Free College Gone?

ferdi

hi
it seems that in their wisdom, bertie and his hench-men are ending free acees to 3rd level education:



irish times artical

i think the basic idea is that you have to pay your college fees once you start earning. i just knew they would do this the year i was set to start:mad:

i hate the establishment here, its all so sneeky and slimey, and they (the gov.) really couldnt give a toss about the wishes of the citizens (eg: backing bushes war + letting US war machine us shannon). this is just another example of the total disregard the irish government have for us. and it dosnt matter if its FF, FG, PDs, LB, GP, SF or whoever in power, they are all just looking out for them and their greasey little pals!!:mad:

and they wonder why no young people vote:rolleyes:

write to you local tds, if you think it will make a differance (it wont by the way)screw them anyway

bertie wants to do it because graduates earn on average 57% more or something, but when we will be paying this money back will we be earning these massive amounts?? NO!!

well thats my rant over with

cheers

ferdi

ballooba

Why should people who have never gone to colllege have to pay for your education?

IMO this scheme make perfect sense.

It's hardly going to take a lifetime to pay off a 32,000 mortgage (At most, correct me if i'm wrong) if you are on a decent salary.

ferdi

Why should people who have never gone to colllege have to pay for your education?

i dont know.

but Tony O'Reilly and other Fat Cat pr!cks got free thrird level education for thier kids, something tells me they didnt really need it.

It's hardly going to take a lifetime to pay off a 32,000 mortgage (At most, correct me if i'm wrong) if you are on a decent salary.

what decent salary?

ballooba

Originally posted by ferdi
i dont know.

but Tony O'Reilly and other Fat Cat pr!cks got free thrird level education for thier kids, something tells me they didnt really need it.

Seperate matter entirely (I presume you are talking of corruption or some b*llox). I'm sure students from privileged will have to pay the same as students from under-privileged backgrounds.

Originally posted by ferdi

what decent salary?

The kind of salary that would make doing the course worthwhile.

ferdi

all you need to know is that i have my knickers (actually i'm more of a boxers man) firmly in a twist. as i said it was a rant, so p!ss off:D

ballooba

Surely if you can't back up your rant, you must see that it is irrational.

This is the fairest solution that I have seen so far to the fees problem IMO.

Only thing is that the public will probably still end up paying for people who don't reach the salary level where they have to start making repayments. This means that we will all end up paying for career academics and the like.

seamus

Originally posted by ballooba
It's hardly going to take a lifetime to pay off a 32,000 mortgage (At most, correct me if i'm wrong) if you are on a decent salary.

It's tough enough to et a footing after leaving college without someting like this hanging over your head. "Oh sorry we can't give you a mortgage for your house, you haven't paid off your college fees yet" :mad:

Let's say when I finish college next year, I have €32,000 hanging over my head, and start out at €25,000 (a very generous salary). Money is paid back at 5% of my salary per annum. It's going to take me 8-10 years to pay it all back, unless I get a drastic pay rise. That means I'll be into my thirties before I get it paid off. Ridiculous.

No, everyone pays tax. Since the Government seems to think that graduates make more money than non-graduates, it then follows that they pay more tax - paying for themselves many times over during their life. This is just another double taxation that the Government likes to sting on people when they **** up the finances. When the economy grows healthy again, will they reinstate free fees? What happens then to the poor bastards with 'loans' hanging over their heads?

Repli

Its looking like theyre gonna be introduced as early as this year.
You can look at this from 2 points of view..

The 1st being the government are wrong in reintroducing fees.. they are shooting themselves in the foot.. college graduates are the key to this country's future.. by reintroducing fees they are restricting thousands of working/middle class students from attending college.. The country is in an economic crisis and the government expect the students to pay for this.. when really it's just a source of short term finance.. we are entitled to free education, what next.. taking away free 2nd level education? last month bertie assured students that fees wouldnt be introduced during his time in govt.
Thanks bertie.


