|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 26, 2018 7:36:01 GMT
You are truly confused. What you answered is how you hope to raise the cash to nationalise the railways. Raising cash is not the same as generating wealth. A distinction you seem unaware of. Taxation is not wealth creation. Actually, used badly, it destroys wealth creation. Dumbo is as dumbo does. You're being a pedantic twat, it was fairly clear the point I was making. It is fairly easy to create enough revenue (if you want to be exact) through a proper redistribution of wealth using the taxation system. I get you don't want to do it but it's fairly easy to do if you have the will. Keep reading the Daily Mail though for your information on the evils of the redistribution of wealth. It's not pedantry though. It shows you are economically illiterate. No surprise there.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 7:40:15 GMT
You're being a pedantic twat, it was fairly clear the point I was making. It is fairly easy to create enough revenue (if you want to be exact) through a proper redistribution of wealth using the taxation system. I get you don't want to do it but it's fairly easy to do if you have the will. Keep reading the Daily Mail though for your information on the evils of the redistribution of wealth. It's not pedantry though. It shows you are economically illiterate. No surprise there. I better sue Nottingham University for giving me my Economics Degree then I suppose. You daft twat.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 26, 2018 7:47:58 GMT
It's not pedantry though. It shows you are economically illiterate. No surprise there. I better sue Nottingham University for giving me my Economics Degree then I suppose. You daft twat. I think the nation should sue them. What a waste of (tax payers) money.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 7:49:06 GMT
I better sue Nottingham University for giving me my Economics Degree then I suppose. You daft twat. I think the nation should sue them. What a waste of (tax payers) money. The bitterness of the university of life
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 26, 2018 7:54:03 GMT
I think the nation should sue them. What a waste of (tax payers) money. The bitterness of the university of life Tax funded extended childhood for the middle and upper classes.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 8:03:02 GMT
The bitterness of the university of life Tax funded extended childhood for the middle and upper classes. Education is a gift from one generation to another. Scrap all tuition fees now!
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 26, 2018 8:13:33 GMT
Tax funded extended childhood for the middle and upper classes. Education is a gift from one generation to another. Scrap all tuition fees now! Higher education is a gift from the working class tax player to the middle and upper classes.
|
|
|
Post by Rick Grimes on Aug 26, 2018 8:16:00 GMT
You are truly confused. What you answered is how you hope to raise the cash to nationalise the railways. Raising cash is not the same as generating wealth. A distinction you seem unaware of. Taxation is not wealth creation. Actually, used badly, it destroys wealth creation. Dumbo is as dumbo does. You're being a pedantic twat, it was fairly clear the point I was making. It is fairly easy to create enough revenue (if you want to be exact) through a proper redistribution of wealth using the taxation system. I get you don't want to do it but it's fairly easy to do if you have the will. Keep reading the Daily Mail though for your information on the evils of the redistribution of wealth. I actually agree with you that the tax avoidance loopholes need closing. Still don’t agree with the nationalisation of railways though, it’s probably the worst example you could have chosen to make your point. At the moment the NHS is struggling massively so surely any extra revenue generated by closing tax avoidance loopholes should go towards the NHS or other essentials like education.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 8:16:12 GMT
Education is a gift from one generation to another. Scrap all tuition fees now! Higher education is a gift from the working class tax player to the middle and upper classes. There is a price to pay but it's a price worth paying for the equality of opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 8:20:35 GMT
You're being a pedantic twat, it was fairly clear the point I was making. It is fairly easy to create enough revenue (if you want to be exact) through a proper redistribution of wealth using the taxation system. I get you don't want to do it but it's fairly easy to do if you have the will. Keep reading the Daily Mail though for your information on the evils of the redistribution of wealth. I actually agree with you that the tax avoidance loopholes need closing. Still don’t agree with the nationalisation of railways though, it’s probably the worst example you could have chosen to make your point. At the moment the NHS is struggling massively so surely any extra revenue generated by closing tax avoidance loopholes should go towards the NHS or other essentials like education. The British Railways are the gold standard example of how the private sector can completely fail the consumer. They are the laughing stock of the world.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 26, 2018 8:27:37 GMT
