From the BBC:
[Owen] Smith has called for the current funding system to be abolished and replaced with a 1%-2% graduate tax. He also promised a high-level apprenticeship to every 18-year-old who gets the grades…
He also promised to build 50,000 "first homes" a year, earmarked for under-30s, which would be rented to first-time buyers at 80% of the local market rent, with the remaining 20% going into a savings pot.
Student loans are currently repaid via a 9% graduate tax, and even that is only enough to repay about half the loans. Reducing that to 1% or 2% is of course much better, but does not explain where the rest of the money will come from.
We summarised the amounts involved and the obvious way forward in our higher education manifesto.
He also promised to build 50,000 "first homes" a year, earmarked for under-30s, which would be rented to first-time buyers at 80% of the local market rent, with the remaining 20% going into a savings pot.
Aargh! That doesn't even make sense; are tenants supposed to pay 100% of the 'market rent' and be given 20% of it back somehow? It's nowhere near enough either. If everybody is to have a chance of obtaining such a home, they would need to build about 300,000 a year, not just 50,000, which wouldn't even show up as a blip.
YPP housing/planning manifesto here.
Showing posts with label Higher Education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Higher Education. Show all posts
Sunday, 28 August 2016
Sunday, 8 March 2015
Manifesto: Higher Education
Please note that there is no one single coherent set of statistics covering higher education, spending and student numbers, all figures are approximate and for guidance only.
Let's sum up the current position before outlining our policies:
Student numbers
Currently, about 38% of school leavers go on to Higher Education, and there are around 1.7 million UK domiciled undergraduate students at UK universities.
This represents a vast increase compared to twenty or thirty years ago. The general perception and overall picture is that:
- UK governments have pushed more and more people into higher education to keep the official unemployment statistics down;
- too many people are taking 'Mickey Mouse' degrees;
- the 'graduate premium' (the extra salary you can earn by doing a degree) is being eroded; and
- faced with far too many applicants for a job, employers prioritise applicants who have been to university, regardless of what they learned.
So to a large extent going to university is just an arms race and a waste of time, effort and money.
Total funding for higher education
The UK government i.e. UK taxpayers, pay around £6 billion a year directly to 'higher education providers'.
Students are supposed to pay £9,000 a year towards tuition fees by taking out student loans. Only half of these will ever be repaid and the other half will never be collected. So the taxpayer contributes a further £7.7 billion a year indirectly (loans made but never repaid), and graduates end up paying £7.7 bn.
So the total cost of running universities is £21 billion a year (the taxpayer pays £13 bn of that) and the average cost per student is £12,000 per year.
Tuition fees/student loans
Student loans are not really loans in the ordinary sense, they are a graduate tax with a capped total repayment; so they combine the worst aspects of debt (they hang over graduates' heads) and the worst aspect of income tax (they discourage people from working harder and earning more). The whole thing is smoke and mirrors.
The total accumulated student loans are £60 billion (pdf) owed by 4.3 million people; the maximum loan that will be owed by somebody starting a three-year course this year will be around £44,000 (including maintenance loan). Half is never collected and the repayment period is up to 30 years, so the amount that is actually clawed back via the tax system each year is minimal (between £1 and £2 billion).
Maintenance grants
Currently, the maximum non-repayable maintenance grant is £3,387, payable to those with a household (i.e. parents') income of £25,000 or less; those with household incomes above £42,875 receive nothing.
Student accommodation
The usual rules apply; a lot of university-owned student accommodation has been sold off and student numbers have increased.
The result is that around a quarter of students stay at their parents' house; a quarter are in halls of residence costing £80 a week and half are paying rent to private landlords for the lowest quality accommodation.
YPP's policies
Having set out the position as at today's date, the way forward is obvious:
- We as a society need graduates, especially in the fields of applied science (biology, medicine, chemistry, engineering, statistics etc); research for research sake (physics); and for teaching future generations (the three R's, science and some social science and arts subjects to round things off). But we do not need an arms race where people will take meaningless degrees merely in order to improve their chances of getting a job.
- The UK government/taxpayer can afford to spend £13 bn a year on higher education (under 1% of GDP) and as an economy, we can't afford not to. That would cover the full tuition cost for over 1 million UK students.
- Instead of 38% of school leavers going to university and being saddled with student loans of nominal £27,000 for the tuition fees of a three year degree, it would be better for around 25% of school leavers to go to university - for 'free' - to focus on studying what the country as a whole needs.
- A core part of YPP's manifesto is for there to be a Citizen's Income (non means tested, non-taxable, non-contributory) for all working age British citizens, equal to Income Support rates (currently £72.40 per week). Students would be entitled to this the same as anybody else, and this is considerably more generous that the savagely means-tested maintenance grants and loans currently on offer.
- Every student should have the possibility of living in low-cost student accommodation for a capped rent of £50 per week (outside London; perhaps up to £80 a week for London where space is at a premium) if they do not want to or cannot sensibly stay at home. This would involve the construction of several thousand units (bed sits or studio flats) in purpose built blocks, the cost of which will be minimal and which would be recouped out of the future rental income anyway.
