Liveblog: 1,500 students join Brighton march against education cuts (From The Argus)

true-brightonian wrote:
Having spoken to local students, it is obvious that support for this walkout is huge. I urge everyone to support our students and the future of this country. An educated population is a necessity for us, and the government's proposals mean that further education will not be an option for many and will leave those who do attend with a lifetime of debt. How is it that someone who studies nursing or teaching at degree level pays back the same as someone who studies finance or banking?

true-brightonian wrote:
@sussexladybabe, the world has changed since then. Today's youngsters are told from Day 1 then need to get a degree, otherwise their lives are not worth living. On top of that, 30 years ago this country made actual things. Those manufacturing jobs are long gone now. To get a job that allows you to raise a family today, I am afraid you need to have an education. 30 years ago most jobs didn't require a degree. Today they do. Our young people will find themselves having to compete against better educated Europeans, Indians and Chinese. Maybe you should study history.

true-brightonian wrote:
@Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

Fight Back wrote:

true-brightonian wrote: @sussexladybabe, the world has changed since then. Today's youngsters are told from Day 1 then need to get a degree, otherwise their lives are not worth living. On top of that, 30 years ago this country made actual things. Those manufacturing jobs are long gone now. To get a job that allows you to raise a family today, I am afraid you need to have an education. 30 years ago most jobs didn't require a degree. Today they do. Our young people will find themselves having to compete against better educated Europeans, Indians and Chinese. Maybe you should study history.

Strange because I know plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters that make very decent livings without a degree. It's a myth that you have to go to Uni to be able to get a decent job. Many achieve it with honest sweat and toil without being a drain on the taxpayer.

true-brightonian wrote:
@sussexladybabe, the world has changed since then. Today's youngsters are told from Day 1 then need to get a degree, otherwise their lives are not worth living. On top of that, 30 years ago this country made actual things. Those manufacturing jobs are long gone now. To get a job that allows you to raise a family today, I am afraid you need to have an education. 30 years ago most jobs didn't require a degree. Today they do. Our young people will find themselves having to compete against better educated Europeans, Indians and Chinese. Maybe you should study history.

LtPaperclip wrote:
I dont care about students and object to having my tax used to fund their education.

LtPaperclip wrote:
I dont care about students and object to having my tax used to fund their education.

Lady Smith wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote: I dont care about students and object to having my tax used to fund their education.

I don't care about LtPaperclip and object to having my tax used to fund their ...... . Not so nice being on the receiving end of a selfish, narrow-minded outlook, is it?

rs wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote: I dont care about students and object to having my tax used to fund their education.

and when you retire those well paid graduates will be helping to fund you. Its not just the graduates that benefit from higher education its the ecconomy as a whole. there's a reason why the emerging ecconomies are throwing money at education.

commentisfree wrote:
Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote: Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry . There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

commentisfree wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote: Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry . There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

Aw bless, you really don't understand, do you? These cuts are about the Government removing all state support, and not just from students. Students do need to support themselves to an extent - we all have to. But not to the point where only the wealthy can succeed. Smelling that coffee yet?

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote:
Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry .
There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

Skippah wrote:
The whole reason we can no longer fund and subsidise all these students is because of the idea that was pushed on us that everybody had the right to go to university. Had we just stuck with putting the best of the best, regardless of their background, into university we could afford to fund them all fully. . The majority of the people protesting are only at university because we ignored our ability to fund them via tax money, now they are being told to pay (only once they are earning £21k, mind you) for their educations, they don't like it. . Still, they aren't happy and have the right to protest, and I support that fully. Whilst not agreeing with them, they are doing what they think is right, so good on them!

MisterB wrote:
One of the little oiks threw an orange up at the window my colleagues and I were leaning out of. Scumbag students.

Why aren't they in class anyway? It's term time.

true-brightonian wrote:
@Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

Fight Back wrote:

true-brightonian wrote: @Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

The key statement in your reply is "but not everyone can be" - EXACTLY. And so not everyone should expect to go to Uni or indeed be able to go to Uni. Unfortunately the current generation believe it to be a right rather than a privilege. University should be for the very top performing students NOT 50% of the population.

Fight Back wrote:

true-brightonian wrote:
@Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

The key statement in your reply is "but not everyone can be" - EXACTLY. And so not everyone should expect to go to Uni or indeed be able to go to Uni. Unfortunately the current generation believe it to be a right rather than a privilege. University should be for the very top performing students NOT 50% of the population.

Tippy Toes wrote:

true-brightonian wrote:
@Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

I have a senior role at an independent school and I don't have a degree. Mr Lahey, I would say that I do have a decent job. When I left school very few people went on to University, but now it seems to be the norm. People just expect to go and for the rest of us to pay for them!

Ballroom Blitz wrote:
I'll tell you all something: The rights and wrongs of this protest are one thing - let's put that to one side for a moment. Let's address this point: If any of you people protesting genuinely think that this arrogant, self serving, tory led government will pay the slightest attention to any of you - you are all all very sadly deluded and shouldn't be allowed out of doors for your own safety.

true-brightonian wrote:
@Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

jeremy radvan wrote:

Tippy Toes wrote:

true-brightonian wrote:
@Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

I have a senior role at an independent school and I don't have a degree. Mr Lahey, I would say that I do have a decent job. When I left school very few people went on to University, but now it seems to be the norm. People just expect to go and for the rest of us to pay for them!

Good heavens! someone who works at a public school complaining about people expecting other people to pay for them.
Perhaps you could explain why the luxury of a private education is not subject to VAT? and why teachers at public schools are entitled to join the STATE subsidised Teachers' Pension Scheme? Scrounging and freeloading is at the very foundation of the public school business.

Tippy Toes wrote:

jeremy radvan wrote:

Tippy Toes wrote:

true-brightonian wrote:
@Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

I have a senior role at an independent school and I don't have a degree. Mr Lahey, I would say that I do have a decent job. When I left school very few people went on to University, but now it seems to be the norm. People just expect to go and for the rest of us to pay for them!

Good heavens! someone who works at a public school complaining about people expecting other people to pay for them.
Perhaps you could explain why the luxury of a private education is not subject to VAT? and why teachers at public schools are entitled to join the STATE subsidised Teachers' Pension Scheme? Scrounging and freeloading is at the very foundation of the public school business.

I never said I was a teacher did I!!!

jeremy radvan wrote:

Tippy Toes wrote:

jeremy radvan wrote:

Tippy Toes wrote:

true-brightonian wrote:
@Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

I have a senior role at an independent school and I don't have a degree. Mr Lahey, I would say that I do have a decent job. When I left school very few people went on to University, but now it seems to be the norm. People just expect to go and for the rest of us to pay for them!

Good heavens! someone who works at a public school complaining about people expecting other people to pay for them.
Perhaps you could explain why the luxury of a private education is not subject to VAT? and why teachers at public schools are entitled to join the STATE subsidised Teachers' Pension Scheme? Scrounging and freeloading is at the very foundation of the public school business.

I never said I was a teacher did I!!!

If you get someone qualified to read my comment to you then you will see that at no point did I suggest that you are a teacher. Haven't you got some leaves to sweep up.

Tippy Toes wrote:

true-brightonian wrote:
@Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

I have a senior role at an independent school and I don't have a degree. Mr Lahey, I would say that I do have a decent job. When I left school very few people went on to University, but now it seems to be the norm. People just expect to go and for the rest of us to pay for them!

LtPaperclip wrote:
I dont care about students and object to having my tax used to fund their education.

heidic1234 wrote:

Tippy Toes wrote:

true-brightonian wrote:
@Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

I have a senior role at an independent school and I don't have a degree. Mr Lahey, I would say that I do have a decent job. When I left school very few people went on to University, but now it seems to be the norm. People just expect to go and for the rest of us to pay for them!

Aren't you lucky you have gotten yourself a senior job at a PRIVATE school?
Do you realise that you can't get teaching jobs WITHOUT degree's now. Why should only the rich from your independent school get to go on to university? By the way, you aren't actually paying for our degree's WE ARE. Our loans HAVE TO BE PAID BACK!
It must be very nice to be in a secure job like yours, thank your lucky stars you are not a poor working class 18 year old with an ability to become academic!

Tippy Toes wrote:

jeremy radvan wrote:

Tippy Toes wrote:

jeremy radvan wrote:

Tippy Toes wrote:

true-brightonian wrote:
@Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

I have a senior role at an independent school and I don't have a degree. Mr Lahey, I would say that I do have a decent job. When I left school very few people went on to University, but now it seems to be the norm. People just expect to go and for the rest of us to pay for them!

Good heavens! someone who works at a public school complaining about people expecting other people to pay for them.
Perhaps you could explain why the luxury of a private education is not subject to VAT? and why teachers at public schools are entitled to join the STATE subsidised Teachers' Pension Scheme? Scrounging and freeloading is at the very foundation of the public school business.

I never said I was a teacher did I!!!

If you get someone qualified to read my comment to you then you will see that at no point did I suggest that you are a teacher. Haven't you got some leaves to sweep up.

