Jeremy Corbyn

[ClaretMoffitt]

His promise made to our countries recently politically invigorated students would cost a whopping 100bn to pay for. Funny, I don't remember seeing that costed in his "amazing manifesto", it's also funny how the Tories are getting absolutely slammed by his rabid supporters for parting with 1.5bn to support a specific part of the UK, but have no problem what so ever with a 100bn spend on students; that's 100bn that should be going to the NHS, or councils, or Social Care which he and his supporters claim to care so much about. Sure, 30bn of that was probably not gonna get paid back anyway, but still, thats a whole lot of money just to buy votes.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news ... d=39557664" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Bin Ont Turf]

Labour and their magic abacus.

[Sidney1st]

Hasn't one of his lot said this weekend that they'd look at the cost of clearing all student debt but wouldn't guarantee it?

I think she also said they wouldn't get at least a 3rd of it back either.

[Top Claret]

The labour way is to feed the electorate with bull sh-t and fantasy. Thank God the majority have not fallen for the labour bull sh-t,, or we would have a bigger shower than this lot who already govern the country

[HarryPottsDesk]

I suppose if this were a political forum the quality of the football comments would be crap too?

[SammyBoy]

Higher education should be free, as it is in plenty of European countries, but I also think people shouldn't be doing degrees in Basket Weaving at the University of Hebden Bridge. It should go back to being free but the entry requirements need to be more stringent, and before anybody points it out I know the aforementioned course and institution don't exist .. yet.

[ClaretMoffitt]

Higher education should be free, as it is in plenty of European countries, but I also think people shouldn't be doing degrees in Basket Weaving at the University of Hebden Bridge. It should go back to being free but the entry requirements need to be more stringent, and before anybody points it out I know the aforementioned course and institution don't exist .. yet.

I could definitely support free fees for STEM subjects and for people to advance in technical skills. Wouldnt mind funding that, but for the trash many go to Uni for today, to force that on the taxpayer is criminal imo.

[Sidney1st]

In the US the parents put money into a college fund for their kids.
I don't know if they expect the state to pay for it all.

[Imploding Turtle]

His promise made to our countries recently politically invigorated students would cost a whopping 100bn to pay for. Funny, I don't remember seeing that costed in his "amazing manifesto", it's also funny how the Tories are getting absolutely slammed by his rabid supporters for parting with 1.5bn to support a specific part of the UK, but have no problem what so ever with a 100bn spend on students; that's 100bn that should be going to the NHS, or councils, or Social Care which he and his supporters claim to care so much about. Sure, 30bn of that was probably not gonna get paid back anyway, but still, thats a whole lot of money just to buy votes.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news ... d=39557664" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The manifesto didn't say it was going to completely clear student debt. Perhaps that's why it wasn't costed in the manifesto; it wasn't in it.

[FactualFrank]

I could definitely support free fees for STEM subjects and for people to advance in technical skills. Wouldnt mind funding that, but for the trash many go to Uni for today, to force that on the taxpayer is criminal imo.

I know what you're saying, but I assume STEM includes IT courses... you get A LOT of layabouts who go into this field who can't even turn on a computer. All this will do is people say, "Hey mate, what are you goin in for?" ... "Dunno, init... IT I think".

You can do beginners courses with 0 GCSEs and hardly being able to give us your name, so it needs to be very clear as to who can do these.

[Sidney1st]

http://www.nme.com/news/jeremy-corbyn-w ... bt-2082478" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In all fairness to him, he did say they couldn't do a true costing at the time due to the short time to the election.

[Rick_Muller]

I could definitely support free fees for STEM subjects and for people to advance in technical skills. Wouldnt mind funding that, but for the trash many go to Uni for today, to force that on the taxpayer is criminal imo.

I'm with you on that, we need to invest in education for the subjects that will improve the country economically - I make that distinction to avoid funding what some would believe to be good subjects like history and art, but in reality these won't run factories or generate wealth for the country.

[bobinho]

He isn't as numb as I intially thought.

Well and truly on the student/young people bandwagon after his "success" at glasto. Relying on the fact that young people are generally stupid enough to believe what he says without working out the numbers first.

Come the revolution brother...