Higher education is a gift from the working class tax player to the middle and upper classes. There is a price to pay but it's a price worth paying for the equality of opportunity. Equality of opportunity is essential in society. But how that is achieved is the tough bit. Free tuition fees sounds a great idea but in practice is a poor one as can be seen in Scotland where there are no tuition fees. There are less working class people in tertiary education here than in England where there are tuition fees. Free tuition fees are simply propagating class differentials. Better, frankly, to do things differently. First direct money away from universities into pre-school and primary education. Second, cut back university places massively and have than as centres for excellence (with appropriate "social" funding available). Third invest massively in technical, vocational training institutions. Sound bite politics are shit.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 8:41:46 GMT
There is a price to pay but it's a price worth paying for the equality of opportunity. Equality of opportunity is essential in society. But how that is achieved is the tough bit. Free tuition fees sounds a great idea but in practice is a poor one as can be seen in Scotland where there are no tuition fees. There are less working class people in tertiary education here than in England where there are tuition fees. Free tuition fees are simply propagating class differentials. Better, frankly, to do things differently. First direct money away from universities into pre-school and primary education. Second, cut back university places massively and have than as centres for excellence (with appropriate "social" funding available). Third invest massively in technical, vocational training institutions. Sound bite politics are shit. Couldn't agree more about diverting funding into vocational training, it has been a blind spot of successive Government's for decades, however whilst what you are suggesting has some merit that will leave Universities as the preserve of the mega rich and the influential. Pretty much what Oxbridge is today despite them letting in the odd troll from the north here and there. The only way to create equality of opportunity is to make it free. It has its drawbacks but it really is the only way.
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Aug 26, 2018 8:56:49 GMT
Maybe we could try another approach - like they do in Germany or Sweden for example. The US isn't the only example. The thing is - if the NHS was any good, other countries would have copied it. But none, nada, zero have. That should tell you something. It's become a pseudo-religion in this country whereas in fact it is a croc of shite. We all deserve better. Much better. Without turning this thread into just about the NHS. I've had the misfortune to make use of this service this year and the Royal Stoke Hospital is fucking shite. They are in my mind without a shadow of a doubt killing people there due to the absolute lack of anything approaching health care. Without going into all of the unbelievable things I saw/heard, the worst was one doctor complaining to another how they had left 1 child waiting for 4 hours in reception with suspected meningitis! And plenty of fools pretend it's the envy of the world. Laughable if it wasn't so serious. Sorry to hear of your experience B.B. Reading other posts I come to the conclusion that, like most social services (i don’t just mean the traditional social services but include NHS) are a complete post code lottery. Down here in Devon health care is relatively good, ok there are waiting lists, but the care you receive is first class, My wife has been aType 1 hereditary diabetic for 45 yers and she gets care second to none. I’ve had a hip replacement and await the other in the near future confident that I will get very good care both pre and post operation. Our health centre can give you an appointment on the day you phone if it’s urgent and you rarely have to wait more than a week to see the doctor of your choice. Have no complaints whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 26, 2018 9:02:16 GMT
Equality of opportunity is essential in society. But how that is achieved is the tough bit. Free tuition fees sounds a great idea but in practice is a poor one as can be seen in Scotland where there are no tuition fees. There are less working class people in tertiary education here than in England where there are tuition fees. Free tuition fees are simply propagating class differentials. Better, frankly, to do things differently. First direct money away from universities into pre-school and primary education. Second, cut back university places massively and have than as centres for excellence (with appropriate "social" funding available). Third invest massively in technical, vocational training institutions. Sound bite politics are shit. Couldn't agree more about diverting funding into vocational training, it has been a blind spot of successive Government's for decades, however whilst what you are suggesting has some merit that will leave Universities as the preserve of the mega rich and the influential. Pretty much what Oxbridge is today despite them letting in the odd troll from the north here and there. The only way to create equality of opportunity is to make it free. It has its drawbacks but it really is the only way. You are highlighting a fundamental philosophical debate in the welfare state that is not about party politics or right v left. It's about whether welfare should be universal or targeted. I'm generally in favour of the latter, but well aware of its limitations. As far as higher education goes, no public money of any form should go to private education meaning, for example, remove charity status from the feeder public schools. Universities should be licensed part of which is an obligation to support diversity. Along with the other stuff I mentioned, over time, we will see a significant improvement.