All of this leaves just a few loose ends...
- outstanding student loans of nominally £60 billion which in practice will be repaid at the rate of £1 or £2 billion a year via the 9% graduate tax surcharge. A core part of our manifesto is to get rid of stealth taxes on income (National Insurance, VAT and higher rate income tax) and restrict taxes on earnings to 20%. The 9% graduate tax is just another stealth tax and a particular burden on the under-thirties (all these stealth taxes on earnings wold be replaced with a tax on land values!). So we would simply write off the bulk of the nominal £60 billion accumulated debt on day one and make up the £1 or £2 billion shortfall in other ways.
- Overseas students. If UK universities can make a profit by charging international students £20,000 a year, why shouldn't they? We ought to welcome such students - just like any tourists they contribute to our invisible exports - and exclude them from immigration quotas.
- YPP have not said that we would cap domestic student numbers at 1 million or any other figure. We have said that we would abolish tuition fees/loans for the one million students studying something of obvious and immediate benefit to society as a whole.
If other people wish to study subjects for purely personal advancement or personal enjoyment, with no obvious net benefit to the taxpayer or society as a whole (law, drama, fine art, ancient history, most post-graduates degrees), then it is up to universities themselves to decide which subjects to offer and what fees to charge and how these will be settled. If such subjects are studied part-time, then the annual costs will be easily affordable by somebody in full time work.
Let's sum up the current position before outlining our policies:
Student numbers
Currently, about 38% of school leavers go on to Higher Education, and there are around 1.7 million UK domiciled undergraduate students at UK universities.
This represents a vast increase compared to twenty or thirty years ago. The general perception and overall picture is that:
- UK governments have pushed more and more people into higher education to keep the official unemployment statistics down;
- too many people are taking 'Mickey Mouse' degrees;
- the 'graduate premium' (the extra salary you can earn by doing a degree) is being eroded; and
- faced with far too many applicants for a job, employers prioritise applicants who have been to university, regardless of what they learned.
So to a large extent going to university is just an arms race and a waste of time, effort and money.
Total funding for higher education
The UK government i.e. UK taxpayers, pay around £6 billion a year directly to 'higher education providers'.
Students are supposed to pay £9,000 a year towards tuition fees by taking out student loans. Only half of these will ever be repaid and the other half will never be collected. So the taxpayer contributes a further £7.7 billion a year indirectly (loans made but never repaid), and graduates end up paying £7.7 bn.
So the total cost of running universities is £21 billion a year (the taxpayer pays £13 bn of that) and the average cost per student is £12,000 per year.
Tuition fees/student loans
Student loans are not really loans in the ordinary sense, they are a graduate tax with a capped total repayment; so they combine the worst aspects of debt (they hang over graduates' heads) and the worst aspect of income tax (they discourage people from working harder and earning more). The whole thing is smoke and mirrors.
The total accumulated student loans are £60 billion (pdf) owed by 4.3 million people; the maximum loan that will be owed by somebody starting a three-year course this year will be around £44,000 (including maintenance loan). Half is never collected and the repayment period is up to 30 years, so the amount that is actually clawed back via the tax system each year is minimal (between £1 and £2 billion).
Maintenance grants
Currently, the maximum non-repayable maintenance grant is £3,387, payable to those with a household (i.e. parents') income of £25,000 or less; those with household incomes above £42,875 receive nothing.
Student accommodation
The usual rules apply; a lot of university-owned student accommodation has been sold off and student numbers have increased.
The result is that around a quarter of students stay at their parents' house; a quarter are in halls of residence costing £80 a week and half are paying rent to private landlords for the lowest quality accommodation.
YPP's policies
Having set out the position as at today's date, the way forward is obvious:
- We as a society need graduates, especially in the fields of applied science (biology, medicine, chemistry, engineering, statistics etc); research for research sake (physics); and for teaching future generations (the three R's, science and some social science and arts subjects to round things off). But we do not need an arms race where people will take meaningless degrees merely in order to improve their chances of getting a job.
- The UK government/taxpayer can afford to spend £13 bn a year on higher education (under 1% of GDP) and as an economy, we can't afford not to. That would cover the full tuition cost for over 1 million UK students.
- Instead of 38% of school leavers going to university and being saddled with student loans of nominal £27,000 for the tuition fees of a three year degree, it would be better for around 25% of school leavers to go to university - for 'free' - to focus on studying what the country as a whole needs.
- A core part of YPP's manifesto is for there to be a Citizen's Income (non means tested, non-taxable, non-contributory) for all working age British citizens, equal to Income Support rates (currently £72.40 per week). Students would be entitled to this the same as anybody else, and this is considerably more generous that the savagely means-tested maintenance grants and loans currently on offer.