The 2nd being that the government and bertie are right in doing this. More money is needed to fund primary & secondary schools.. so that everyone can get a decent education. As i said above this will restrict a lot of working/middle class students from attending college.. When in reality most working class students don't attend college anyway.. only 20% in fact.. where as 90% of middle/upper class students attend some sort of college.
However, with our current government I really doubt they will invest the money in 1st/2nd level education.. Most people in 3rd level already will find some way to come up with the €3000-€6000/year.. be it working some extra hours during summer.. or a student loan..

Doodee

the whole point behind the free 3rd level edication is the fact that even if you were poor, middle-class or rich, u could still go easily to college/uni and pay your way through for food ect, this is the biggest loss to the government, what shall they do with all this extra cash, spend it on stupid comms systems that make no sense at all.

I mean ffs, we are already behind the rest of europe in our IT infastructure but by bringing back Fee's is going to cause havok!

I for one dont fancy having to pay off loans for third level ed and having to support myself through college. I curt the purse strings from my parents when i got my job in November, I dont fancy having to go back to Galway every weekend just to bring up food and money to keep me going for the week cause i have to pay off school loans.

also, the majourity of degree students dont tend to get jobs for 2 years after finishing their degree's unless they have work experience.

its a load of bollix, and will have a MAJOUR effect.

look at the states, u can pay for your kids education, regardless of how stupid they are, well, what i mean is, the more u pay the better the kids shall be educated (UP to them, if they slack off,,,, u know what i mean)

ahh i dunno, im ranting.

seamus

Thread moved from Leaving Cert to Politics

ballooba

Originally posted by seamus
"Oh sorry we can't give you a mortgage for your house, you haven't paid off your college fees yet" :mad:

Highly unlikely. They don't refuse you a car loan because you have a mortgage outstanding on your house.

Originally posted by seamus

It's going to take me 8-10 years to pay it all back, unless I get a drastic pay rise. That means I'll be into my thirties before I get it paid off. Ridiculous.

Mortgage on a house would take a lot longer to pay off.

Originally posted by seamus

No, everyone pays tax. Since the Government seems to think that graduates make more money than non-graduates, it then follows that they pay more tax - paying for themselves many times over during their life.

The fact that graduate earn more money and therefore pay more tax only means that they make a greater contribution to paying off there college fees than their none college going counterparts. What about none graduates who arte in the upper wage brackets? should they also pay for you education?

Originally posted by seamus

What happens then to the poor bastards with 'loans' hanging over their heads?

What happened to the poor bastards who had loans out when the free fees came in?

If someone could give me a good reason why you personally shouldn't have to pay for the education that you personally receive then i will gladly eat my hat.

ferdi

Thread moved from Leaving Cert to Politics

thats good, i thought i was going mad

If someone could give me a god reason why you personally shouldn't have to pay for the education that you personally receive then i will gladly eat my hat.

at some stage you'll probably need a doctor, nurse or some type of proffesional who went to college. why should we, a "first world nation" have to import medical personel, its outragious.

ballooba

Originally posted by ferdi

at some stage you'll probably need a doctor, nurse or some type of proffesional who went to college. why should we, a "first world nation" have to import medical personel, its outragious.

Forgive if i'm stupid, but I don't see the connection between importing medical personnel and re-introducing fees.
[edit] If you forgive me then can you please also point out the connection?[/edit]

ferdi

i forgive you.

ferdi

Let's say when I finish college next year, I have €32,000 hanging over my head, and start out at €25,000 (a very generous salary). Money is paid back at 5% of my salary per annum. It's going to take me 8-10 years to pay it all back, unless I get a drastic pay rise. That means I'll be into my thirties before I get it paid off. Ridiculous.

lets be honest, that is totally ridiculous.
they will reap what they so.

who are the groups who oppose fees etc?
can anyone give me some some websites please please please

cheers
ferdi

Repli

http://www.usi.ie/
Fight the system!

PHB

This is a short term plan to stimulate the economy, and is not looking at the long term picture.

If they introduce the fees as a lump sum at the start of the year, the amount of people from working class backgrounds will drop, its just a simple fact.
If they however take up this pay after approach, it will not stop as many people, but will still stop some.