Oh I see, so now I am not educated? Is that because I am not a teacher or because I sweep leaves??? What an ignorant idiot you really are. My point was that I didn't go to university but through hard work I have managed to get a decent well paid job. I have never asked anyone else pay for me. I object to students moaning about how hard their life is.

blesshim wrote:
Teachers at Portslade Community College are actively encouraging their 5th form students skip this afternoon's lessons to join the march

toldsloth wrote:
Then they should be reprimanded. Look, we cannot afford to go on as we are. Once you've graduated and got a job you will not even notice the repayments on the loan. It is the cheapest money you will ever get. I know students who used theirs to buy cars for crying out loud! Stop moaning and knuckle down to some study

LawStudent wrote:
I applaud Tea Break as he is obviously the only person on this forum who is bothered enough to see the bigger picture. Students in year 9, 10 and 11 will lose momentum to achieve as they know for a fact they will no longer have the opportunity to become a doctor or lawyer etc. So referring to someone’s earlier comment on how students are a drain on the tax payer, how do you think that’s going to change when students don’t go to university, can’t find jobs because of lack of qualifications, and rely on job seeker’s allowance and take even more of your hard earned money? I certainly want the opportunity to become successful in my chosen field; law, and definitely can’t achieve that without a university degree. What most annoys me is the fact that people who have jobs and earn a living for themselves and their families today, don’t realise how hard it is in this current climate to get a job. Yes it is good you have a job and you can afford to be judgmental, but what about the students who are just starting out, who have nothing and you aren’t helping them and the government aren’t helping them, by rising university prices and making the opportunity to better yourself less available to any student, because who says someone who can afford these fees deserves the education more than someone who can’t?

LtPaperclip wrote:
I dont care about students and object to having my tax used to fund their education.

LawStudent wrote:
I applaud Tea Break as he is obviously the only person on this forum who is bothered enough to see the bigger picture. Students in year 9, 10 and 11 will lose momentum to achieve as they know for a fact they will no longer have the opportunity to become a doctor or lawyer etc. So referring to someone’s earlier comment on how students are a drain on the tax payer, how do you think that’s going to change when students don’t go to university, can’t find jobs because of lack of qualifications, and rely on job seeker’s allowance and take even more of your hard earned money? I certainly want the opportunity to become successful in my chosen field; law, and definitely can’t achieve that without a university degree. What most annoys me is the fact that people who have jobs and earn a living for themselves and their families today, don’t realise how hard it is in this current climate to get a job. Yes it is good you have a job and you can afford to be judgmental, but what about the students who are just starting out, who have nothing and you aren’t helping them and the government aren’t helping them, by rising university prices and making the opportunity to better yourself less available to any student, because who says someone who can afford these fees deserves the education more than someone who can’t?

LtPaperclip wrote:

Skippah wrote:
The whole reason we can no longer fund and subsidise all these students is because of the idea that was pushed on us that everybody had the right to go to university. Had we just stuck with putting the best of the best, regardless of their background, into university we could afford to fund them all fully. . The majority of the people protesting are only at university because we ignored our ability to fund them via tax money, now they are being told to pay (only once they are earning £21k, mind you) for their educations, they don't like it. . Still, they aren't happy and have the right to protest, and I support that fully. Whilst not agreeing with them, they are doing what they think is right, so good on them!

I dont even agree with them having the right to protest. What right do the schools have to allow there pupils to leave school and go out on a march ??????? which parents gave permission for that ? The secondary schools that let children out of school should be prosecuted.

Fight Back wrote:

LawStudent wrote:
I applaud Tea Break as he is obviously the only person on this forum who is bothered enough to see the bigger picture. Students in year 9, 10 and 11 will lose momentum to achieve as they know for a fact they will no longer have the opportunity to become a doctor or lawyer etc. So referring to someone’s earlier comment on how students are a drain on the tax payer, how do you think that’s going to change when students don’t go to university, can’t find jobs because of lack of qualifications, and rely on job seeker’s allowance and take even more of your hard earned money? I certainly want the opportunity to become successful in my chosen field; law, and definitely can’t achieve that without a university degree. What most annoys me is the fact that people who have jobs and earn a living for themselves and their families today, don’t realise how hard it is in this current climate to get a job. Yes it is good you have a job and you can afford to be judgmental, but what about the students who are just starting out, who have nothing and you aren’t helping them and the government aren’t helping them, by rising university prices and making the opportunity to better yourself less available to any student, because who says someone who can afford these fees deserves the education more than someone who can’t?

As I made the comment on Uni students being a drain I'll answer you.

A majority of students now leave Uni and end up in either in low paid jobs or on the dole. So those in low paid jobs are a drain because they aren't paying back their fees and those on the dole are a double drain.

The answer is to make Unis exclusive to the best students again - not open them up to any man and his dog. I often interview people for positions and it's remarkable how awful the CV often is from degree holders. I've got fed up with degree holding students EXPECTING to get the job so now don't interview them - I look for experience rather than qualifications.

To the idiot that thinks he understands the private education sector - private schools that register as charities get tax relief because they are CHARITIES. They don't get direct subs from the state. Every penny they need to run the school they have to raise in fees or fund raising. All of them also make bursaries available to talented children that can't afford the fees. If the people who send their children to private schools didn't the state education would required considerably more funding than it does now. Your comments against a private education smack of envy rather than an intelligent understanding.

Ballroom Blitz wrote:
Well, yet another 'peaceful' Brighton protest ends up being taken over by the anarchist element that attends all such events in our city.
It's the 'same old, same old'.
The marchers may have a valid point to make, but in the end all anyone will remember is that they decided yet again to have a ruck with the police.
Hardly grown up or helping to put your point across.
Contrast with the public workers demo a couple of weekends ago where there was no trouble at all, and they made their point far more powerfully, and with dignity.
I'm fed up with mob rule, and rabble taking over our streets.
It proves nothing except your stupidity and immaturity, and makes me think that having to pay more for your uni education is nothing but a good thing. Maybe you'll appreciate it more.

brunswick63 wrote:
Had to laugh at the banner currently flying outside the window of the middle flat of 19 Brunswick Place; "Brunswick Place Is A Student Street We have A Human Right To Get Degrees". Pretty much demonstrates the mind-boggling intellect of todays students...

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote: Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry . There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

Aw bless, you really don't understand, do you? These cuts are about the Government removing all state support, and not just from students. Students do need to support themselves to an extent - we all have to. But not to the point where only the wealthy can succeed. Smelling that coffee yet?

awww bless , you really think you can intimidate me ? ha ha....any way as i am not entitled to any goverment benifits any way i dont see why i should care tbh, are the wealthy not already in the secceeded club ?

No one has told me yet why my tax should be used to pay for a adults education ?

Tea break wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

LawStudent wrote:
I applaud Tea Break as he is obviously the only person on this forum who is bothered enough to see the bigger picture. Students in year 9, 10 and 11 will lose momentum to achieve as they know for a fact they will no longer have the opportunity to become a doctor or lawyer etc. So referring to someone’s earlier comment on how students are a drain on the tax payer, how do you think that’s going to change when students don’t go to university, can’t find jobs because of lack of qualifications, and rely on job seeker’s allowance and take even more of your hard earned money? I certainly want the opportunity to become successful in my chosen field; law, and definitely can’t achieve that without a university degree. What most annoys me is the fact that people who have jobs and earn a living for themselves and their families today, don’t realise how hard it is in this current climate to get a job. Yes it is good you have a job and you can afford to be judgmental, but what about the students who are just starting out, who have nothing and you aren’t helping them and the government aren’t helping them, by rising university prices and making the opportunity to better yourself less available to any student, because who says someone who can afford these fees deserves the education more than someone who can’t?

As I made the comment on Uni students being a drain I'll answer you.

A majority of students now leave Uni and end up in either in low paid jobs or on the dole. So those in low paid jobs are a drain because they aren't paying back their fees and those on the dole are a double drain.

The answer is to make Unis exclusive to the best students again - not open them up to any man and his dog. I often interview people for positions and it's remarkable how awful the CV often is from degree holders. I've got fed up with degree holding students EXPECTING to get the job so now don't interview them - I look for experience rather than qualifications.

To the idiot that thinks he understands the private education sector - private schools that register as charities get tax relief because they are CHARITIES. They don't get direct subs from the state. Every penny they need to run the school they have to raise in fees or fund raising. All of them also make bursaries available to talented children that can't afford the fees. If the people who send their children to private schools didn't the state education would required considerably more funding than it does now. Your comments against a private education smack of envy rather than an intelligent understanding.

So you actively discriminate against people holding at degree looking for employment at your organisation? I'm sure your boss would be pleased to hear that rather than recruiting the best person for the job, irrespective of whether they hold a degree or not, you're filtering the CVs based on your personal opinion.

Tea break wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

LawStudent wrote:
I applaud Tea Break as he is obviously the only person on this forum who is bothered enough to see the bigger picture. Students in year 9, 10 and 11 will lose momentum to achieve as they know for a fact they will no longer have the opportunity to become a doctor or lawyer etc. So referring to someone’s earlier comment on how students are a drain on the tax payer, how do you think that’s going to change when students don’t go to university, can’t find jobs because of lack of qualifications, and rely on job seeker’s allowance and take even more of your hard earned money? I certainly want the opportunity to become successful in my chosen field; law, and definitely can’t achieve that without a university degree. What most annoys me is the fact that people who have jobs and earn a living for themselves and their families today, don’t realise how hard it is in this current climate to get a job. Yes it is good you have a job and you can afford to be judgmental, but what about the students who are just starting out, who have nothing and you aren’t helping them and the government aren’t helping them, by rising university prices and making the opportunity to better yourself less available to any student, because who says someone who can afford these fees deserves the education more than someone who can’t?