- Every student should have the possibility of living in low-cost student accommodation for a capped rent of £50 per week (outside London; perhaps up to £80 a week for London where space is at a premium) if they do not want to or cannot sensibly stay at home. This would involve the construction of several thousand units (bed sits or studio flats) in purpose built blocks, the cost of which will be minimal and which would be recouped out of the future rental income anyway.
All of this leaves just a few loose ends...
- outstanding student loans of nominally £60 billion which in practice will be repaid at the rate of £1 or £2 billion a year via the 9% graduate tax surcharge. A core part of our manifesto is to get rid of stealth taxes on income (National Insurance, VAT and higher rate income tax) and restrict taxes on earnings to 20%. The 9% graduate tax is just another stealth tax and a particular burden on the under-thirties (all these stealth taxes on earnings wold be replaced with a tax on land values!). So we would simply write off the bulk of the nominal £60 billion accumulated debt on day one and make up the £1 or £2 billion shortfall in other ways.
- Overseas students. If UK universities can make a profit by charging international students £20,000 a year, why shouldn't they? We ought to welcome such students - just like any tourists they contribute to our invisible exports - and exclude them from immigration quotas.
- YPP have not said that we would cap domestic student numbers at 1 million or any other figure. We have said that we would abolish tuition fees/loans for the one million students studying something of obvious and immediate benefit to society as a whole.
If other people wish to study subjects for purely personal advancement or personal enjoyment, with no obvious net benefit to the taxpayer or society as a whole (law, drama, fine art, ancient history, most post-graduates degrees), then it is up to universities themselves to decide which subjects to offer and what fees to charge and how these will be settled. If such subjects are studied part-time, then the annual costs will be easily affordable by somebody in full time work.
Monday, 20 January 2014
Meet the new bastard, same as the old bastard
From The Guardian 5 December 2013:
Unemployed teenagers who leave school without basic English and maths will be forced to go back to the classroom for 16 hours a week or lose their benefits under new rules announced by George Osborne.
The chancellor said he wanted to get rid of a "culture of worklessness" among some school-leavers...
OK, so that's what The Blue Wing has to offer, and The Red Wing finally hit back today, from Politics Home:
Labour will challenge the Conservatives' dominance of welfare issues today, with a pledge to strip jobseekers of benefits if they turned down classes in English, numeracy or IT.
The plans, set to be unveiled in a first major outing for Rachel Reeves as shadow work and pensions secretary at the centre-left IPPR think tank, would see the party force jobseekers to sit a skills test within six weeks of claiming benefits.
Anyone without basic skills would be forced to take a course and face losing their benefits if they refuse.
Madness.
It has long been a rule in the UK welfare system that if you are doing more than a certain number of hours doing GSCEs or A-Levels that you are no longer "available for work" and hence that you are not entitled to welfare.
We used to have more or less free university and student grants, the Red, Blue and Yellow Wings have gradually phased in an idiotic tuition fee system and reduced student grants to a derisory level.
Those two measures, whatever their merits or demerits, discourage people from getting "skills".
The Blue-Yellow Wings got rid of the Educational Maintenance Allowance, a very modest payment to people doing A-levels, shortly after getting into government.
So we've now gone round the clock and are taking away welfare from people who don't go to school or college as well.
No doubt they'll square the circle of contradictions by denying welfare payments to people who do have some "skills" on the basis they can't be trying hard enough to get a job, so how's about an unpaid work placement or something?
Unemployed teenagers who leave school without basic English and maths will be forced to go back to the classroom for 16 hours a week or lose their benefits under new rules announced by George Osborne.
The chancellor said he wanted to get rid of a "culture of worklessness" among some school-leavers...
OK, so that's what The Blue Wing has to offer, and The Red Wing finally hit back today, from Politics Home:
Labour will challenge the Conservatives' dominance of welfare issues today, with a pledge to strip jobseekers of benefits if they turned down classes in English, numeracy or IT.
The plans, set to be unveiled in a first major outing for Rachel Reeves as shadow work and pensions secretary at the centre-left IPPR think tank, would see the party force jobseekers to sit a skills test within six weeks of claiming benefits.
Anyone without basic skills would be forced to take a course and face losing their benefits if they refuse.
Madness.
It has long been a rule in the UK welfare system that if you are doing more than a certain number of hours doing GSCEs or A-Levels that you are no longer "available for work" and hence that you are not entitled to welfare.
We used to have more or less free university and student grants, the Red, Blue and Yellow Wings have gradually phased in an idiotic tuition fee system and reduced student grants to a derisory level.
Those two measures, whatever their merits or demerits, discourage people from getting "skills".
The Blue-Yellow Wings got rid of the Educational Maintenance Allowance, a very modest payment to people doing A-levels, shortly after getting into government.
So we've now gone round the clock and are taking away welfare from people who don't go to school or college as well.
No doubt they'll square the circle of contradictions by denying welfare payments to people who do have some "skills" on the basis they can't be trying hard enough to get a job, so how's about an unpaid work placement or something?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)