|
|
|
Post by Rick Grimes on Aug 26, 2018 9:09:05 GMT
I actually agree with you that the tax avoidance loopholes need closing. Still don’t agree with the nationalisation of railways though, it’s probably the worst example you could have chosen to make your point. At the moment the NHS is struggling massively so surely any extra revenue generated by closing tax avoidance loopholes should go towards the NHS or other essentials like education. The British Railways are the gold standard example of how the private sector can completely fail the consumer. They are the laughing stock of the world. We’re struggling with getting essentials like the NHS right at the moment. Using taxpayers money to re-nationalise the railways would be a complete waste. There are many taxpayers that don’t even use trains.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 9:36:28 GMT
Couldn't agree more about diverting funding into vocational training, it has been a blind spot of successive Government's for decades, however whilst what you are suggesting has some merit that will leave Universities as the preserve of the mega rich and the influential. Pretty much what Oxbridge is today despite them letting in the odd troll from the north here and there. The only way to create equality of opportunity is to make it free. It has its drawbacks but it really is the only way. You are highlighting a fundamental philosophical debate in the welfare state that is not about party politics or right v left. It has become political (and Political) though hasn't it? When unregulated, unchecked greed in the financial system caused the biggest depression in a generation what happened? Was the financial system reformed and those responsible punished? Nope. The chance to impose the Political policy of austerity was eagerly seized by those who had been patiently waiting. The poorest in society were targetted to pay for the mistakes of the wealthiest, which begat the sickening concept of poverty porn. Lets all laugh at the poor probably mentally ill woman on benefits street. She's the real problem. That is Capitalism in practice.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Aug 26, 2018 9:52:08 GMT
You are highlighting a fundamental philosophical debate in the welfare state that is not about party politics or right v left. It has become political (and Political) though hasn't it? When unregulated, unchecked greed in the financial system caused the biggest depression in a generation what happened? Was the financial system reformed and those responsible punished? Nope. The chance to impose the Political policy of austerity was eagerly seized by those who had been patiently waiting. The poorest in society were targetted to pay for the mistakes of the wealthiest, which begat the sickening concept of poverty porn. Lets all laugh at the poor probably mentally ill woman on benefits street. She's the real problem. That is Capitalism in practice. That argument is too simplistic and prejudiced. It's the rationale of a petulant child. Capitalism has its faults - massive ones. But the problems you highlight become even worse under socialism and its accompanying self satisfying, moralising, grandstanding policies not to mention its vacuous economic thinking. It's a shame, IMO, that the promise of New Labour collapsed beneath the weight of Gordon Brown's hubris. Instead we are left with the perenial incompetence of the Tories and the ineptness of Labour under Corbyn and his cronies. Sadly, in Scotland, the SNP who seemed to have (generally) found a way to govern effectively have now lost their way. We deserve better - but I won't hold my breath.
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Aug 26, 2018 10:00:14 GMT
Equality of opportunity is essential in society. But how that is achieved is the tough bit. Free tuition fees sounds a great idea but in practice is a poor one as can be seen in Scotland where there are no tuition fees. There are less working class people in tertiary education here than in England where there are tuition fees. Free tuition fees are simply propagating class differentials. Better, frankly, to do things differently. First direct money away from universities into pre-school and primary education. Second, cut back university places massively and have than as centres for excellence (with appropriate "social" funding available). Third invest massively in technical, vocational training institutions. Sound bite politics are shit. Couldn't agree more about diverting funding into vocational training, it has been a blind spot of successive Government's for decades, however whilst what you are suggesting has some merit that will leave Universities as the preserve of the mega rich and the influential. Pretty much what Oxbridge is today despite them letting in the odd troll from the north here and there. The only way to create equality of opportunity is to make it free. It has its drawbacks but it really is the only way. I would disagree that it has been a blind spot of successive governments on vocational education under the Dearing report the Blair government expanded the vocational element of education increasing the amount of courses and meeting the standards of industry, opening up education