As I made the comment on Uni students being a drain I'll answer you.

A majority of students now leave Uni and end up in either in low paid jobs or on the dole. So those in low paid jobs are a drain because they aren't paying back their fees and those on the dole are a double drain.

The answer is to make Unis exclusive to the best students again - not open them up to any man and his dog. I often interview people for positions and it's remarkable how awful the CV often is from degree holders. I've got fed up with degree holding students EXPECTING to get the job so now don't interview them - I look for experience rather than qualifications.

To the idiot that thinks he understands the private education sector - private schools that register as charities get tax relief because they are CHARITIES. They don't get direct subs from the state. Every penny they need to run the school they have to raise in fees or fund raising. All of them also make bursaries available to talented children that can't afford the fees. If the people who send their children to private schools didn't the state education would required considerably more funding than it does now. Your comments against a private education smack of envy rather than an intelligent understanding.

So you actively discriminate against people holding at degree looking for employment at your organisation? I'm sure your boss would be pleased to hear that rather than recruiting the best person for the job, irrespective of whether they hold a degree or not, you're filtering the CVs based on your personal opinion.

Fight Back wrote:

Tea break wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

LawStudent wrote:
I applaud Tea Break as he is obviously the only person on this forum who is bothered enough to see the bigger picture. Students in year 9, 10 and 11 will lose momentum to achieve as they know for a fact they will no longer have the opportunity to become a doctor or lawyer etc. So referring to someone’s earlier comment on how students are a drain on the tax payer, how do you think that’s going to change when students don’t go to university, can’t find jobs because of lack of qualifications, and rely on job seeker’s allowance and take even more of your hard earned money? I certainly want the opportunity to become successful in my chosen field; law, and definitely can’t achieve that without a university degree. What most annoys me is the fact that people who have jobs and earn a living for themselves and their families today, don’t realise how hard it is in this current climate to get a job. Yes it is good you have a job and you can afford to be judgmental, but what about the students who are just starting out, who have nothing and you aren’t helping them and the government aren’t helping them, by rising university prices and making the opportunity to better yourself less available to any student, because who says someone who can afford these fees deserves the education more than someone who can’t?

As I made the comment on Uni students being a drain I'll answer you.

A majority of students now leave Uni and end up in either in low paid jobs or on the dole. So those in low paid jobs are a drain because they aren't paying back their fees and those on the dole are a double drain.

The answer is to make Unis exclusive to the best students again - not open them up to any man and his dog. I often interview people for positions and it's remarkable how awful the CV often is from degree holders. I've got fed up with degree holding students EXPECTING to get the job so now don't interview them - I look for experience rather than qualifications.

To the idiot that thinks he understands the private education sector - private schools that register as charities get tax relief because they are CHARITIES. They don't get direct subs from the state. Every penny they need to run the school they have to raise in fees or fund raising. All of them also make bursaries available to talented children that can't afford the fees. If the people who send their children to private schools didn't the state education would required considerably more funding than it does now. Your comments against a private education smack of envy rather than an intelligent understanding.

So you actively discriminate against people holding at degree looking for employment at your organisation? I'm sure your boss would be pleased to hear that rather than recruiting the best person for the job, irrespective of whether they hold a degree or not, you're filtering the CVs based on your personal opinion.

Yes - it's call filtering the candidates. 99.9% of the time those with work experience have been the better candidate rather than those with a bit of paper from a Uni. As no company has the time to interview all candidates you have to find a method that gets you to a decent candidate the quickest. Given virtually all the CVs I've ever read from graduates are very poor and often contain spelling mistakes they are some of the first CVs filtered out. Oh, my boss knows my filtering process and uses it as well !

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

Colin Houlson wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote: Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry . There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

Aw bless, you really don't understand, do you? These cuts are about the Government removing all state support, and not just from students. Students do need to support themselves to an extent - we all have to. But not to the point where only the wealthy can succeed. Smelling that coffee yet?

awww bless , you really think you can intimidate me ? ha ha....any way as i am not entitled to any goverment benifits any way i dont see why i should care tbh, are the wealthy not already in the secceeded club ? No one has told me yet why my tax should be used to pay for a adults education ?

Perhaps you should put some of your precious tax to good use and get 'a adult education'.

kkj wrote:

Colin Houlson wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote: Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry . There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

Aw bless, you really don't understand, do you? These cuts are about the Government removing all state support, and not just from students. Students do need to support themselves to an extent - we all have to. But not to the point where only the wealthy can succeed. Smelling that coffee yet?

awww bless , you really think you can intimidate me ? ha ha....any way as i am not entitled to any goverment benifits any way i dont see why i should care tbh, are the wealthy not already in the secceeded club ? No one has told me yet why my tax should be used to pay for a adults education ?

Perhaps you should put some of your precious tax to good use and get 'a adult education'.

I think what LtPaperclip is getting at is that as he has never used anyone's tax money to get an education, why should other people use his to get one? At least that's what I surmise from reading his posts.

Colin Houlson wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

Tea break wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

LawStudent wrote:
I applaud Tea Break as he is obviously the only person on this forum who is bothered enough to see the bigger picture. Students in year 9, 10 and 11 will lose momentum to achieve as they know for a fact they will no longer have the opportunity to become a doctor or lawyer etc. So referring to someone’s earlier comment on how students are a drain on the tax payer, how do you think that’s going to change when students don’t go to university, can’t find jobs because of lack of qualifications, and rely on job seeker’s allowance and take even more of your hard earned money? I certainly want the opportunity to become successful in my chosen field; law, and definitely can’t achieve that without a university degree. What most annoys me is the fact that people who have jobs and earn a living for themselves and their families today, don’t realise how hard it is in this current climate to get a job. Yes it is good you have a job and you can afford to be judgmental, but what about the students who are just starting out, who have nothing and you aren’t helping them and the government aren’t helping them, by rising university prices and making the opportunity to better yourself less available to any student, because who says someone who can afford these fees deserves the education more than someone who can’t?

As I made the comment on Uni students being a drain I'll answer you.

A majority of students now leave Uni and end up in either in low paid jobs or on the dole. So those in low paid jobs are a drain because they aren't paying back their fees and those on the dole are a double drain.

The answer is to make Unis exclusive to the best students again - not open them up to any man and his dog. I often interview people for positions and it's remarkable how awful the CV often is from degree holders. I've got fed up with degree holding students EXPECTING to get the job so now don't interview them - I look for experience rather than qualifications.

To the idiot that thinks he understands the private education sector - private schools that register as charities get tax relief because they are CHARITIES. They don't get direct subs from the state. Every penny they need to run the school they have to raise in fees or fund raising. All of them also make bursaries available to talented children that can't afford the fees. If the people who send their children to private schools didn't the state education would required considerably more funding than it does now. Your comments against a private education smack of envy rather than an intelligent understanding.

So you actively discriminate against people holding at degree looking for employment at your organisation? I'm sure your boss would be pleased to hear that rather than recruiting the best person for the job, irrespective of whether they hold a degree or not, you're filtering the CVs based on your personal opinion.

Yes - it's call filtering the candidates. 99.9% of the time those with work experience have been the better candidate rather than those with a bit of paper from a Uni. As no company has the time to interview all candidates you have to find a method that gets you to a decent candidate the quickest. Given virtually all the CVs I've ever read from graduates are very poor and often contain spelling mistakes they are some of the first CVs filtered out. Oh, my boss knows my filtering process and uses it as well !

I make it around half a dozen grammatical errors in your comment. Are you sure you're qualified for this job, mate?

true-brightonian wrote:
@sussexladybabe, the world has changed since then. Today's youngsters are told from Day 1 then need to get a degree, otherwise their lives are not worth living. On top of that, 30 years ago this country made actual things. Those manufacturing jobs are long gone now. To get a job that allows you to raise a family today, I am afraid you need to have an education. 30 years ago most jobs didn't require a degree. Today they do. Our young people will find themselves having to compete against better educated Europeans, Indians and Chinese. Maybe you should study history.

kkj wrote:

Colin Houlson wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote: Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry . There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

Aw bless, you really don't understand, do you? These cuts are about the Government removing all state support, and not just from students. Students do need to support themselves to an extent - we all have to. But not to the point where only the wealthy can succeed. Smelling that coffee yet?

awww bless , you really think you can intimidate me ? ha ha....any way as i am not entitled to any goverment benifits any way i dont see why i should care tbh, are the wealthy not already in the secceeded club ? No one has told me yet why my tax should be used to pay for a adults education ?

Perhaps you should put some of your precious tax to good use and get 'a adult education'.

I think what LtPaperclip is getting at is that as he has never used anyone's tax money to get an education, why should other people use his to get one? At least that's what I surmise from reading his posts.