[Damo]

I don't know why they bother going to university.
As soon as they are qualified to do something useful, they will be targeted by the unemployed
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/s ... ith-abuse/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Imploding Turtle]

Yep, because only hard left-wing people are unemployed.

[Lancasterclaret]

No politician bothers telling the truth anymore.

Why would you? people believe anything if they want to.

[Damo]

Yep, because only hard left-wing people are unemployed.

Hey Charlie. How come you don't go on, and on, and on, and on, and on about how unfair FPTP is as a voting system since Labour won the election a few weeks ago?

[LoveCurryPies]

The wealthy and better off mid class simply pick up their kid's uni costs. And provide the money for a house or at least the deposit for a house.

It's the poor and lower mid class who are left with a large Uni bill hanging around their heads. How these kids will ever get on the housing ladder is beyond me.

I do think uni fees should be scrapped. I would find the money by cutting military spending and a penny on income tax.

But I found all your of Corbyn's many spending schemes to be poorly costed. It was a lie that only the top 5% would pay.

We need a middle ground party...good social policies but properly costed and funded.

[dermotdermot]

I wish that woman on the podium at the Durham Miners Gala today had given Corbyn a slap. He deserved it by the way his minders were man handling her.

[Damo]

Martin Lewis pulled apart the uni fees argument this week.
My gripe is that everyone should pay back their fees. It would encourage people to study relivant subjects instead of tossing it off for a few years

[ablueclaret]

LCP I think you're right about us all having to pay more, with the rich paying some extra on top of that.
However I feel the Labour Party have shown themselves to be a middle class party with this policy, it's the kids who don't go to Uni who most need the help.
For me I'd like to see all kids get a sum of cash to spend on their education, business or future development, to be used when they think best

[Imploding Turtle]

Hey Charlie. How come you don't go on, and on, and on, and on, and on about how unfair FPTP is as a voting system since Labour won the election a few weeks ago?

What, like the day after the election?



None of you ***** cared when we had the most insanely disproportional result 2 years ago so why would you expect me to think you'd give a **** now?
You seem to like polarised two-party politics. I'm more than willing to talk about FPTP and how **** it is but none of you seemed to give a ****. And if you do then why didn't you care two years ago?

By all means talk about FPTP, i'll contribute and spend time explaining the evidence for how ****** up it is, but i'm not going to make the initial effort for you.

And by the way, this weak-as-**** attempt to discredit FPTP opponents because we're not as loud now as we were immediately after an objectively worse election result in terms of proportionality is demonstrative of the fact that you're not interested in playing the ball.

[ElectroClaret]

Is he Irish?

[pureclaret]

tories 1 labour 0 get over it

[basil6345789]

Combined degree courses, eg Gap Year Design combined with American Studies, should be axed

[Imploding Turtle]

Combined degree courses, eg Gap Year Design combined with American Studies, should be axed

OK. Why?

[Clarets4me]

I do think uni fees should be scrapped. I would find the money by cutting military spending and a penny on income tax.

But I found all your of Corbyn's many spending schemes to be poorly costed. It was a lie that only the top 5% would pay.

We need a middle ground party...good social policies but properly costed and funded.

Since 1979, the proportion of Income Tax paid by the top 1% of earners, has risen from 11 to 28%. In 2009/10, Corporation Tax stood at 28%, and it's now at 19%, with the result that Revenue has risen by 40%...

One penny on Income Tax, would raise between £4.5 - £ 5.5 Billion at most. We need a wider tax base, as a lot of people have been taken out of paying any Income Tax, by the growth in the personal allowance under both the Coalition & Conservative Governments. In 2009/10, you started paying tax after you'd earnt £6,475, this tax year it's £11,500. A 5p Income Tax rate between say £7,800 and £11,500, would bring in £185 a year from everybody earning over £150 pw, that adds up to a lot of money..

I would look at other measures too, an additional Sales tax on on-line purchases for one...

[LoveCurryPies]

Since 1979, the proportion of Income Tax paid by the top 1% of earners, has risen from 11 to 28%. In 2009/10, Corporation Tax stood at 28%, and it's now at 19%, with the result that Revenue has risen by 40%...