to a lot of poorer students that had educational barriers in there way what was one of the first things the Tories did was to tear these courses up and implement an exam system that benefitted the richer people that could afford extra tuition from an early age pulling up the drawbridge on poorer family students going to university and hence reducing talented students going to university and to this the rise in tuition fees as a determent to poorer family's going (fear of massive debt) and you have a system of education that excludes a proportion of the population. You have a system of education that rewards the ability of a student to recall education on a single day or moment of time and does not accurately allow students to demonstrate there knowledge and understanding over a large period of time. And before some say on here vocational education is easy I'd like you to look or do what the students have or had to submit to achieve a pass far more rigorous than a traditional "o" level or gcse these courses also encouraged and promoted independent thinking and study the basic skills a company needs of employees.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 10:00:55 GMT
It has become political (and Political) though hasn't it? When unregulated, unchecked greed in the financial system caused the biggest depression in a generation what happened? Was the financial system reformed and those responsible punished? Nope. The chance to impose the Political policy of austerity was eagerly seized by those who had been patiently waiting. The poorest in society were targetted to pay for the mistakes of the wealthiest, which begat the sickening concept of poverty porn. Lets all laugh at the poor probably mentally ill woman on benefits street. She's the real problem. That is Capitalism in practice. That argument is too simplistic and prejudiced. It's the rationale of a petulant child. Capitalism has its faults - massive ones. But the problems you highlight become even worse under socialism and its accompanying self satisfying, moralising, grandstanding policies not to mention its vacuous economic thinking. It's a shame, IMO, that the promise of New Labour collapsed beneath the weight of Gordon Brown's hubris. Instead we are left with the perenial incompetence of the Tories and the ineptness of Labour under Corbyn and his cronies. Sadly, in Scotland, the SNP who seemed to have (generally) found a way to govern effectively have now lost their way. We deserve better - but I won't hold my breath. There's nothing simplistic or petulant about it at all. That IS what happened.
|
|
|
Post by santy on Aug 26, 2018 10:02:40 GMT
I'm of the belief that privatisation of national infrastructure is a horrible mistake. It should be public run, but there should be a degree of common sense and on the whole it should be run at surplus. Then you sort them into two groups - those that cannot be run at a profit because they are essential (so the military, the NHS) and those that must be run at a profit to help provide for their own future investment (railway, roads, electricity etc). It still would have support from the general taxation, but wouldn't it be a wonderful world to live in where railway capacity needs increasing and the rail network has enough money of its own to fund it without having to sacrifice elsewhere? Some people claim its very socialist in its approach, to me it just seems fairly common sense.
It's utterly bizarre that we have the current set-up where national infrastructure is constructed in conjunction with groups that charge exorbitant amounts and get guaranteed revenues going forward, and then also provide the service and charge on top of that - but often run it in such a way that the profits are minimal and the subsequent taxation is a fraction of what it could otherwise be. Licensing fees for brand names, the purchase of items from other parts of the business that are based in other countries etc.
Wishful thinking on my behalf, but I'm always surprised this has never been the case, of course the power of unions would have to be somewhat diluted because ultimately on a broad stroke level unions are cunts. The general belief would be that any profits generated they would be entitled to and are probably the ultimate example of short-term thinking.
Ultimately we need a balance of socialist and capitalist values. The reason is because the end game of either is unsustainable. Socialism doesn't always have to end up like Venezuela, but it does always have the susceptible risk of an elite class that the society serves forming. Funnily enough, we've veered pretty close to the capitalist end game too. Where there's an elite class that society serves. In socialism its political and military power. In capitalism its wealth.
Socialism and Capitalism are built on the same premise, the masses give everything to be hoarded by the few. The real reason socialism gets such a bad rep is because a) cold war propaganda and b) not enough other nations to provide a support frame.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 10:27:30 GMT
Going back to the railways, it staggers me that it is seen as sensible economics to effectively export you rail manufacturing jobs abroad!