Fight Back wrote:

Colin Houlson wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

Tea break wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

LawStudent wrote:
I applaud Tea Break as he is obviously the only person on this forum who is bothered enough to see the bigger picture. Students in year 9, 10 and 11 will lose momentum to achieve as they know for a fact they will no longer have the opportunity to become a doctor or lawyer etc. So referring to someone’s earlier comment on how students are a drain on the tax payer, how do you think that’s going to change when students don’t go to university, can’t find jobs because of lack of qualifications, and rely on job seeker’s allowance and take even more of your hard earned money? I certainly want the opportunity to become successful in my chosen field; law, and definitely can’t achieve that without a university degree. What most annoys me is the fact that people who have jobs and earn a living for themselves and their families today, don’t realise how hard it is in this current climate to get a job. Yes it is good you have a job and you can afford to be judgmental, but what about the students who are just starting out, who have nothing and you aren’t helping them and the government aren’t helping them, by rising university prices and making the opportunity to better yourself less available to any student, because who says someone who can afford these fees deserves the education more than someone who can’t?

As I made the comment on Uni students being a drain I'll answer you.

A majority of students now leave Uni and end up in either in low paid jobs or on the dole. So those in low paid jobs are a drain because they aren't paying back their fees and those on the dole are a double drain.

The answer is to make Unis exclusive to the best students again - not open them up to any man and his dog. I often interview people for positions and it's remarkable how awful the CV often is from degree holders. I've got fed up with degree holding students EXPECTING to get the job so now don't interview them - I look for experience rather than qualifications.

To the idiot that thinks he understands the private education sector - private schools that register as charities get tax relief because they are CHARITIES. They don't get direct subs from the state. Every penny they need to run the school they have to raise in fees or fund raising. All of them also make bursaries available to talented children that can't afford the fees. If the people who send their children to private schools didn't the state education would required considerably more funding than it does now. Your comments against a private education smack of envy rather than an intelligent understanding.

So you actively discriminate against people holding at degree looking for employment at your organisation? I'm sure your boss would be pleased to hear that rather than recruiting the best person for the job, irrespective of whether they hold a degree or not, you're filtering the CVs based on your personal opinion.

Yes - it's call filtering the candidates. 99.9% of the time those with work experience have been the better candidate rather than those with a bit of paper from a Uni. As no company has the time to interview all candidates you have to find a method that gets you to a decent candidate the quickest. Given virtually all the CVs I've ever read from graduates are very poor and often contain spelling mistakes they are some of the first CVs filtered out. Oh, my boss knows my filtering process and uses it as well !

I make it around half a dozen grammatical errors in your comment. Are you sure you're qualified for this job, mate?

There's a hell of a difference between an online forum and a CV. I proof read my CV - I don't bother with my posts on here !

Joeinbrighton wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

How would this help exactly? If you are cramming a course into 2 years rather than 3 or 4, it either means that the student would not be completing a full degree, or it would mean they would be cramming more of a syllabus into a shorter space of time. And if it turns out to be the latter, how exactly is a student supposed to get their coursework and required reading done while at one and the same time holding down a full time job? There is such a thing as a work-life balance!

Fight Back wrote:

Colin Houlson wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

Tea break wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

LawStudent wrote:
I applaud Tea Break as he is obviously the only person on this forum who is bothered enough to see the bigger picture. Students in year 9, 10 and 11 will lose momentum to achieve as they know for a fact they will no longer have the opportunity to become a doctor or lawyer etc. So referring to someone’s earlier comment on how students are a drain on the tax payer, how do you think that’s going to change when students don’t go to university, can’t find jobs because of lack of qualifications, and rely on job seeker’s allowance and take even more of your hard earned money? I certainly want the opportunity to become successful in my chosen field; law, and definitely can’t achieve that without a university degree. What most annoys me is the fact that people who have jobs and earn a living for themselves and their families today, don’t realise how hard it is in this current climate to get a job. Yes it is good you have a job and you can afford to be judgmental, but what about the students who are just starting out, who have nothing and you aren’t helping them and the government aren’t helping them, by rising university prices and making the opportunity to better yourself less available to any student, because who says someone who can afford these fees deserves the education more than someone who can’t?

As I made the comment on Uni students being a drain I'll answer you.

A majority of students now leave Uni and end up in either in low paid jobs or on the dole. So those in low paid jobs are a drain because they aren't paying back their fees and those on the dole are a double drain.

The answer is to make Unis exclusive to the best students again - not open them up to any man and his dog. I often interview people for positions and it's remarkable how awful the CV often is from degree holders. I've got fed up with degree holding students EXPECTING to get the job so now don't interview them - I look for experience rather than qualifications.

To the idiot that thinks he understands the private education sector - private schools that register as charities get tax relief because they are CHARITIES. They don't get direct subs from the state. Every penny they need to run the school they have to raise in fees or fund raising. All of them also make bursaries available to talented children that can't afford the fees. If the people who send their children to private schools didn't the state education would required considerably more funding than it does now. Your comments against a private education smack of envy rather than an intelligent understanding.

So you actively discriminate against people holding at degree looking for employment at your organisation? I'm sure your boss would be pleased to hear that rather than recruiting the best person for the job, irrespective of whether they hold a degree or not, you're filtering the CVs based on your personal opinion.

Yes - it's call filtering the candidates. 99.9% of the time those with work experience have been the better candidate rather than those with a bit of paper from a Uni. As no company has the time to interview all candidates you have to find a method that gets you to a decent candidate the quickest. Given virtually all the CVs I've ever read from graduates are very poor and often contain spelling mistakes they are some of the first CVs filtered out. Oh, my boss knows my filtering process and uses it as well !

I make it around half a dozen grammatical errors in your comment. Are you sure you're qualified for this job, mate?

There's a hell of a difference between an online forum and a CV. I proof read my CV - I don't bother with my posts on here !

RottingdeanRant wrote:

Joeinbrighton wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

How would this help exactly? If you are cramming a course into 2 years rather than 3 or 4, it either means that the student would not be completing a full degree, or it would mean they would be cramming more of a syllabus into a shorter space of time. And if it turns out to be the latter, how exactly is a student supposed to get their coursework and required reading done while at one and the same time holding down a full time job? There is such a thing as a work-life balance!

A significant majority of students that I have had contact with in the last 5 years tell me that they only need to go to the uni 1 to 3 days a week and that is normally only for a few hours. Therefore, notwithstanding the course work there is clearly an opportunity to complete the same syllabus within a shorter overall course. I regularly visit student houses and the majority are not up before 10 am or later and most when up appear to be spending a lot of time watching tv and playing games on their computers. Therefore there is amply opportunity to have them work harder for a shorter period and have the same level of instruction.

Colin Houlson wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:

Joeinbrighton wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

How would this help exactly? If you are cramming a course into 2 years rather than 3 or 4, it either means that the student would not be completing a full degree, or it would mean they would be cramming more of a syllabus into a shorter space of time. And if it turns out to be the latter, how exactly is a student supposed to get their coursework and required reading done while at one and the same time holding down a full time job? There is such a thing as a work-life balance!

A significant majority of students that I have had contact with in the last 5 years tell me that they only need to go to the uni 1 to 3 days a week and that is normally only for a few hours. Therefore, notwithstanding the course work there is clearly an opportunity to complete the same syllabus within a shorter overall course. I regularly visit student houses and the majority are not up before 10 am or later and most when up appear to be spending a lot of time watching tv and playing games on their computers. Therefore there is amply opportunity to have them work harder for a shorter period and have the same level of instruction.

As I mistakeny commented elsewhere, Christ.

RickH wrote:
Nice to see the 'degree vs no degree 'debate starting again. Before I got my degree, the maximum salary open to me after 12 years or so in the job market was around £20K - pretty good for most folks. Since graduating ten years ago, its now three times that. And to just throw that extra cup of petrol on this heated debate, I did my degree through the OU, so was working at the same time. "The point"? you may ask! "There's more than one way to skin a cat", is the obvious response. And as for the guy who thinks its a good way to sift out CVs based on, in his view excess, qualifications and then defend his own poor spelling and grammar here because this is an online forum (so doesn't count): do you recall the saying about walking the walk, as well as talking the talk? Thought not!

Fight Back wrote:
"Christ" - such a well argued point. You're not a Uni student by chance ?

RickH wrote:
Nice to see the 'degree vs no degree 'debate starting again. Before I got my degree, the maximum salary open to me after 12 years or so in the job market was around £20K - pretty good for most folks. Since graduating ten years ago, its now three times that. And to just throw that extra cup of petrol on this heated debate, I did my degree through the OU, so was working at the same time. "The point"? you may ask! "There's more than one way to skin a cat", is the obvious response. And as for the guy who thinks its a good way to sift out CVs based on, in his view excess, qualifications and then defend his own poor spelling and grammar here because this is an online forum (so doesn't count): do you recall the saying about walking the walk, as well as talking the talk? Thought not!

Fight Back wrote:

Colin Houlson wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:

Joeinbrighton wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

How would this help exactly? If you are cramming a course into 2 years rather than 3 or 4, it either means that the student would not be completing a full degree, or it would mean they would be cramming more of a syllabus into a shorter space of time. And if it turns out to be the latter, how exactly is a student supposed to get their coursework and required reading done while at one and the same time holding down a full time job? There is such a thing as a work-life balance!

