UK Politics IV: Disraeli Gears

[Vassenor]

Then clearly we need to flood the market with properly regulated narcotics to drive the criminals out of business.

Since a lot of the harm may go away once people stop taking heroin that the dealer has cut with rat poison to bulk it out.

[Chestaan]

When GCSEs and A-Levels were vital to get most careers, they became free. Why shouldn't the same occur to Bachelors' degrees, other than the government not wanting to pay for anything that isn't their own salary?

That kind of destroys the point of a degree; if the Government pays for it, more people will pursue them, they will lose value, and something else (a higher degree which the Government will not pay for,) will take their place. The more of a commodity there is, generally, the less value it has.

That's not the point of a degree. Degrees exist to educate people in areas they find interesting or wish to pursue a career in.

[Vassenor]

That kind of destroys the point of a degree; if the Government pays for it, more people will pursue them, they will lose value, and something else (a higher degree which the Government will not pay for,) will take their place. The more of a commodity there is, generally, the less value it has.

That's not the point of a degree. Degrees exist to educate people in areas they find interesting or wish to pursue a career in.

You mean we shouldn't be judging the worth of people purely based on the number of TLAs they can put after their name? That sounds like socialism to be judging based on skills.

[Ifreann]

Because wanting an education is idleness?

Wanting the government to fund education=dangerous socialism
Dangerous socialism=politics of envy
Envy=sin
Sloth=sin
Sloth=idleness
QED.

As we all know, the wages of sin are death.

---

When GCSEs and A-Levels were vital to get most careers, they became free. Why shouldn't the same occur to Bachelors' degrees, other than the government not wanting to pay for anything that isn't their own salary?

That kind of destroys the point of a degree; if the Government pays for it, more people will pursue them, they will lose value, and something else (a higher degree which the Government will not pay for,) will take their place. The more of a commodity there is, generally, the less value it has.

Because an education is a commodity, valuable only in its rarity and it's utility in gaining employment.

[Geilinor]

When GCSEs and A-Levels were vital to get most careers, they became free. Why shouldn't the same occur to Bachelors' degrees, other than the government not wanting to pay for anything that isn't their own salary?

That kind of destroys the point of a degree; if the Government pays for it, more people will pursue them, they will lose value, and something else (a higher degree which the Government will not pay for,) will take their place. The more of a commodity there is, generally, the less value it has.

The government already helps pay for a university education.

[Lamadia III]

Education is a commodity; very often, the more you invest into it, the better the result is overall, whether that be a top private school, a good university, good degrees. The more people who have this commodity ie. a degree, the less attractive you are to a potential employer; my mum among many qualifications has a PhD in neuroscience. This gives her an edge over many others in the field, for instance; if everybody had this qualification, and the others she had, the less attractive she would seem in terms of standing out. Thus, making degrees too accessible to people is counter-productive.
As it is, we have far too many people entering universities; we have a jobs market full of verity & full of interesting careers, and very often for many jobs an apprenticeship is far superior to any degree. We need to be encouraging children to look at all options, and not just aiming immediately for degrees. Evidently, concentrate the more intelligent students on the latter, whilst working to help people aspire to both this & other options.

[Vassenor]

Maybe the solution is to stop treating everything in life like a business transaction.

[Conscentia]

Because wanting an education is idleness?

Not at all; demanding the government cover this cost without you having to pay the money back is, however.

So should the British government charge for the use of roads, the emergency services, the police, the courts? After-all - demanding the government cover costs without having to pay the money back is idleness.

[Alvecia]

Maybe the solution is to stop treating everything in life like a business transaction.

You think I'd do better with the ladies if I didn't start the conversation with my contractual terms?

[Geilinor]

Because wanting an education is idleness?

Not at all; demanding the government cover this cost without you having to pay the money back is, however.

Graduates will pay the money back over time through taxes.

[Arkolon]

Maybe the solution is to stop treating everything in life like a business transaction.