The socialist policy of shaking up public sector buying rules to bring in "a default position of facilitating British procurement, including steel, whenever possible" would seem eminently sensible?
|
|
|
Post by lawrieleslie on Aug 26, 2018 11:12:45 GMT
Couldn't agree more about diverting funding into vocational training, it has been a blind spot of successive Government's for decades, however whilst what you are suggesting has some merit that will leave Universities as the preserve of the mega rich and the influential. Pretty much what Oxbridge is today despite them letting in the odd troll from the north here and there. The only way to create equality of opportunity is to make it free. It has its drawbacks but it really is the only way. You are highlighting a fundamental philosophical debate in the welfare state that is not about party politics or right v left. It's about whether welfare should be universal or targeted. I'm generally in favour of the latter, but well aware of its limitations. As far as higher education goes, no public money of any form should go to private education meaning, for example, remove charity status from the feeder public schools. Universities should be licensed part of which is an obligation to support diversity. Along with the other stuff I mentioned, over time, we will see a significant improvement. Vocational training does work for sure. I spent 9 years before retiring teaching vocational 6th formers and getting them placed into meaningful vocational training providers. Obout 25% of our 6th Form was made up of these students or roughly 50-60 a year. There is such a shortage of building trade skillls and engineering skills and student were becoming savvy in spotting these to enroll on the courses. Our school provided training in many vocational areas from hairdressing, health and social care, automotive and even beauty therapy. It works because now that students have to stay in education or training until 18 it gives massive opportunity to those less academic with no wish to go to university. The vocational qualifications are now being given degree status with the introduction of degree apprenticeships which allows students to undertake higher level training without having to go to university. This is the way ahead and, imo, university degrees should be free for those undertaking courses that contribute to U.K. PLC. By that I mean medical, teaching, engineers, science etc. Those courses that give students a degree in meaningless subjects should be paid for.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2018 12:44:11 GMT
Higher education is exactly what took my parents from working class to middle class.
Something so fundamental as making sure the population aren't thick as fuck is possibly the most important thing there is. Of course some governments/politicians such as Trump prefer their public to be thick and easily led.
You only have to look at the rise of things like 'anti-vax', flat earth, climate change denial and the most idiotic quote ever to be uttered in 'I think we've had quite enough of experts', to see that the world is in desperate need of a bit of education.
My personal view is that a graduate tax of a few percent over 30k a year is more than enough to be reasonable.
As a slightly different point, but still vaguely on education, far too many in government have no knowledge of the field they are in. Those in secretary of state positions should at the minimum have 10 years experience directly involved in the relevant field.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Aug 26, 2018 14:28:31 GMT
You generate wealth by taxing things correctly Take Amazon, they more than halved its declared UK corporation tax bill from £15.8m to £7.4m year-on-year in 2016. 'The cut came despite turnover at the UK business, which handles the packing and delivery of parcels and functions such as customer service, rising from £946m to £1.46bn'. Corporate tax avoidance is widespread and cost economies billions and ultimately it is the poor that feel the brunt. Capitalism truly does work for the few not the many You pay corporarion tax on profits not sales, amazon model is high volume low margins. Socialism always wanting someone else to pay for free unicorns.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Aug 26, 2018 14:39:15 GMT
Are you serious? Do you remember British Rail? The original omnishambles. Blimey, this old chestnut! Yes I do. It was an age where you didn't have to remortgage your house to get to Chipping Sodbury before 10am and we weren't paying huge subsidies to terrible failing private sharks for the pleasure of our (£300) return out of the public exchequer for the privilege. The good old days eh? We dont pay subsidies, these firms pay franchise fees to get the contract on top of this they then pay track access and station access fees. You want train prices to go down stop the government charging these companies so much but then the shortfall has to be made back via higher taxation on everyone else, I'm quite happy if you want the lad in tescos on minimum wage to pay more to allow me to get into London cheaper to charge my exhorbiant contractor rates but thats not really fair. Just like cars the burden of tax should fall on those who use it the most.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Aug 26, 2018 14:40:49 GMT
You generate wealth by taxing things correctly Take Amazon, they more than halved its declared UK corporation tax bill from £15.8m to £7.4m year-on-year in 2016. 'The cut came despite turnover at the UK business, which handles the packing and delivery of parcels and functions such as customer service, rising from £946m to £1.46bn'. Corporate tax avoidance is widespread and cost economies billions and ultimately it is the poor that feel the brunt. Capitalism truly does work for the few not the many You pay corporarion tax on profits not sales, amazon model is high volume low margins. Socialism always wanting someone else to pay for free unicorns. The Labour (New) model moved from taking taxes off companies via Corporation tax and moving it on to employment taxes under Employers NI which was carried on by the Conservatives. If the economy has a downturn then CT receipts go down with profits but the underlying employment taxes hold up. This of course is dependent on companies employing people full time at decent economic wage levels so I would imagine that Amazon is getting off lightly.