A significant majority of students that I have had contact with in the last 5 years tell me that they only need to go to the uni 1 to 3 days a week and that is normally only for a few hours. Therefore, notwithstanding the course work there is clearly an opportunity to complete the same syllabus within a shorter overall course. I regularly visit student houses and the majority are not up before 10 am or later and most when up appear to be spending a lot of time watching tv and playing games on their computers. Therefore there is amply opportunity to have them work harder for a shorter period and have the same level of instruction.

As I mistakeny commented elsewhere, Christ.

And of course, you know it's mistakenly rather than mistakeny !!!!!

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote:
Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry .
There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

Angryoldman wrote:
The students are standing up for what's right.
We have for far too long rolled over while the government take take take.
The unions have already called for civil disobedience.
They bail out Ireland for 7 billion pounds, which is more than the cuts taken from welfare.
Now it looks as though we will be bailing out Portugal and Spain.
Not in my name.
A revolution is well overdue in the UK
Well done students.

brunswick63 wrote:
At the bottom of Farm Road this afternoon were two girls, one of which was holding a sign saying "Medea Studies Students Against Cuts" (took a photo if anyone is interested in seeing it). British higher education at it's finest...

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

heidic1234 wrote:
Do you know what scares me here. The amount of people who make sweeping statements on students, I have read "they only go in one day a week", "they don't work", "its easy", "they all just drink loads and don't get up till midday".
Do you really think that the millions of students in this country are all doing this?
I go to university because I want to excel in history of art, I want a career in history of art-you try getting a career in this without a degree. Both my working class parents have worked their entire lives and paid taxes, I work part time and pay taxes. I will pay back my loan. I deserve this just as much as some Etonian with a very rich mummy and daddy.

Pedroski wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

What a load of toss. I went to uni as a mature student, after working in dead end jobs for a charge card company for 10 years.....and I did a 3 year degree course, and it certainly wasn't a walk in the park. When you add up time for courses, research, report writing...it really is a full time job. Add on to that a part time job, and there's no way it can all be crammed into 2 years and still have decent content. And so what if people want to blow off some steam in pubs and clubs and have parties? It's all part of life - doing a degree, or any kind of job, should take away from people wanting to enjoy what they're doing. And if it wasn't for students, Brighton and Hove would be a miserable hole full of miserable moaning gits.

heidic1234 wrote:
Do you know what scares me here. The amount of people who make sweeping statements on students, I have read "they only go in one day a week", "they don't work", "its easy", "they all just drink loads and don't get up till midday".
Do you really think that the millions of students in this country are all doing this?
I go to university because I want to excel in history of art, I want a career in history of art-you try getting a career in this without a degree. Both my working class parents have worked their entire lives and paid taxes, I work part time and pay taxes. I will pay back my loan. I deserve this just as much as some Etonian with a very rich mummy and daddy.

Fight Back wrote:

heidic1234 wrote:
Do you know what scares me here. The amount of people who make sweeping statements on students, I have read "they only go in one day a week", "they don't work", "its easy", "they all just drink loads and don't get up till midday".
Do you really think that the millions of students in this country are all doing this?
I go to university because I want to excel in history of art, I want a career in history of art-you try getting a career in this without a degree. Both my working class parents have worked their entire lives and paid taxes, I work part time and pay taxes. I will pay back my loan. I deserve this just as much as some Etonian with a very rich mummy and daddy.

If you need a degree for a career in that chosen field fine but just expect to pay more for your degree - something that reflects the true cost of the course rather than being heavily dependant upon the taxpayer. I'm not sure I would want my taxes paying for a degree in the History of Art given it doesn't really advance our economy and is a very very select field.

Fight Back wrote:

heidic1234 wrote:
Do you know what scares me here. The amount of people who make sweeping statements on students, I have read "they only go in one day a week", "they don't work", "its easy", "they all just drink loads and don't get up till midday".
Do you really think that the millions of students in this country are all doing this?
I go to university because I want to excel in history of art, I want a career in history of art-you try getting a career in this without a degree. Both my working class parents have worked their entire lives and paid taxes, I work part time and pay taxes. I will pay back my loan. I deserve this just as much as some Etonian with a very rich mummy and daddy.

If you need a degree for a career in that chosen field fine but just expect to pay more for your degree - something that reflects the true cost of the course rather than being heavily dependant upon the taxpayer. I'm not sure I would want my taxes paying for a degree in the History of Art given it doesn't really advance our economy and is a very very select field.

Skippah wrote:

heidic1234 wrote:
Do you know what scares me here. The amount of people who make sweeping statements on students, I have read "they only go in one day a week", "they don't work", "its easy", "they all just drink loads and don't get up till midday".
Do you really think that the millions of students in this country are all doing this?
I go to university because I want to excel in history of art, I want a career in history of art-you try getting a career in this without a degree. Both my working class parents have worked their entire lives and paid taxes, I work part time and pay taxes. I will pay back my loan. I deserve this just as much as some Etonian with a very rich mummy and daddy.

You do deserve it as much as an Etonian, yes. That's why you are lent the money to pay for your university education at rather favourable rates and only expected to pay it back once you are earning enough. A point that is being extended to £21k and will have a sliding scale on how much you pay back depending on your ability to pay. I think it's rather fair terms on a loan. It's either that or go back to only letting the brightest into universities and heavily subsidising those, you cant have it both ways.
.
Either only a few go to uni, who we can afford to help more with fees or loads of people go and they will have to pay for the privilege. And only when they can financially afford to pay as well.

Pedroski wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

heidic1234 wrote:
Do you know what scares me here. The amount of people who make sweeping statements on students, I have read "they only go in one day a week", "they don't work", "its easy", "they all just drink loads and don't get up till midday".
Do you really think that the millions of students in this country are all doing this?
I go to university because I want to excel in history of art, I want a career in history of art-you try getting a career in this without a degree. Both my working class parents have worked their entire lives and paid taxes, I work part time and pay taxes. I will pay back my loan. I deserve this just as much as some Etonian with a very rich mummy and daddy.

If you need a degree for a career in that chosen field fine but just expect to pay more for your degree - something that reflects the true cost of the course rather than being heavily dependant upon the taxpayer. I'm not sure I would want my taxes paying for a degree in the History of Art given it doesn't really advance our economy and is a very very select field.

Fightback....you're missing the point. A degree in History of Art, if it allows Heidi to work in the field that she wants, DOES advance our economy. It means Heidi will get a job she enjoys, which is paying her money, on which she is paying income tax, and paying VAT on goods she buys, and paying a mortgage/rent. I'd be more than happy for some of my taxes to go towards that. It's all part of what makes drives the economy. And I'd rather support that, than have my money being spent on the war machine, or on sucking up to the Americans, or.....a whole list of other things.

brunswick63 wrote:
Had to laugh at the banner currently flying outside the window of the middle flat of 19 Brunswick Place; "Brunswick Place Is A Student Street We have A Human Right To Get Degrees". Pretty much demonstrates the mind-boggling intellect of todays students...

Fight Back wrote:

Pedroski wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

heidic1234 wrote:
Do you know what scares me here. The amount of people who make sweeping statements on students, I have read "they only go in one day a week", "they don't work", "its easy", "they all just drink loads and don't get up till midday".
Do you really think that the millions of students in this country are all doing this?
I go to university because I want to excel in history of art, I want a career in history of art-you try getting a career in this without a degree. Both my working class parents have worked their entire lives and paid taxes, I work part time and pay taxes. I will pay back my loan. I deserve this just as much as some Etonian with a very rich mummy and daddy.

If you need a degree for a career in that chosen field fine but just expect to pay more for your degree - something that reflects the true cost of the course rather than being heavily dependant upon the taxpayer. I'm not sure I would want my taxes paying for a degree in the History of Art given it doesn't really advance our economy and is a very very select field.

Fightback....you're missing the point. A degree in History of Art, if it allows Heidi to work in the field that she wants, DOES advance our economy. It means Heidi will get a job she enjoys, which is paying her money, on which she is paying income tax, and paying VAT on goods she buys, and paying a mortgage/rent. I'd be more than happy for some of my taxes to go towards that. It's all part of what makes drives the economy. And I'd rather support that, than have my money being spent on the war machine, or on sucking up to the Americans, or.....a whole list of other things.

I agree on the war machine etc but the taxpayer shouldn't be helping to fund courses that just enable people to pay tax - people do that in any job regardless of a degree. A degree in medicine, science, information technology etc will allow the country to grow services to grow the economy - History of Art doesn't have much of a bearing on growing the econony.

deve wrote:
Would it make sense for universities to open more along business lines. Students work 5 days a week, 9 to 5, holidays should be about what an average company gives staff - say max 30 days. Currently a University year is about 30 weeks, students work say 3 or 4 days. That is not very useful to anyone. Make it say a 45 week year and 5 days per week. This gives students more ideas about working life, makes them realise university is hard work - like a real job. They shorten their courses, run up less debt, are more ready for work. They wont see University as a shelter from the real world, and employers know the students who get through and succeed are worth employing. Taxpayers get more bang for their bucks as they are not subsidising empty universities and dead time. Maybe this would gee up some of the lectures as well ! Less time to protest as well - like most working people !

