People who think that because they went to university and got a distinction that they are intelligent, it seldom goes hand in hand as proven. 3-4 years of someone telling you things that you remember and then are tested on, is not the same as intelligence, you just remembered a load of stuff, and formed an opinion. ;o)
I 50% maybe 60% agree with you there
Most of that is made up of jealousy having never educated myself beyond GCSE level. What I will say makes degree's valuable is the proof that you have the capacity to learn and stick at something and see it through. Even if the degree is in alien biology or Egyptian writing.
Unfortunately my experience tells me graduates now days are coming into such a competitive market they are loaded up with responsibility they don't have the experience or emotional intelligence to handle properly. And in my workplace apprentices are infinitely more valuable because they already know the ropes and have been educated just as well but practically also.
The 50-60% agreement is because I have had more than one graduate look me in the eye and I have heard the utter nonsense spew from their cockhole. You can't argue with some people or debate with them and I'm not convinced putting people in positions of immediate rank just because they have degrees is sensible, I take my hat off to anyone who has got one though. Luke I say probably jealousy on my part for having to work since school and missing out on shagging and drinking my way through a load of like minded women.
Good post that Greenie
It was partly tongue in cheek, however like you I have had experience of working with Uni bods thinking that anyone who never went to Uni are thickies when the reality is spun 180 degrees (see what I did there). A prime example is my middle brother, he is head of Computer Programming (whatever thats called these days) for an American Bank, and is financially secure for life now. But he left school in 1981 with a handful of O levels, joined Lloyds bank as a trainee and worked his way up, worked in Canada and had his own EU company before taking the USA job based in London. He has ex colleagues, some are his own age who he would like to employ because he knows they are mustard, however when he approaches HR they say that because the person does not have a degree that cant employ them, the person(s) that set the rules has a degree and they think that is all that is needed, he then gets sent some wet behind the ears graduate who is pony at their job and needs training, that surely cant be right, can it?
I completely agree. You only have to glance at Twitter to see the utter nonsense spouted by university graduates.
What's annoying is that the mere mention of my education (which I used as an example, not as a comment on mine or anyone else's intelligence or to show I am better than anyone else) has been jumped on by a handful of people who didn't bother reading it in context. Out of all my close friends only a small portion of them actually have degrees but I would never consider any of them less intelligent for this. Seems there are quite a few people though who have a deep-held hatred or suspicion towards those who do hold degrees, given the hostile reaction I received for simply mentioning it (and insecure unpleasant individuals who use phrases like "experts" when they spout such views).
Its not all about you, its a view I have held for many years.
Meant to add, but it wont let me edit is that many owners of degrees to look down on people who dont have them.
And vice versa.
It's small-minded to look down on anyone just because of their education, or to make assumptions (i.e. That they think they are better than you). Your original post was clearly referencing me when I had done nothing of the sort. And I certainly don't recognise the experience of 4 years of being told stuff to remember. Must have gone to the wrong school.
But thats how you come across, you have referenced your education a few times on here mate, at the risk of sounding patronising, its important to you, obviously, but really the rest of the world dont really care. Agree about not looking down at people with different levels of education, one of mates Dads didnt learn to read and write until he was 45, but by that time he was a millionaire, his dad was a rag and bone man and he started as a lighterman on the Thames, went on to own one of the biggest car dealership in the UK and was a freeman of London, a brighter mind I have yet to meet.
I can only think of 2 occasions I have referenced my education on here and never has it been to put down anyone else, so you must be confusing me with someone else. If that's how I come across I think it has more to do with your contempt of graduates than me referencing my experience. It's not actually that important to me, I wouldn't class my academic achievements within my top 5 life achievements, what I've done post-uni is far more important.
Anyway this seems to have all stemmed from a massive misunderstanding which has unfortunately shown a rather unpleasant side to certain posters.
People who think that because they went to university and got a distinction that they are intelligent, it seldom goes hand in hand as proven. 3-4 years of someone telling you things that you remember and then are tested on, is not the same as intelligence, you just remembered a load of stuff, and formed an opinion. ;o)
I 50% maybe 60% agree with you there
Most of that is made up of jealousy having never educated myself beyond GCSE level. What I will say makes degree's valuable is the proof that you have the capacity to learn and stick at something and see it through. Even if the degree is in alien biology or Egyptian writing.
Unfortunately my experience tells me graduates now days are coming into such a competitive market they are loaded up with responsibility they don't have the experience or emotional intelligence to handle properly. And in my workplace apprentices are infinitely more valuable because they already know the ropes and have been educated just as well but practically also.
The 50-60% agreement is because I have had more than one graduate look me in the eye and I have heard the utter nonsense spew from their cockhole. You can't argue with some people or debate with them and I'm not convinced putting people in positions of immediate rank just because they have degrees is sensible, I take my hat off to anyone who has got one though. Luke I say probably jealousy on my part for having to work since school and missing out on shagging and drinking my way through a load of like minded women.