But it has to be treated like a business transaction because its very existence relies on the taxation of business transactions and is itself a business transaction between taxpayer and state and state and university. You can't wish away the cost of it all.

[Lamadia III]

Not at all; demanding the government cover this cost without you having to pay the money back is, however.

So should the British government charge for the use of roads, the emergency services, the police, the courts? After-all - demanding the government cover costs without having to pay the money back is idleness.

Making the comparison between higher education & the emergency services makes you seem unintelligent, which you certainly are not. The fundamental duty of a government is to protect its citizens; that is it. This can span off into the police, fire brigade & at a definite push, healthcare. It is also the duty of the government to provide law & order, which comes under the courts. These things are paid for through taxes; the fact that loans are given out to students is absolutely fine in my book, but people expecting to not have to pay this sum back is ignorant & entitled, as it is not the fundamental duty of the state to pay for your education, certainly higher education.
It branches off as so; protecting the people (police & army), maintaining law & order (police, army & courts), providing basic services (roads, rail, electricity, water, gas.) The first two are fundamental, the latter at a big push. Education does not come into this, and furthermore higher education as a non-nationalised entity does not come under the jurisdiction of the state.

[Chestaan]

Education is a commodity; very often, the more you invest into it, the better the result is overall, whether that be a top private school, a good university, good degrees. The more people who have this commodity ie. a degree, the less attractive you are to a potential employer; my mum among many qualifications has a PhD in neuroscience. This gives her an edge over many others in the field, for instance; if everybody had this qualification, and the others she had, the less attractive she would seem in terms of standing out. Thus, making degrees too accessible to people is counter-productive.
As it is, we have far too many people entering universities; we have a jobs market full of verity & full of interesting careers, and very often for many jobs an apprenticeship is far superior to any degree. We need to be encouraging children to look at all options, and not just aiming immediately for degrees. Evidently, concentrate the more intelligent students on the latter, whilst working to help people aspire to both this & other options.

Crazy idea here, maybe we should allocate university places based on skill rather than on how much you can pay?

[Conscentia]

Education is a commodity

It isn't. Commodities can be traded. There is no way for me to sell my knowledge of calculus to someone else.

[...] As it is, we have far too many people entering universities; we have a jobs market full of verity & full of interesting careers, and very often for many jobs an apprenticeship is far superior to any degree. We need to be encouraging children to look at all options, and not just aiming immediately for degrees. Evidently, concentrate the more intelligent students on the latter, whilst working to help people aspire to both this & other options.

Why does it sound like your solution to an over-saturation of graduates is to limit education to the wealthy, rather than assigning opportunities on merit?

[Ifreann]

Education is a commodity; very often, the more you invest into it, the better the result is overall, whether that be a top private school, a good university, good degrees. The more people who have this commodity ie. a degree, the less attractive you are to a potential employer; my mum among many qualifications has a PhD in neuroscience. This gives her an edge over many others in the field, for instance; if everybody had this qualification, and the others she had, the less attractive she would seem in terms of standing out. Thus, making degrees too accessible to people is counter-productive.
As it is, we have far too many people entering universities; we have a jobs market full of verity & full of interesting careers, and very often for many jobs an apprenticeship is far superior to any degree. We need to be encouraging children to look at all options, and not just aiming immediately for degrees. Evidently, concentrate the more intelligent students on the latter, whilst working to help people aspire to both this & other options.

Thank goodness we don't educate more neuroscientists. Sure, human understanding of neuroscience might advance faster with more neuroscientists, and who knows how that might improve people's lives, but your mother would be less rich. And that would be terrible.

[Souseiseki]

apparently the "earn £35k or gtfo" law came into force today

what a shit country

[Lamadia III]

Education is a commodity

It isn't. Commodities can be traded. There is no way for me to sell my knowledge of calculus to someone else.