If the idea of this scheme was to stop people from spending their lives in education, then it will not be effective in the slighest, since those people will have financial support from their parents anyway.

This will result in less skilled labour, which will be detremental to the economy, which will result in higher taxes for the people that this would save tax money from.

3rd Level education should be a right, not a priviledge.

sunbeam

Could be wrong of course, but I got the impression from the article in the Times that a 'reformed' grants system would stay in addition a loans system so the very poorest students wouldn't incur extra debts.

Yes, I'm fully aware of the inequalities of the grant system as it stands. I was a grant recipient myself. I'm from a working class background. Both parents left school at 14 and only one cousin had been to college before me. Years ago the only way to get into the professional course I wanted to do was to have a masters when applying-credential inflation in the mid nineties and all-so I started a research masters. To make a long story short my grant ran out before completion becuase I all but dropped out to care for a terminally ill parent. I took a variety of low paid jobs and paid fees every year in the hope I would complete it, the strain of travelling accross the country to care for my other parent who was also ill and health problems of my own made this impossible. I'm now trying to complete it while caring for her fulltime.

At the time the professional course I wanted to do was was ESF funded and I'd hoped to work for a bit and save up enough to keep myself for the year. However the loss of this funding and substantial increases in costs of living has put this out of my reach. Without the professional qualification I won't earn enough for any bank to offer me a loan to do it-so I'd actually be quite pleased if there was a student loan system where I could get one...

ballooba

Originally posted by ferdi
who are the groups who oppose fees etc?
can anyone give me some some websites please please please

www.fightfees.com i thought you had done some research on this b4 you went on your rant??? [posters on every (USI affiliated) campus in the country with the address].

You still haven't substantiated your point about the connection between importing medical personnel and re-introducing fees.

Anyway, by the very nature of supply and demand, if we need doctors then the salary available to these people will go up. if the salary fgor a doctor is proportionally higher than that available to other graduates then the higher cost of training to be a doctor is a justifiable expense.

If people from other countries are willing to pay to train as a doctor and will work for cheaper and provide the same service then its right that they should get the jobs.

If these 'imported' medical personnel are having their education paid for by other countries and then not paying tax to said countries then the situation will rapidly sort itself out, in that said countries will no longer pay for free education for these doctors, nurses etc.

bonkey

At the moment, every taxpayer in Ireland is paying for students to go to college.

When the system changes, that will no longer be the case.

So, you're complaining about having to pay back your fees....and ignoring that once you're working you'll never be funding other students' fees.

I would also suggest you check how relaitvely short-term a phenomenon free fees was...its amazing how many people seem to consider it an inalienable right.

jc

3rd Level education should be a right, not a priviledge

3rd level education should be earned not just given to you.

At the moment, every taxpayer in Ireland is paying for students to go to college.

Yup, & also consider that the majority of jobs that students have while in college are not paid over the counter, so they in turn don't pay tax. I may be wrong in this assumption, but it was generally the way, when i went to college.

TBH, i'd prefer my taxes to be spent on areas that actually help me.

Cork

Originally posted by klaz
3rd level education should be earned not just given to you.

I think that "Free Fees" introtroduced by the rainbow government was a gift to the super rich.

It did not encourage an additional prticipation in third level education. I think if additional funding becomes available school transport to secondary schools should be free.

But - Free Fees was a big waste of taxpayers money. It was both short sighted and ill conceived. It was amazing - it was introduced by a socialist minister for eduacation.

I think that they will bring in a loans system that graduates will pay back through taxation. This is a fairer system than free fees.

ballooba

BTW the government announced to day that they are increasing spending on school dinners for primary and secondary school students. Bear in mind that this is the only proper meal that a lot of kids get in the day.

They also announced that they are selling a building off Baggot St for something in the region of 9 million which will be spent on Garda Stations and schools (drop in the ocean but its a start).

If free education for 3rd level students was scrapped then a lot more money would be available for a lot more people to get to the level where 3rd level is even an option for them.