Ballroom Blitz wrote:

deve wrote:
Would it make sense for universities to open more along business lines. Students work 5 days a week, 9 to 5, holidays should be about what an average company gives staff - say max 30 days. Currently a University year is about 30 weeks, students work say 3 or 4 days. That is not very useful to anyone. Make it say a 45 week year and 5 days per week. This gives students more ideas about working life, makes them realise university is hard work - like a real job. They shorten their courses, run up less debt, are more ready for work. They wont see University as a shelter from the real world, and employers know the students who get through and succeed are worth employing. Taxpayers get more bang for their bucks as they are not subsidising empty universities and dead time. Maybe this would gee up some of the lectures as well ! Less time to protest as well - like most working people !

Best post on this board. That's really thinking outside the box.

Pedroski wrote:

Ballroom Blitz wrote:

deve wrote: Would it make sense for universities to open more along business lines. Students work 5 days a week, 9 to 5, holidays should be about what an average company gives staff - say max 30 days. Currently a University year is about 30 weeks, students work say 3 or 4 days. That is not very useful to anyone. Make it say a 45 week year and 5 days per week. This gives students more ideas about working life, makes them realise university is hard work - like a real job. They shorten their courses, run up less debt, are more ready for work. They wont see University as a shelter from the real world, and employers know the students who get through and succeed are worth employing. Taxpayers get more bang for their bucks as they are not subsidising empty universities and dead time. Maybe this would gee up some of the lectures as well ! Less time to protest as well - like most working people !

Best post on this board. That's really thinking outside the box.

No mate. The problem is that students are NOT paid. They don't receive a LIVING WAGE. And so the extra time off is usually put to use in working to earn money to subsidise their income. Also remember, that it is usually their parents, who are usually tax payers, who also end up having to subsidise their offspring to help them through university. Unless students were paid a living wage to go to university then being completely full time for the whole of the year is not possible.

golf crazy wrote:
We should do what the french do in these situations,Get the water cannons out, give em a good soaking

chroma wrote:

golf crazy wrote: We should do what the french do in these situations,Get the water cannons out, give em a good soaking

May be, but you're overlooking what protesters do in France, and if Brighton were France tonight, it would be on fire and widespread rioting on the streets. Don't believe for a moment that France's tough policing stance has any positive effect on protesters behaviour. It doesn't. If anything, if aggravates it.

ladwebslinger wrote:

brunswick63 wrote: At the bottom of Farm Road this afternoon were two girls, one of which was holding a sign saying "Medea Studies Students Against Cuts" (took a photo if anyone is interested in seeing it). British higher education at it's finest...

Sorry Brunswick 63... but it's: 'British higher education at its finest'. Probably my Sussex University degree that taught me that. British highest education at its finest indeed: a higher education that was free, and rightly so. More university students benefits society as a whole - we'd not get very far without the doctors, scientists, and dare I say, thinkers and philosophers of this world. More education, not less!

Johnboy123 wrote:
As a gradaute who left uni in march many students might find my comments slightly ironic. However I feel the students protesters causing violence are anarchist only interested in causing mayhem and trouble. The problem I have found is that is doesn't benefit you anymore having a degree. When I left university I couldn't get a job. I feel that like my other friends from uni that there has no become too many people going uni, which doesn't give you the USP over others as so many people have a degree these days.  I worked bloody hard at uni to get a good mark, however so does the tax payer who gets up every morning an goes to work. They shouldn't of have had to pay for my education as I was the one who choose to go to uni. The country is in a financial mess and the country doesn't need politically motivated academics whipping up even more hysteria over every cut, from a government who didn't even get us in the mess! 

brunswick63 wrote:
At the bottom of Farm Road this afternoon were two girls, one of which was holding a sign saying "Medea Studies Students Against Cuts" (took a photo if anyone is interested in seeing it). British higher education at it's finest...

kkj wrote:

Colin Houlson wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote: Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry . There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

Aw bless, you really don't understand, do you? These cuts are about the Government removing all state support, and not just from students. Students do need to support themselves to an extent - we all have to. But not to the point where only the wealthy can succeed. Smelling that coffee yet?

awww bless , you really think you can intimidate me ? ha ha....any way as i am not entitled to any goverment benifits any way i dont see why i should care tbh, are the wealthy not already in the secceeded club ? No one has told me yet why my tax should be used to pay for a adults education ?

Perhaps you should put some of your precious tax to good use and get 'a adult education'.

I think what LtPaperclip is getting at is that as he has never used anyone's tax money to get an education, why should other people use his to get one? At least that's what I surmise from reading his posts.

deve wrote:
Would it make sense for universities to open more along business lines. Students work 5 days a week, 9 to 5, holidays should be about what an average company gives staff - say max 30 days. Currently a University year is about 30 weeks, students work say 3 or 4 days. That is not very useful to anyone. Make it say a 45 week year and 5 days per week. This gives students more ideas about working life, makes them realise university is hard work - like a real job. They shorten their courses, run up less debt, are more ready for work. They wont see University as a shelter from the real world, and employers know the students who get through and succeed are worth employing. Taxpayers get more bang for their bucks as they are not subsidising empty universities and dead time. Maybe this would gee up some of the lectures as well ! Less time to protest as well - like most working people !

Pedroski wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

What a load of toss. I went to uni as a mature student, after working in dead end jobs for a charge card company for 10 years.....and I did a 3 year degree course, and it certainly wasn't a walk in the park. When you add up time for courses, research, report writing...it really is a full time job. Add on to that a part time job, and there's no way it can all be crammed into 2 years and still have decent content. And so what if people want to blow off some steam in pubs and clubs and have parties? It's all part of life - doing a degree, or any kind of job, should take away from people wanting to enjoy what they're doing. And if it wasn't for students, Brighton and Hove would be a miserable hole full of miserable moaning gits.

pun master wrote:

Pedroski wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

What a load of toss. I went to uni as a mature student, after working in dead end jobs for a charge card company for 10 years.....and I did a 3 year degree course, and it certainly wasn't a walk in the park. When you add up time for courses, research, report writing...it really is a full time job. Add on to that a part time job, and there's no way it can all be crammed into 2 years and still have decent content. And so what if people want to blow off some steam in pubs and clubs and have parties? It's all part of life - doing a degree, or any kind of job, should take away from people wanting to enjoy what they're doing. And if it wasn't for students, Brighton and Hove would be a miserable hole full of miserable moaning gits.

Well I did a four year course. I say 'did,' but the truth is more that I didn't - just dossed around for four years, spent most of it partying my knackers off, ran off a few photocopies from the library from which to take quotes from, blagged a few essays, didn't bother turning up to a lot of my seminars, and managed to bag myself a 2:1. C'mon guys who are we kidding; university is nowhere near as hard as you make out - the argument for two year courses is spot on...

jeremy radvan wrote:

pun master wrote:

Pedroski wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

What a load of toss. I went to uni as a mature student, after working in dead end jobs for a charge card company for 10 years.....and I did a 3 year degree course, and it certainly wasn't a walk in the park. When you add up time for courses, research, report writing...it really is a full time job. Add on to that a part time job, and there's no way it can all be crammed into 2 years and still have decent content. And so what if people want to blow off some steam in pubs and clubs and have parties? It's all part of life - doing a degree, or any kind of job, should take away from people wanting to enjoy what they're doing. And if it wasn't for students, Brighton and Hove would be a miserable hole full of miserable moaning gits.

Well I did a four year course. I say 'did,' but the truth is more that I didn't - just dossed around for four years, spent most of it partying my knackers off, ran off a few photocopies from the library from which to take quotes from, blagged a few essays, didn't bother turning up to a lot of my seminars, and managed to bag myself a 2:1. C'mon guys who are we kidding; university is nowhere near as hard as you make out - the argument for two year courses is spot on...

These public school boys get everywhere

pun master wrote:

jeremy radvan wrote:

pun master wrote:

Pedroski wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

What a load of toss. I went to uni as a mature student, after working in dead end jobs for a charge card company for 10 years.....and I did a 3 year degree course, and it certainly wasn't a walk in the park. When you add up time for courses, research, report writing...it really is a full time job. Add on to that a part time job, and there's no way it can all be crammed into 2 years and still have decent content. And so what if people want to blow off some steam in pubs and clubs and have parties? It's all part of life - doing a degree, or any kind of job, should take away from people wanting to enjoy what they're doing. And if it wasn't for students, Brighton and Hove would be a miserable hole full of miserable moaning gits.

Well I did a four year course. I say 'did,' but the truth is more that I didn't - just dossed around for four years, spent most of it partying my knackers off, ran off a few photocopies from the library from which to take quotes from, blagged a few essays, didn't bother turning up to a lot of my seminars, and managed to bag myself a 2:1. C'mon guys who are we kidding; university is nowhere near as hard as you make out - the argument for two year courses is spot on...

These public school boys get everywhere

You could not be further from the truth. Raised on a council estate by a secretary for a mum, warehouseman for a dad, attended ordinary state comprehensive in West London; just born lucky enough to be academic I guess...