One penny on Income Tax, would raise between £4.5 - £ 5.5 Billion at most. We need a wider tax base, as a lot of people have been taken out of paying any Income Tax, by the growth in the personal allowance under both the Coalition & Conservative Governments. In 2009/10, you started paying tax after you'd earnt £6,475, this tax year it's £11,500. A 5p Income Tax rate between say £7,800 and £11,500, would bring in £185 a year from everybody earning over £150 pw, that adds up to a lot of money..

I would look at other measures too, an additional Sales tax on on-line purchases for one...

You want to starting taxing people who earn less than £11,500? It would cost more to collect than what it would bring in and to those people it would mean not eating.

[Clarets4me]

You want to starting taxing people who earn less than £11,500? It would cost more to collect than what it would bring in and to those people it would mean not eating.

In 2009/10, under Gordon Brown, someone earning £11,500 pa would have paid £761 in Income Tax during that year...

My proposal would mean them paying £3.55 pw or £185 pa.

Everyone earning more than £7,800 pa would pay the 5% rate on their first £3700 above that figure, from a Refuse Collector to Sir Alan Sugar. Costs would be negligible, as most would be collected through PAYE. The Institute for Fiscal Studies revealed in April 2016, that around 43% of Britons of working age, pay no Income Tax...this measure would raise a minimum of £5.5 Billion...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04 ... ich-incre/

[AndrewJB]

Since 1979, the proportion of Income Tax paid by the top 1% of earners, has risen from 11 to 28%. In 2009/10, Corporation Tax stood at 28%, and it's now at 19%, with the result that Revenue has risen by 40%...

One penny on Income Tax, would raise between £4.5 - £ 5.5 Billion at most. We need a wider tax base, as a lot of people have been taken out of paying any Income Tax, by the growth in the personal allowance under both the Coalition & Conservative Governments. In 2009/10, you started paying tax after you'd earnt £6,475, this tax year it's £11,500. A 5p Income Tax rate between say £7,800 and £11,500, would bring in £185 a year from everybody earning over £150 pw, that adds up to a lot of money..

I would look at other measures too, an additional Sales tax on on-line purchases for one...

[If it be your will]

.

[HatfieldClaret]

LCP I think you're right about us all having to pay more, with the rich paying some extra on top of that.
However I feel the Labour Party have shown themselves to be a middle class party with this policy, it's the kids who don't go to Uni who most need the help.
For me I'd like to see all kids get a sum of cash to spend on their education, business or future development, to be used when they think best

So who will be paying for that FFS ? Can that grant be back dated for all of us who didn't go to uni ?
What pie in the sky crap. You could be shadow minister for brilliant ideas.
Middle class party ? FFS !

[Paul Waine]

My thoughts on a few of the points made above:

1) I like abc's idea of a "voucher" (or call it a grant) for every individual that can be spent towards the cost of "getting started in life beyond school." It would be truly egalitarian to treat everyone equally, whether they were academically capable to pursue a degree course, or wanted to pursue another path to their "working life" (or other contribution to society). And, yes, I support them being free to decide when, as well as how, they would invest their voucher. The voucher, of course, would be funded by taxation - and so the progressive taxation system that we operate in the UK would deal with the different backgrounds of the individuals.

2) There is a problem with the ever higher personal tax allowances. Somewhere there has to be a ceiling for income that can be received before income tax is paid. A divide between income tax payer and non-income tax payer is not healthy for society. It is better that everyone feels that they are contributing - according to their means, of course. I doubt the marginal cost of collecting income tax is particularly high: payroll systems are almost invariably computerised and now link to (most) government systems, national insurance records are also maintained (including records of NI when below NI limits - all needed to establish pension rights), plus working tax credits and non-working benefits - so, we are all in the system, one way of another.

3) There is no benefit to admitting young (or old) to university if they haven't attained the educational standards to benefit from a degree. So called "mickey mouse" degrees are a con on these individuals. Much better to give them the opportunity (and support) to fill the gaps in their education before joining a degree course - or provide the training to give them the skills to pursue another path in life.

[aggi]

In terms of only funding STEM subjects, if you look around at the degrees in an an investment bank the vast majority will be STEM subjects, same in many other high paid jobs. It seems a bit backwards to remove fees for qualifications that get you the highest paid jobs.

