Free Education

I am so ignorant about so many current issues that I am afraid I am not quite sure what the question refers to. But I prefer by the far the system where education is not controlled by big business interests. The situation in continental Europe and as it was in the UK before Tony Blair seems far preferable to me.

It is not only the financial exploitation of students I fear, but also the DUMBING DOWN. I went to an Anglican college in Wales shortly after the Blair government started university charges - and it was very clear to me that the new competitive market that had been introduced into Britain was resulting in making the curriculum far more stupid than it had been previously. (At least more stupid in terms of the humanities which are most prone to suffer in this situation.)

Again, so ignorant of so much that is current. But ignorant as I am, I do tend to fear that the Anglosphere will only get dumber by importing these American methods and that continental Europe will preserve high culture better the longer she resists Americanisation.

I agree it's immoral to take another person's property in most cases, but I don't agree that taxation and redistribution are inherently wrong. We only have property in the first place because we live in a community that can defend and guarantee our claims to property. The community has, in my view, a reasonable claim to some of our property in return.

I agree with you totally about lesbian dancing. And yet, I have mixed feelings. For all my dislike of the leftism in academe, I appreciate the fact that a large amount of people can dedicate their lives to the things of the mind, without any immediate practical application. Which is better, a woman writing books of feminist film theory or the same woman coming up with marketing slogans for yoghurt? I think the feminist film theory is better, because at least it's subject matter is less trivial.

In 2017, some 49% of young people in England were expected to have entered advanced studies by the age of 30. Those advanced studies were in Universities and other colleges offering courses at an advanced level.

That's a big proportion, and it's a target that Tony Blair aimed for in 1999. It used to be said that the government wanted this high participation because it kept a substantial number of young people out of the unemployed numbers and in education. Even better if the student goes on to spend another few years doing a Masters.

When I was doing my degree in the early eighties, the fees were paid for by the government and we even got a free maintenance grant. The taxpayer footed the bill. Now the majority of UK students have to take out a tuition fee loan and maintenance loan (for accommodation and living costs). The average debt for an English graduate would be about £32,000, and about £20,000 for NI graduates. 

The ironic thing is that the taxpayer will end up paying some of that, as it is reckoned that 75% of students will not have paid the full loan back by the time they retire as they will be on relatively low or average wages, and the repayment is based on what they earn over and above a threshold (£25,000 per year). So you pay nothing if you earn £24,999 or less per year. 

The advantage of student loans is that anyone can afford to go to University if they don't mind the debt (which in reality is more like a graduate tax). 

In reality though, many of the courses are made easy to enter and hold out little chance of a strong job (media studies, humanities etc).

There are also credible stories that some tough modules have been made easier for first year students to pass so that they don't drop out and the University retains them and their money.

I think it would probably be better if fewer students attended university. First, many aren't suited to academia. Many are doing lightweight degrees. Entrance qualifications could rise to take in only the better students for job oriented degrees and many degree subject areas could be abolished or the numbers they accept cut dramatically. Hopefully quality would increase.

This is a subject one which I don't really have an opinion. If people are wasting their time and money going to college, then they shouldn't. But I've often heard that college education increases your income-- even "rubbishy" degrees. All the "do you want chips with that?" jokes don't seem to be true, on the whole.

I've worked as a university library assistant for the last sixteen years. I've become somewhat protective of the students, especially the slow ones. So I am biased. College has to be seen under two aspects-- training on the one hand, a life experience on the other. But, as I say, I don't have any definite opinions. The crippling levels of college debt in America seem obviously wrong to me, but I don't think there's such a thing as RIGHT to a college education, either.