Student Loans....do they make any sense?

I have always said that if you want to go on to Uni, you should fund it yourself, why on earth should the tax payer have to chip in.

You have just had 16-17 yrs free education along with the rest, you want more then pay for it.

The system at the moment is wrong and needs to stop.

My own daughter went on to Uni and we paid for it, not easy and had to forgo lots of thing in life, but we did it for her, she did have a small debt when she finished but that was to us, not the tax payer.

So you are saying that students should take on even more debt?
 
on what basis do they justify interest rates of 6% when base rates are 0.5%, when we had them they were at very low rates relative to base rate (i think 1.9% when interest rates were higher) which ultimately made them affordable and meant i was able to pay mine off pretty quickly
 
If it's the only way to get through uni, why not?

5 of my children had uni loans, and 4 of them paid them off before they were 30. They went without the foreign holidays and new cars till they cleared their debt.
 
If it's the only way to get through uni, why not?

5 of my children had uni loans, and 4 of them paid them off before they were 30. They went without the foreign holidays and new cars till they cleared their debt.

Very likely their level of student debt was much less than the £45k which is a typical amount owing these days.

£9000 a year plus maintenance loan bears no resemblance to a thousand or 2 a year and a grant for living expenses.
 
My wife went to uni got a degree and now is a teaching assistant earning just enough to actually pay her student loan back

in my mind shes wasting her degree in a way because she could be a teacher with the degree and could do this job without it!

where as myself I left school at 16 to start an apprenticeship and have worked my way up .. I bring in 2 and half times what my wife does with no student debt

I dont get why so many go to uni personally
 
I have always said that if you want to go on to Uni, you should fund it yourself, why on earth should the tax payer have to chip in.

You have just had 16-17 yrs free education along with the rest, you want more then pay for it.

The system at the moment is wrong and needs to stop.

My own daughter went on to Uni and we paid for it, not easy and had to forgo lots of thing in life, but we did it for her, she did have a small debt when she finished but that was to us, not the tax payer.

Err..most 16-17y/o haven't had the opportunity to earn enough to afford that...oh silly me, you meant their parents ability to afford their children's higher education...well that is quite simply unbelievably short sighted IMO... its not exactly a level playing field is it?! So, then every child born to wealthy (enough) parents can choose exactly which path to follow. And the others?-awe tough luck kids, if you're not born into money tough stinking luck. It really doesn't matter that you've the particular talents to follow a vocation such as medicine, science, engineering, architecture, law, etc etc etc just get yourself down to the job centre or take up that job your dads mate has offered you - come back in 30-40years when you've saved up enough.
Of course we need our children and young people to go into colleges, apprenticeships, universities.. whichever is appropriate to develop the career path suitable for them to bring the best contribution they can to our society as a whole.
 
My wife went to uni got a degree and now is a teaching assistant earning just enough to actually pay her student loan back

in my mind shes wasting her degree in a way because she could be a teacher with the degree and could do this job without it!

where as myself I left school at 16 to start an apprenticeship and have worked my way up .. I bring in 2 and half times what my wife does with no student debt

I dont get why so many go to uni personally

That last sentance sums it up for me.
 
I got one in the 1 of the years I was at uni way back in the 90's when they first came out.

I borrowed the princely sum of £640 and paid it back in a oner when I started earning decent money. Different world back then...

If my daughter goes to uni I will pay for whatever she needs over and above tuition fees which she does not have to pay in Scotland.

I dread to think what it would be like carting around a £50k plus debt right through your working life especially with no prospect of ever paying it off.

If your daughter is good at saving, she'd be better taking the full amount and not spending a penny over the 4 years of study. Then she would have a good sum of money saved for first deposit on a house. With interest on the loan in Scotland only rising with inflation it's the smart move IMO.
 
For me it worked out brilliantly.

Ok I had a job while a uni, just a few hours a week so it wasn't a distraction and I only did that for one of the years.

I'm very close to paying mine off, will have taken about 15 years.

My wife's however remains unpaid, she took a lot bigger student loan out and it will expire before she pays off a penny under our current plans.
 
Also, if you are not going to earn even 20k with your degree, i would question why you thought you needed one. This is the problem with too many people having degrees in rubbish.

:thup: students are more interested in getting tanked and humping than studying. That's why most of them leave with degree's in "media with tourism" or something like and then end up working in call centres........of course, I'm exaggerating for effect.

Student loans do not make sense. Apprentiships, both technical and commercial do, but that's for a different thread.
 
For me it worked out brilliantly ... will have taken about 15 years.

You mean the old system worked out brilliantly for you!

15 years ago fees would have been £1,000/year? With a current interest rate of 1.25%.

Students graduating today would have at least 9 times as much debt. And at 5x the interest rate. A scary proposition.
 
For me (with children at Uni), the most scarey thing is the way the government have already started moving the goalposts. The loans were taken out in good faith, but already the earnings threshold has been frozen (effectively lowered in real terms). What happens if they extend or remove the 30 year cutoff? Or the proportion of salary that is taken? It's a worry. And with the fees as high as they are, it's tough for anyone but the wealthy to avoid taking them out. It's a minimum of £45k to fund one person through a 3 year degree at the moment (unless they live at home, in which case 30k+living expenses), not the sort of change I have lying about, (contributions welcome...)
 
:thup: students are more interested in getting tanked and humping than studying. That's why most of them leave with degree's in "media with tourism" or something like and then end up working in call centres........of course, I'm exaggerating for effect.

You are exaggerating, but to such an extent that it has no effect apart from looking suspiciously ill-informed...
 
If your daughter is good at saving, she'd be better taking the full amount and not spending a penny over the 4 years of study. Then she would have a good sum of money saved for first deposit on a house. With interest on the loan in Scotland only rising with inflation it's the smart move IMO.

I don't understand how you can count borrowed money as "savings". You haven't saved up at all, you've borrowed money and now have debt.

My daughter won't be doing anything like that.
 
I don't understand how you can count borrowed money as "savings". You haven't saved up at all, you've borrowed money and now have debt.

My daughter won't be doing anything like that.

But it is not classed as debt, and you probably will never have to pay it off.
 
Top