Let's be honest, a large number of degrees, whether it be STEM or basket weaving, don't get used beyond graduation. It's the skills that are developed, critical thinking, research, debate, analysis, etc that are valuable.

[Lancasterclaret]

I've got to be honest, I use my history only on here these days.

Still been useful though, for all the reasons aggi mentions.

[Rileybobs]

I think the most important thing you learn at university is independence. You learn a lot of life lessons moving away from home and fending for yourself at 18. Not that that's a reason for university education to be state funded.

[kentonclaret]

Theresa May will make a speech tomorrow begging and pleading for the support of Jeremy Corbyn and his party in a final throw of the dice as she desperately tries to cling to power (or asking for ideas and policy suggestions from rival parties as she embarks on her crusade to spread fairness and prosperity throughout Britain having already made a start with NI).

Jeremy Corbyn pointed her in the direction of the "Magic Money Tree" and she went and stole £1 billion.

[Paul Waine]

In terms of only funding STEM subjects, if you look around at the degrees in an an investment bank the vast majority will be STEM subjects, same in many other high paid jobs. It seems a bit backwards to remove fees for qualifications that get you the highest paid jobs.

Let's be honest, a large number of degrees, whether it be STEM or basket weaving, don't get used beyond graduation. It's the skills that are developed, critical thinking, research, debate, analysis, etc that are valuable.

Hi aggi, what if the students for STEM subjects are from backgrounds that need assistance to go to uni?

I wouldn't limit support to STEM and other subjects that can achieve "high paid" jobs. Many good students of history, English, foreign languages, geography, economics, philosophy and more, can also go on and achieve "high paid" jobs, whether it is in the professions, teaching or other jobs. And, then we need doctors, dentists, nurses and other medical professions.

But, as I've posted, I'd also provide support for people who don't have the capability to benefit from a good degree; provide them with other training opportunities or support in setting up in business etc etc.

I guess you know that the reason STEM jobs are strongly represented in investment banks is because the mathematical and IT skills are critical to be a successful investment banker - just as these skills can contribute towards success in many other roles.

Some degree subjects are more vocational than others. I agree that is the deployment of the skills acquired in studying, whatever the specific subject, that are valuable.

[AndrewJB]

I think history is anything but pointless as a subject at university. It's the collective memory of our society, and any culture that ignores or devalues it will risk a kind of societal dementia.

[Lancasterclaret]

Or "those that fail to learn the lessons from history are doomed to repeat them"

[HatfieldClaret]

Or "those that fail to learn the lessons from history are doomed to repeat them"

The one thing we learn from history is....

We don't learn.

Therein lies the problem.

[pureclaret]

Its not often I agree with Ablueclaret but hes right again on what about the people who dont go to University. Do they get a £50,000 voucher to start there own business. They could then pay a nominal amount back over say 30 years and if the business fails after 5 years then they pay nothing back
Only 40% of uk new businesses fail in the first 5 years. So 60% of people will be running there own business and not a drain on the state hopefully.
I also think that the Financial times says that on average a University graduate will earn £9,000 a year more than someone who has not been to university after 5 years so surely they can pay back the loans by the time they are 30 (I do think the rate of interest is to high but is this not a spur to pay it off quicker.)

[BennyD]

However, those with a degree tend to think that the best jobs are their right and having got one of those plum jobs, resent having to pay back the money that got them the degree that got them the job. Today's mantra is; it's all about me.

[evensteadiereddie]

You know a lot of graduates, do you ?

[pureclaret]

Why not have the loan paid back within 10 yrs but no /low interest if paid back within 10 yrs fees could be lowered as they would be repeated and paid back so could be reinvested into economy. Also make the graduate more responsible for the loans.

[Lancasterclaret]

Interest free loans up to ten years would be the way to do it.

[If it be your will]

.

[FactualFrank]

Can he play central midfield?

[If it be your will]

.

[pureclaret]

But surely any one who has borrowed money or saved it to start there own business should get there loans paid off as well, with perhaps a bonus paid for how many people they employ /have employed over the lifetime of the business or at least 30 yrs