Tippy Toes wrote:

true-brightonian wrote: @Fight Back, The City of Brighton and Hove, well that is great for them. I am sure you are right, but not everyone can be a plumber or a builder. How many women do you know who are "plumbers, builders, sparkies, roofers and carpenters"? Not many, I expect.

I have a senior role at an independent school and I don't have a degree. Mr Lahey, I would say that I do have a decent job. When I left school very few people went on to University, but now it seems to be the norm. People just expect to go and for the rest of us to pay for them!

heidic1234 wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote: Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry . There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

Most students DO have part time jobs and some, like myself, have to get full time jobs. Do you seriously think that we get thousands of pounds thrown at us? I don't believe I have a "right" to my degree but I have worked VERY hard through school and college to get here. Why should I and all the hard working students getting good a-level grades because they want to be educated and learn have to miss out on this? The protests aren't just about the rise in fee's which is extortionate, they are about the government attempting to destroy all opportunities for the poor. If I was 18 and was told I was going to have to pay £30,000 for university by a group of men who never paid student top up fee's I wouldn't go. But then again, that's the point isn't it?

Skippah wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

Skippah wrote: The whole reason we can no longer fund and subsidise all these students is because of the idea that was pushed on us that everybody had the right to go to university. Had we just stuck with putting the best of the best, regardless of their background, into university we could afford to fund them all fully. . The majority of the people protesting are only at university because we ignored our ability to fund them via tax money, now they are being told to pay (only once they are earning £21k, mind you) for their educations, they don't like it. . Still, they aren't happy and have the right to protest, and I support that fully. Whilst not agreeing with them, they are doing what they think is right, so good on them!

I dont even agree with them having the right to protest. What right do the schools have to allow there pupils to leave school and go out on a march ??????? which parents gave permission for that ? The secondary schools that let children out of school should be prosecuted.

It's their future and if they want to protest. Let them. At least they're sticking up for what they believe in. . So what if they miss a day of school?! And I doubt any school "let" them go. They just went, It was never hard when I was at school to just go out, I doubt that has changed in a matter of 6 years.

Colin Houlson wrote:
Lt Paperclip, one of the benefits of education is knowing the difference between 'there' and 'their'.

Joeinbrighton wrote:

kkj wrote:

Colin Houlson wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote: Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry . There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

Aw bless, you really don't understand, do you? These cuts are about the Government removing all state support, and not just from students. Students do need to support themselves to an extent - we all have to. But not to the point where only the wealthy can succeed. Smelling that coffee yet?

awww bless , you really think you can intimidate me ? ha ha....any way as i am not entitled to any goverment benifits any way i dont see why i should care tbh, are the wealthy not already in the secceeded club ? No one has told me yet why my tax should be used to pay for a adults education ?

Perhaps you should put some of your precious tax to good use and get 'a adult education'.

I think what LtPaperclip is getting at is that as he has never used anyone's tax money to get an education, why should other people use his to get one? At least that's what I surmise from reading his posts.

Unless our learned friend, the decorated trombone, never went to school, or unless he was schooled on foreign shores, he will at some point have had his education funded by the British tax payer just as the rest of us have.

LtPaperclip wrote:

Skippah wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

Skippah wrote: The whole reason we can no longer fund and subsidise all these students is because of the idea that was pushed on us that everybody had the right to go to university. Had we just stuck with putting the best of the best, regardless of their background, into university we could afford to fund them all fully. . The majority of the people protesting are only at university because we ignored our ability to fund them via tax money, now they are being told to pay (only once they are earning £21k, mind you) for their educations, they don't like it. . Still, they aren't happy and have the right to protest, and I support that fully. Whilst not agreeing with them, they are doing what they think is right, so good on them!

I dont even agree with them having the right to protest. What right do the schools have to allow there pupils to leave school and go out on a march ??????? which parents gave permission for that ? The secondary schools that let children out of school should be prosecuted.

It's their future and if they want to protest. Let them. At least they're sticking up for what they believe in. . So what if they miss a day of school?! And I doubt any school "let" them go. They just went, It was never hard when I was at school to just go out, I doubt that has changed in a matter of 6 years.

why did poundland churchill square and western road come under attack then ? what have they to do with student fees ?

pun master wrote:

Pedroski wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote:
I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

What a load of toss. I went to uni as a mature student, after working in dead end jobs for a charge card company for 10 years.....and I did a 3 year degree course, and it certainly wasn't a walk in the park. When you add up time for courses, research, report writing...it really is a full time job. Add on to that a part time job, and there's no way it can all be crammed into 2 years and still have decent content. And so what if people want to blow off some steam in pubs and clubs and have parties? It's all part of life - doing a degree, or any kind of job, should take away from people wanting to enjoy what they're doing. And if it wasn't for students, Brighton and Hove would be a miserable hole full of miserable moaning gits.

Well I did a four year course. I say 'did,' but the truth is more that I didn't - just dossed around for four years, spent most of it partying my knackers off, ran off a few photocopies from the library from which to take quotes from, blagged a few essays, didn't bother turning up to a lot of my seminars, and managed to bag myself a 2:1. C'mon guys who are we kidding; university is nowhere near as hard as you make out - the argument for two year courses is spot on...

jeremy radvan wrote:

pun master wrote:

jeremy radvan wrote:

pun master wrote:

Pedroski wrote:

RottingdeanRant wrote: I would have thought that a simple way to reduce many of the fees is to make the degree course shorter, maybe 2 years or less instead of 3. The students could then be expected to work 5 days a week for 8 hours a day. This I expect would also reduce the problems associated with late night parties.

What a load of toss. I went to uni as a mature student, after working in dead end jobs for a charge card company for 10 years.....and I did a 3 year degree course, and it certainly wasn't a walk in the park. When you add up time for courses, research, report writing...it really is a full time job. Add on to that a part time job, and there's no way it can all be crammed into 2 years and still have decent content. And so what if people want to blow off some steam in pubs and clubs and have parties? It's all part of life - doing a degree, or any kind of job, should take away from people wanting to enjoy what they're doing. And if it wasn't for students, Brighton and Hove would be a miserable hole full of miserable moaning gits.

Well I did a four year course. I say 'did,' but the truth is more that I didn't - just dossed around for four years, spent most of it partying my knackers off, ran off a few photocopies from the library from which to take quotes from, blagged a few essays, didn't bother turning up to a lot of my seminars, and managed to bag myself a 2:1. C'mon guys who are we kidding; university is nowhere near as hard as you make out - the argument for two year courses is spot on...

These public school boys get everywhere

You could not be further from the truth. Raised on a council estate by a secretary for a mum, warehouseman for a dad, attended ordinary state comprehensive in West London; just born lucky enough to be academic I guess...

Well done, did it take you a long time to cultivate that air of effortless dismissiveness? Being academically gifted is a long way from being educated. So the fact that you were able to "blag" your way through university and cheat through plagiarism means that nobody else should be given the space and time to aspire to something better than a fraudulently obtained 2:1?

Pedroski wrote:

LtPaperclip wrote:

commentisfree wrote: Why do you all think it is only about cuts in University education?

You wait until next year when all the new taxes and cuts take effect. You better get in line at the soup kitchens or you will be going hungry . There are no free rides in life...Students should get part time jobs to pay for extra education and not see free goverment cash as there right.

Come on then clever little man....where are all the part time jobs for the hundreds of thousands of school leavers? And what's this crap about "free government cash"? I got grants for university fees, and loans to support my family (which I'm now paying back) and expect to be effectively repaying my grants through my taxes. What the government are effectively wanting to do is to still tax people, and then raise more money through people having loans to pay their fees. Surely, if we have to take out loans for university education, then we should all see a reduction in our income tax as we're no longer paying for education through that. But we won't. It's a money making scam that disadvantages those on lower incomes and has no effect on those on higher incomes. The usual Tory stuff.

heidic1234 wrote:

Fight Back wrote:

heidic1234 wrote: Do you know what scares me here. The amount of people who make sweeping statements on students, I have read "they only go in one day a week", "they don't work", "its easy", "they all just drink loads and don't get up till midday". Do you really think that the millions of students in this country are all doing this? I go to university because I want to excel in history of art, I want a career in history of art-you try getting a career in this without a degree. Both my working class parents have worked their entire lives and paid taxes, I work part time and pay taxes. I will pay back my loan. I deserve this just as much as some Etonian with a very rich mummy and daddy.

If you need a degree for a career in that chosen field fine but just expect to pay more for your degree - something that reflects the true cost of the course rather than being heavily dependant upon the taxpayer. I'm not sure I would want my taxes paying for a degree in the History of Art given it doesn't really advance our economy and is a very very select field.

I am a taxpayer too. It is a LOAN I have received, not a handout. I am not very good at things that may "benefit the economy". Also, I think you will find that art does benefit the economy. Do you know how many tourists visit the British Museum? Do you know how much money British Artists bring to this country, at the base of culture there is always money to be made. Not that I care for money, I just want to be happy and love my job. Maybe that's the difference between you and I.