[...] As it is, we have far too many people entering universities; we have a jobs market full of verity & full of interesting careers, and very often for many jobs an apprenticeship is far superior to any degree. We need to be encouraging children to look at all options, and not just aiming immediately for degrees. Evidently, concentrate the more intelligent students on the latter, whilst working to help people aspire to both this & other options.

Why does it sound like your solution to an over-saturation of graduates is to limit education to the wealthy, rather than assigning opportunities on merit?

I am not limiting it to the wealthy, at all, which is why I support student loans to increase social mobility. I have no quarrel with student loans; I have an objection to people expecting to get these loans without having to pay them back, as if it is their God-given right for the state to pay for them to further their intelligence. It is not.

[Geilinor]

I am not limiting it to the wealthy, at all, which is why I support student loans to increase social mobility. I have no quarrel with student loans; I have an objection to people expecting to get these loans without having to pay them back, as if it is their God-given right for the state to pay for them to further their intelligence. It is not.

What about government-funding scholarships based on merit?

[Arkolon]

Education is a commodity; very often, the more you invest into it, the better the result is overall, whether that be a top private school, a good university, good degrees. The more people who have this commodity ie. a degree, the less attractive you are to a potential employer; my mum among many qualifications has a PhD in neuroscience. This gives her an edge over many others in the field, for instance; if everybody had this qualification, and the others she had, the less attractive she would seem in terms of standing out. Thus, making degrees too accessible to people is counter-productive.
As it is, we have far too many people entering universities; we have a jobs market full of verity & full of interesting careers, and very often for many jobs an apprenticeship is far superior to any degree. We need to be encouraging children to look at all options, and not just aiming immediately for degrees. Evidently, concentrate the more intelligent students on the latter, whilst working to help people aspire to both this & other options.

Crazy idea here, maybe we should allocate university places based on skill rather than on how much you can pay?

How do you value skill in a subject? How well you do in tests just measures how well you can take a written or oral examination. Maybe it makes more sense to measure skill as net impact to society, which is most easily measured by the surplus value you create. Since in a market economy you can expect surplus value to always be greater than wage, wage would be a pretty good indicator of how much output you're producing. So what if we had a system whereby you need to take tests to get in, since they're not a terrible metric it must be said, but skilled students are incentivised to go to university by taking a loan they start paying back when they start earning above a certain threshold, so you can safely say they're providing a net contribution to society through the surplus value they create.

So, like, the current system.

[Ostroeuropa]

apparently the "earn £35k or gtfo" law came into force today

what a shit country

It sounds good to me.

[Geilinor]

apparently the "earn £35k or gtfo" law came into force today

what a shit country

It sounds good to me.

Why is it £35k? Why not £34k?

Kicking people out based on arbitrary numbers makes no sense.

[MERIZoC]

apparently the "earn £35k or gtfo" law came into force today

what a shit country

It sounds good to me.

"Multiculturalists are waging war against poor people"

[Lamadia III]

I think my mother ended up paying in the region of £400,000 for her university fees; this is a huge amount, and that is because she was training in a medical field. The high price of tuition, however, does not mean that it is the Government's responsibility to pay for it; this is a very dangerous attitude to have, as it breeds the idea of your life being in the hands of the state, which is not only immoral, but idle.

Where the hell did your mother study?

Oxford & Harvard were her main two universities, although the toured most of the top 10 during her studies training as a neurosurgeon.

[Ostroeuropa]

It sounds good to me.

Why is it £35k? Why not £34k?

Kicking people out based on arbitrary numbers makes no sense.

It was always going to be arbitrary. The point is now that we've picked a number we can raise it or lower it according to what we want and the way it effects the country, thus no longer making it arbitrary.

I'd prefer a more overt culture-based system, but that's not going to be pushed in the current climate. 35k is fairly substantial. It will effectively mean mass migration from outside the EU ends.

[Ostroeuropa]

It sounds good to me.

"Multiculturalists are waging war against poor people"

I always said the native working classes. Never mentioned poor people in general.