If these people then decide that 3rd level education is worthwhile, they can go and the government will lend them the cash.

Johnmb

At the moment, every taxpayer in Ireland is paying for students to go to college.

When the system changes, that will no longer be the case.

So, you're complaining about having to pay back your fees....and ignoring that once you're working you'll never be funding other students' fees.

So are you saying that by doing this they are going to lower my taxes? If not then they shouldn't be doing it. My taxes should be used to invest in the future of my country, and that means providing a good education to people so that they can get jobs and I won't have to be paying for them to have a life for the rest of their lives.

Cork

If free education for 3rd level students was scrapped then a lot more money would be available for a lot more people to get to the level where 3rd level is even an option for them.

I agree - Impove primary and secondary. Making 3rd level free was a move that did not increase 3rd level education. Because of this - free fees must go.

I would also suggest you check how relaitvely short-term a phenomenon free fees was...its amazing how many people seem to consider it an inalienable right.

When you make something free. It is hard to accept you'll have to pay for it.

But when you look & see that participation in 3rd level was not improved - you see that fees should be brought back.

Johnmb

I agree - Impove primary and secondary. Making 3rd level free was a move that did not increase 3rd level education. Because of this - free fees must go.

But they won't use that money to improve primary and secondary education. Even if they did, they should not be doing it at the expence of third level education. There are lots of other areas that could be cut back. Health and education should never be cut back.

But when you look & see that participation in 3rd level was not improved - you see that fees should be brought back.

Participation in third level education has increased. It is not at the level one would like, but that is due to social problems. Working class students generally accepted that they could not afford to go to college. That mindset takes a while to overcome, and free fees have not been around that long. Now with stupidity like this on the governments part, it is unlikely to change anytime soon as the working classes will still not expect to be able to go to college as they can't trust the government to provide the funding. If education is a right, why does it not extend to third level? Why just second level? Especially considering that in todays world, second level education simply isn't good enough to encourage investment in the country from abroad.

ferdi

i thought you had done some research on this b4 you went on your rant???

intransitive senses
1 : to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner
2 : to scold vehemently
transitive senses : to utter in a bombastic declamatory fashion
(webster's)

where does it say i have to do research for a little rant on an internet discussion board?

If education is a right, why does it not extend to third level? Why just second level? Especially considering that in todays world, second level education simply isn't good enough to encourage investment in the country from abroad.

exactly.

ferdi

BTW the government announced to day that they are increasing spending on school dinners for primary and secondary school students. Bear in mind that this is the only proper meal that a lot of kids get in the day.

When did they start paying for students meals? I mean, while I was at school, i paid for my lunch (with either my own or my parents money). Admittedly its almost 8 years since i did my leaving cert.

Johnmb

When did they start paying for students meals? I mean, while I was at school, i paid for my lunch (with either my own or my parents money).

It only occurs in some schools, not all. And they have pretty much said that it is not going to apply to all schools in disadvantaged areas, let alone all schools.

hmmm.... so what types of schools get it? Special-Needs Schools? Seems strange that if only a few schools are getting it, why are we paying for it...

ballooba

Originally posted by klaz
hmmm.... so what types of schools get it? Special-Needs Schools? Seems strange that if only a few schools are getting it, why are we paying for it...

I don't know what type of school you are talking about or whether it needs to be incorporated in this scheme.

There are schools where parents literally struggle to make enough money to keep their kids in school. Clothes, books, transport and meals. These are schools where many parents can't afford to buy food to make breakfast for the kids. There are also schools where uniforms are the only clothes the kids own.

Before this scheme was introduced, many kids were going to school hungry. I'm sure you know that it is impossible to work never mind enjoy your work if you are hungry.

I know of two schools where this scheme operates. The National Schools in Finglas and Ballymun. Finglas is serviced by Bewley's who provide lunches for the students.

There is no reason why this scheme should be extended to priviliged schools. The line has to be drawn somewhere and if you thinks that the kids who rely on this service should be denied it then I won't try and change your opinion.