Tracey wrote:
Loads of silly teenage kids nicked fruit from my stall, not sure how this will help their cause, they were violent and completely out of control, i seriously cannot have any respect for these little s**ts!

thejessa wrote:
@LTpaperclip, so do you pay alot of taxes then? i mean if someone who shagged a footballer to get famous and is managing to stick out as a singer is your idea of how to get off the council estate you must have a really good job! what about giving people a chance to actually succeed at doing something more than go in reveal and hello? you dont have to have a degree to do that but you do at least need ambition to be more than the next candidate on x factor. my gosh but your arguements are weak. even with no fees university is only for the ones who study, and they dont have to become docotrs, lawyers and politicians some of them become teachers or detectives or charity workers, architects engineers, building inspectors. some of them choose to go to university as adults because after thirty years of being a brickie their bodies cant take anymore so they get qualified to be site managers or inspectors. it isnt just about the ones you dont like. its about the ones you need as well. students dont stay students forever and without them, well lets just say surgery would be a little hit an miss for starters. get some information before you get irate. think about the whole picture not just that you dissaprove of one bit of it. please.

Bert Fox wrote:
I'm proud that our children are actually able to think for themselves and express their anger. Yes children need role models but that shouldn't include the passive and compliant who just want business to carry on as usual - well at least so long as they're OK.

thejessa wrote:
iceman is the only one who is making sense, pedroski, ltpaperclip and others are simply ranting on with little or no interest in actually finding out the implications of these cuts. seems stupidity is a national disease, and if we all keep fightin with each other there will be nobody left to fight the cuts. I have two children one aged 15 one aged 2, and i am not prepared to tell them that they are worthless because some rich beauracrat or some gripey fool says they dont deserve a future. we all want the same things, for our children to be able to to read and write, for our homes to stay our own, to be able to go to a doctor or hospital when we are ill or injured, for a police force that enforces the laws, for work so we can feed our families and support for when things go wrong. this government wants to take all of that away from us. all of that protection for the individual and help for the masses to be peeled away to support the banks and money. there is no humanity in these cuts, only greed. no sense of fairness or justice, only feeding the corporations. as these cuts go through, those of you who think it is fair and just have had many years of the freedoms of the state and of the government caring for its people, why should our children be punished and left to fend for themselves against a government that would rather cripple the country than care for its poor. I am ashamed that Britain no longer cares for its people, but perhaps if its people can actually look out for one another then we can stop the government from destroying our lives.

Tippy Toes wrote:

Bert Fox wrote:
I'm proud that our children are actually able to think for themselves and express their anger. Yes children need role models but that shouldn't include the passive and compliant who just want business to carry on as usual - well at least so long as they're OK.

You are proud that they smashed up and urinated on police vehicles in London? That they smashed up shops in Brighton? I don't think that's anything to be very proud of. I believe that people have the right to peaceful protest, but this was anything but.

Tippy Toes wrote:
I want the best for my children, but to be honest, I expect to have to pay for it! But maybe that's because I live in the real world. The country is in a terrible financial state. They have to make cuts. People need to wake up.

Pedroski wrote:

Tippy Toes wrote:

Bert Fox wrote:
I'm proud that our children are actually able to think for themselves and express their anger. Yes children need role models but that shouldn't include the passive and compliant who just want business to carry on as usual - well at least so long as they're OK.

You are proud that they smashed up and urinated on police vehicles in London? That they smashed up shops in Brighton? I don't think that's anything to be very proud of. I believe that people have the right to peaceful protest, but this was anything but.

Problem is......what should be peaceful protests get hijacked. Makes me wonder....the "anarchistic" groups that hijack protests (like they did yesterday).....are they formed by the government for the purpose of detracting from what the protests are actually about and for turning people against the students?

thejessa wrote:
@dexy and LTpaperclip, why do you think these cuts are just about students, I was there yesterday and witnessed shopkeepers applauding, police agreeing and parents backing up theri kids, this is not about freehandouts, this is about an electorate that has been lied to and is now having their childrens future denied. if you think that there is no grounds for this and that they are all spoilt brats expecting handouts surely you have misunderstood the principles of the situation. why not do a little research before you cast off generations of support for families through education or would you rather go back to the victorian era? where do you think your money comes from and the jobs you get mr electrician. i know a great many people with a trade and they all want the best opportunities for their kids too.

Bert Fox wrote:

Pedroski wrote:

Tippy Toes wrote:

Bert Fox wrote:
I'm proud that our children are actually able to think for themselves and express their anger. Yes children need role models but that shouldn't include the passive and compliant who just want business to carry on as usual - well at least so long as they're OK.

You are proud that they smashed up and urinated on police vehicles in London? That they smashed up shops in Brighton? I don't think that's anything to be very proud of. I believe that people have the right to peaceful protest, but this was anything but.

Problem is......what should be peaceful protests get hijacked. Makes me wonder....the "anarchistic" groups that hijack protests (like they did yesterday).....are they formed by the government for the purpose of detracting from what the protests are actually about and for turning people against the students?

When protesters get angry after being shoved around by the police all day why do people then say that the protests have been hijacked by anarchist groups?

An anarchist group would not go and raid Poundland when there is a McDonalds next door.

Pedroski wrote:

Tippy Toes wrote:
I want the best for my children, but to be honest, I expect to have to pay for it! But maybe that's because I live in the real world. The country is in a terrible financial state. They have to make cuts. People need to wake up.

You just don't get it.....WE DO PAY FOR IT. You know those things called "TAXES"....they are used to pay for the health service, social care, education, pensions and so on. We pay fortunes into the government to pay for what we, and our children, and our parents are entitled. The government want us to pay for education on top of what we already pay...

thejessa wrote:
@LTpaperclip, you aren't by chance a BNP supporter are you? just you have referred to people who are into art as Fairys or girls you want to bring back the stocks and various other methods of barbaric punishments. am very pleased for you being a specialist in your chosen field but obviously it does not involve much interaction with other human beings. If you had children or a little bit more understanding of the national situation you might stop being so small minded and provincial. you might also not see taxes being used for education as a personal vendetta on you, after all I dont agree with the war in afghanistan, I know someof my taxes go towards that and i also know it is not the soldiers fault they have been sent to fight a war that people in Britain didnt want. I know that some of my taxes goes towards helping the disabled and the elderly and social care for deprived people, i also know that some of it goes on big government dinners and flights away. I really dont like the idea that multimillionaire mr cameron can hire a personal photographer to take pictures of him in the act of destroying Britains economy and at the same point take away my childrens future. no, they dont have to go to university but having spent their whole lives telling them to work hard and they will do well, i now should say, sorry kids people like LTpaperclip think that you are grubbing little oiks who deserve nothing, but happily back the rich men in power who spit on your efforts. tell you what, why dont you start visiting state schools and telling the kids they are all worthless in your eyes, however hard they work. in fact try telling your clients for your specialised electrician work that all students are spoilt drunken and lazy and deserve nothing. perhaps they will respond a little differently to you. and for those of you who think university places should be cut by half, i bet you don't include yourself in that half! the job market is impossible for most people to get a job degree or otherwise, we are in a major depression but you still have a better chance of getting employment not just in Britain but worldwide. all the people who are losing their jobs because of badly planned government cuts will also be fighting for employment with you. the only thing that is personal about these cuts is that they are not designed to improve life for the people of Britain, they are designed to keep the moneymen of Britain friendly with each other, whatever the human cost may be!

thejessa wrote:
@LTpaperclip, you aren't by chance a BNP supporter are you? just you have referred to people who are into art as Fairys or girls you want to bring back the stocks and various other methods of barbaric punishments. am very pleased for you being a specialist in your chosen field but obviously it does not involve much interaction with other human beings. If you had children or a little bit more understanding of the national situation you might stop being so small minded and provincial. you might also not see taxes being used for education as a personal vendetta on you, after all I dont agree with the war in afghanistan, I know someof my taxes go towards that and i also know it is not the soldiers fault they have been sent to fight a war that people in Britain didnt want. I know that some of my taxes goes towards helping the disabled and the elderly and social care for deprived people, i also know that some of it goes on big government dinners and flights away. I really dont like the idea that multimillionaire mr cameron can hire a personal photographer to take pictures of him in the act of destroying Britains economy and at the same point take away my childrens future. no, they dont have to go to university but having spent their whole lives telling them to work hard and they will do well, i now should say, sorry kids people like LTpaperclip think that you are grubbing little oiks who deserve nothing, but happily back the rich men in power who spit on your efforts. tell you what, why dont you start visiting state schools and telling the kids they are all worthless in your eyes, however hard they work. in fact try telling your clients for your specialised electrician work that all students are spoilt drunken and lazy and deserve nothing. perhaps they will respond a little differently to you. and for those of you who think university places should be cut by half, i bet you don't include yourself in that half! the job market is impossible for most people to get a job degree or otherwise, we are in a major depression but you still have a better chance of getting employment not just in Britain but worldwide. all the people who are losing their jobs because of badly planned government cuts will also be fighting for employment with you. the only thing that is personal about these cuts is that they are not designed to improve life for the people of Britain, they are designed to keep the moneymen of Britain friendly with each other, whatever the human cost may be!

Pedroski wrote:
Thejessa...again, well said. TippyToes....while further education is a choice, it is still something that should be available to all. And even without the massive fee increase, you would still have to pay for it through supporting son/daughter financially. And independent/mature students still have to pay through student loans to cover living expenses.