lots of education *doesn't* benefit anyone. Some programs of study, for some students, are a net loss for society. Why should we continue to fund them?

I'd also argue that education doesn't benefit everyone equally. I'm pretty sure a doctor or high earning business man benefits more from their education than the guy waiting tables at SuperMacs.

I don't see why the people who benefit most from an education (the students) shouldn't pay for it.

We fund all courses because we're a first world country not currently under the yoke of communism or any particularly abusive regime that doesn't allow freedom of choice. We fund them because everyone has a right to eduction and should have a right to eduction and it is in a persons own interest what they choose to do. Not having that choice would be horrible.
It's an idiot that picks random courses to approve and leaves the rest aside. Things change, there are many avenues in life and many worthwhile things to study. Life isn't about generating revenue and paying taxes. Society is a more complicated thing than the cartoon picture in your head.

If your goal in life is to pay as much tax as you can to the government rather than pursue your passion then good for you, if that's your measure of a person. Don't think of applying that idea to others.

Your example makes no sense. The doctor studied medicine. What are you saying is wrong with the guy in Supermacs? Did he do a degree or what? WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY? :pac:

"Net loss for society" followed by a "why should we". Dear God, on so many levels. I hope you're trolling.

steddyeddy

mariaalice wrote: »

Life is not fair that just the way it is.....No system is going to get it completely right the best you can hope for is that its the least un fair system.

Human natter being what it is people will always find ways around any system.

In other words "If it's broke dont try and fix it because other things are broke too".

UCDVet

Shryke wrote: »

We fund all courses because we're a first world country not currently under the yoke of communism or any particularly abusive regime that doesn't allow freedom of choice. We fund them because everyone has a right to eduction and should have a right to eduction and it is in a persons own interest what they choose to do. Not having that choice would be horrible.
It's an idiot that picks random courses to approve and leaves the rest aside. Things change, there are many avenues in life and many worthwhile things to study. Life isn't about generating revenue and paying taxes. Society is a more complicated thing than the cartoon picture in your head.

If your goal in life is to pay as much tax as you can to the government rather than pursue your passion then good for you, if that's your measure of a person. Don't think of applying that idea to others.

Your example makes no sense. The doctor studied medicine. What are you saying is wrong with the guy in Supermacs? Did he do a degree or what? WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY? :pac:

"Net loss for society" followed by a "why should we". Dear God, on so many levels. I hope you're trolling.

My post was directly in response to someone who said 'education benefits everyone' or something to that effect. You are claiming we fund education because 'everyone has a right to education'. That's an entirely different stance. It seems you and I both agree to disagree with the idea that 'Society should pay for it, it's a benefit to us all'.

Still, I'm trying to objectively measure the benefit to society....and I'm sorry, I can't find any need to train someone in some useless degree. As a taxpayer, I don't care about what someone enjoys. They can enjoy stuff on their own time.

We should be funding educational programs that our society needs. Kind of like how we stream-line the immigration process for outsiders who have qualifications Ireland is lacking. I mean, there's an entire list of jobs we have shortages in.

If people are claiming we pay for student's education to benefit society, you can hardly blame me for wanting it to, ya know, actually benefit society.

As for the Supermac's example - I'm saying the doctor benefited far more from the doctor's education than the guy working at Supermacs. Even if there is a benefit for society as a whole, some people experience that benefit more directly than others. Is it far that a rich doctor got his way paid through college by the tax dollars of the guy working at Supermacs?

And before you say, 'Well, the rich doctor will repay more in taxes' - that's not necessarily true. The doctor has no obligation to repay that debt. He may or may not. A doctor would have no trouble emigrating and enjoying the fruits of his high-priced education in other countries with lower tax rates.

steddyeddy

Boombastic wrote: »

It depends-will your parents pay for the drink?:D

Society should pay for our drink :P!

Shryke

UCDVet wrote: »

My post was directly in response to someone who said 'education benefits everyone' or something to that effect. You are claiming we fund education because 'everyone has a right to education'. That's an entirely different stance. It seems you and I both agree to disagree with the idea that 'Society should pay for it, it's a benefit to us all'.

Still, I'm trying to objectively measure the benefit to society....and I'm sorry, I can't find any need to train someone in some useless degree. As a taxpayer, I don't care about what someone enjoys. They can enjoy stuff on their own time.

We should be funding educational programs that our society needs. Kind of like how we stream-line the immigration process for outsiders who have qualifications Ireland is lacking. I mean, there's an entire list of jobs we have shortages in.

If people are claiming we pay for student's education to benefit society, you can hardly blame me for wanting it to, ya know, actually benefit society.

As for the Supermac's example - I'm saying the doctor benefited far more from the doctor's education than the guy working at Supermacs. Even if there is a benefit for society as a whole, some people experience that benefit more directly than others. Is it far that a rich doctor got his way paid through college by the tax dollars of the guy working at Supermacs?