Perhaps we need some formula for extracting taxes out of Amazon because their model doesn't provide either employment or government taxes.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 26, 2018 16:45:28 GMT
Higher education is a gift from the working class tax player to the middle and upper classes. There is a price to pay but it's a price worth paying for the equality of opportunity. Tax payer? I don't get it. "A gift from the working class tax payer to the middle and upper classes"?? What does that mean? Doesn't the middle and upper class pay taxes in England? Eh, in Sweden you have to take loans to study at the University (if you're not rich) - for living costs, not any fees, but a very small stud organization fee. I still have £8.500 to pay back ... However, I'm glad we have this opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Aug 26, 2018 18:39:42 GMT
There is a price to pay but it's a price worth paying for the equality of opportunity. Tax payer? I don't get it. "A gift from the working class tax payer to the middle and upper classes"?? What does that mean? Doesn't the middle and upper class pay taxes in England? Eh, in Sweden you have to take loans to study at the University (if you're not rich) - for living costs, not any fees, but a very small stud organization fee. I still have £8.500 to pay back ... However, I'm glad we have this opportunity. Hi musik its the same here now, it changed 20 years or so ago previously you didnt have to pay tuition fees but there was no loans so only the relatively well off could afford to go so the working class were subsidising the upper and middle classes to go and do pointless classes. Now more people go but they can came away with 50k or more student debt but they only pay back once they earn a certain amount at pretty low rates, I think once you earn above £30k a year, deductions are less than £100 a month.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Aug 26, 2018 18:48:40 GMT
Blimey, this old chestnut! Yes I do. It was an age where you didn't have to remortgage your house to get to Chipping Sodbury before 10am and we weren't paying huge subsidies to terrible failing private sharks for the pleasure of our (£300) return out of the public exchequer for the privilege. The good old days eh? We dont pay subsidies, these firms pay franchise fees to get the contract on top of this they then pay track access and station access fees. You want train prices to go down stop the government charging these companies so much but then the shortfall has to be made back via higher taxation on everyone else, I'm quite happy if you want the lad in tescos on minimum wage to pay more to allow me to get into London cheaper to charge my exhorbiant contractor rates but thats not really fair. Just like cars the burden of tax should fall on those who use it the most. You can call subsidies all the fancy names you want to fyd but they're still subsidies.
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 26, 2018 20:30:20 GMT
Tax payer? I don't get it. "A gift from the working class tax payer to the middle and upper classes"?? What does that mean? Doesn't the middle and upper class pay taxes in England? Eh, in Sweden you have to take loans to study at the University (if you're not rich) - for living costs, not any fees, but a very small stud organization fee. I still have £8.500 to pay back ... However, I'm glad we have this opportunity. Now more people go but they can came away with 50k or more student debt but they only pay back once they earn a certain amount at pretty low rates, I think once you earn above £30k a year, deductions are less than £100 a month. Wow, £50.000 is a lot of money. If it had been me, I think I would have worked a few years and saved as much as I could before studying at the University then. If you go 4 years here and take maximum loans (for your normal living costs), you will have a debt of about £21.600 after the 4 years. But as I said, usually there are no tuition fees to pay. Some exceptions exist. When it comes to repay plans it has got a lot worse in recent years, a lot! When I studied most of the time I had the old kind of loans. They used a kind of index year by year, like a very low interest. Then came a new kind of loan during a short period of time, with a kind of interest. The third and now the only existing type of loan at the University is an expensive one, with high interest AND you have to pay every year even if you're not having any income AT ALL whatsoever. This has been disastrous to many poor students who haven't been able to find a job after the exams. Myself have to pay back to all 3 loan systems, but luckily my largest part is to the oldest index loan system. And if you earn less than £12.800 per year, you don't have to pay back anything that particular year. The maximum number of years you can avoid paying back is 10 though, in that old index loan system. Then you have to pay back, even with no income.
|
|