And before you say, 'Well, the rich doctor will repay more in taxes' - that's not necessarily true. The doctor has no obligation to repay that debt. He may or may not. A doctor would have no trouble emigrating and enjoying the fruits of his high-priced education in other countries with lower tax rates.

Tax dollars? Are you in Ireland friend or are you living in America? If you're state side you can keep your opinions to yourself. If you're in Ireland I'm going to assume you've watched way too many films and don't understand things too well.

You don't stream line what is essential because you can't define essential in a first world country. It's not up to you. Art and design are important. Literature is important. Science and engineering are important. Everything has its own merit.

You're tax dollars (again, Dear God) go to fund all sorts, not just education. It's one area that should be entirely funded. I'm going to take it from this ineptitude that you've never had the thrill of looking at the Irish budget or followed any news stories about the economy and spending in the last.... ah, just for your whole life.

Education lifts up society as a whole and furthers society as a whole, from individual to individual. You're being an idiot because you don't see any value of education to society. You say value to society and all you mean is taxes. You have no concept of how education betters individuals and betters humanity, and that makes me sadface. See. I sadfaced.

And your example is still nonsensical to me. The guy in Supermacs didn't go to college? He could have if he wanted to though? Or did the doctor guy steal his place and have a gypsy curse him to work in Supermacs forever?
The doctor pays plenty of taxes. The guy in Supermacs barely pays any. He doesn't fund one ministers bender in the Dail Bar in a year, let alone educating a Doctor.
Did the guy in Supermacs drop out of college or...

Ficheall

Shryke wrote: »

It's one area that should be entirely funded.

Why?

Shryke wrote: »

Education lifts up society as a whole and furthers society as a whole, from individual to individual. You're being an idiot because you don't see any value of education to society. You say value to society and all you mean is taxes. You have no concept of how education betters individuals and betters humanity, and that makes me sadface. See. I sadfaced.

There is quite a difference between "attending college" and "being educated".

Cian92

The grant system could definitely do with an overhaul. Every year when the grants come through I'm always asked to go out clubing...

I never got a grant and I never will. So I got a job working at least 48 hours a week during the summer and 16 during college. I live in Cork and because of my inability to receive a grant and having to pay high fees my choice of university was restricted to somewhere within commuting distance.

Out of my part time job I finance my college fees, my car (to get to and from college/work) and any other expenses I have.

I have a friend in college who never had a job but can live much more luxuriously than me as he receives a grant and lives at home. :mad:

I know of another family who receive the grant and were able to send both of their sons to Dublin (from Cork) for university. Where is the fairness in this? I don't qualify for a grant, have to pay fees and stay close to home :mad:

I spend my days toiling away juggling work and college trying to pay my way, and then you have lucky Larry getting everything paid for by the taxpayer with more time to study as he doesn't spend his time working.

We have the government paying people grants to do crazy courses, such as folklore and philosphy. It is madness.

In my opinion grants should not be paid as people should finance themselves with part time jobs. However, depending on parents income, savings and number of children attending 3rd level the registration fee should be waived or reduced.

Shryke

Ficheall wrote: »

Why?

Why not? Or do you want to weigh in with an opinion that I can respond to.

Education drives us all forward. It pulls us out of mud huts and puts us in skyscrapers. It's integral to society.
...It's in a lot of ways down to how you think the state should function.

Entirely is moreish. Properly funded, and take that how you like it.

Ficheall wrote: »

There is quite a difference between "attending college" and "being educated".

There is, but that's a pedantic road to go down. The experience of college as well as the education you get etc. You want to split hairs on how different aspects can be beneficial and how beneficial and do a whole smorgasbord of wishy washy pros and cons? I don't. Are you disagreeing with the brunt of what I'm saying, and how would you lay it out if you are?

randylonghorn

FionnMcCool87 wrote: »

Maybe if students spent as much time looking for a part time job as they do whinging about the grant they would be better off.

Do / did you have a part-time job in college, Fionn?

1ZRed wrote: »

That bullshit idea that students are whiny wasters is an unfounded joke.

Unfortunately, a small minority are, and because they're louder / more obvious, they tend to give the rest a bad name.

gutenberg wrote: »

I also think that postgraduate funding from the student grant system should be scrapped. I know it has been substantially reduced already, but I don't see how it's fair that people continue to be supported into postgraduate study, where everyone is liable for fees; a person may do ok without a grant for their undergraduate course, but be completely unable to undertake postgraduate studies because this is when tuition fees kick in. Supporting people at bachelors degree level should take absolute priority, as getting people into college is the first crucial step, and then a system of postgraduate funding should be put in place based on merit.

I see your argument, gutenberg, but bear in mind that the same government which has cut postgraduate funding regularly mouths pious and empty platitudes about the "knowledge economy" and how essential it is that we increase our output of people educated to postgraduate level, indeed, preferably to doctoral level.