Good post that Greenie
It was partly tongue in cheek, however like you I have had experience of working with Uni bods thinking that anyone who never went to Uni are thickies when the reality is spun 180 degrees (see what I did there). A prime example is my middle brother, he is head of Computer Programming (whatever thats called these days) for an American Bank, and is financially secure for life now. But he left school in 1981 with a handful of O levels, joined Lloyds bank as a trainee and worked his way up, worked in Canada and had his own EU company before taking the USA job based in London. He has ex colleagues, some are his own age who he would like to employ because he knows they are mustard, however when he approaches HR they say that because the person does not have a degree that cant employ them, the person(s) that set the rules has a degree and they think that is all that is needed, he then gets sent some wet behind the ears graduate who is pony at their job and needs training, that surely cant be right, can it?
I completely agree. You only have to glance at Twitter to see the utter nonsense spouted by university graduates.
What's annoying is that the mere mention of my education (which I used as an example, not as a comment on mine or anyone else's intelligence or to show I am better than anyone else) has been jumped on by a handful of people who didn't bother reading it in context. Out of all my close friends only a small portion of them actually have degrees but I would never consider any of them less intelligent for this. Seems there are quite a few people though who have a deep-held hatred or suspicion towards those who do hold degrees, given the hostile reaction I received for simply mentioning it (and insecure unpleasant individuals who use phrases like "experts" when they spout such views).
Its not all about you, its a view I have held for many years.
Meant to add, but it wont let me edit is that many owners of degrees to look down on people who dont have them.
And vice versa.
It's small-minded to look down on anyone just because of their education, or to make assumptions (i.e. That they think they are better than you). Your original post was clearly referencing me when I had done nothing of the sort. And I certainly don't recognise the experience of 4 years of being told stuff to remember. Must have gone to the wrong school.
But thats how you come across, you have referenced your education a few times on here mate, at the risk of sounding patronising, its important to you, obviously, but really the rest of the world dont really care. Agree about not looking down at people with different levels of education, one of mates Dads didnt learn to read and write until he was 45, but by that time he was a millionaire, his dad was a rag and bone man and he started as a lighterman on the Thames, went on to own one of the biggest car dealership in the UK and was a freeman of London, a brighter mind I have yet to meet.
I can only think of 2 occasions I have referenced my education on here and never has it been to put down anyone else, so you must be confusing me with someone else. If that's how I come across I think it has more to do with your contempt of graduates than me referencing my experience. It's not actually that important to me, I wouldn't class my academic achievements within my top 5 life achievements, what I've done post-uni is far more important.
Anyway this seems to have all stemmed from a massive misunderstanding which has unfortunately shown a rather unpleasant side to certain posters.
I had that one as a kid, from Smash Hits I think. On the one side, Bananarama, on the other side Kajagoogoo, rather unpleasant.....
Left school at 15, did not take any exams. Served a 6-year apprenticeship, then spent the rest of my life in well paid interesting jobs, and have now retired, not rich by any means, but do not need to worry about bills etc, paid my mortgage up in my 50s, I have had regular overseas holidays for the few years, and a decent car. Isn't this what most people want? If you want to go to Uni, fine, but not necessary to have a good life.
Some people seem to think that you have to go to uni/get a degree to have achieved/be able to achieve. It's a constant argument between me and the wife, that when we have children she wants them to ultimately go to uni (like she did), where as I'm of the opinion that they should do what they want to do - simple as that.
I'm 31 and left school at 16 (which was the start of the generation where it was unusual to do that) with just some average (all C's) GCSE's. Without a uni education I've managed to be a chartered accountant and have a reasonable job imo. My brother, who is a few years younger than me, followed suit in leaving school when he could and is also doing well for himself and neither of us have had any uni debt to worry about.
And I don't say the above in a boasty way. It came through a lot of hard work. At 17 (2002) I was earning a pathetic £50 a week on an apprentice scheme, so working all day then coming home and doing a paper round every night of the week to make the money up. Have also spent years doing ad-hoc horrible jobs on the side so I could afford to do what I wanted to do.
Don't get me wrong, University is a good thing and if you want/need that degree then go for it, but I just don't like the fact that people look down on you if you didn't or don't plan to take that route, as though it's the only option available.
Fully agree with these comments. I've done ok in IT despite only having CSE (below o'levels) qualifications and told my 17 year old daughter that uni is not a must be thing and just do what you want to do. I've come across some very poor graduates working in IT and some very skilled workers with no degree.
Computing education is simply a shit show, in the development area I've been constantly shocked by how poorly educated a lot of graduates are.
I recently came across the CV of someone I managed, I was shocked to see that he had a MSc in Software Development.. This guy had a few natural intuitions about key topics, but nothing that his 5 years in industry wouldn't have provided. (Perhaps the fact he was being managed by someone about 10 years his junior says a lot.)
I've interviewed fresh graduates from Computer Science programmes who have struggled with pure CS topics - i.e algorithmic complexity, or basic networking principles - so applied knowledge - i.e basic problem solving and logic - is non existent.
Its sad, because it's one area that could really use with a proper syllabus and teaching method. You see stories everyday about insecure software and data breaches, then you look at the knowledge of the average developer and the root cause suddenly becomes obvious.
Left school at 15, did not take any exams. Served a 6-year apprenticeship, then spent the rest of my life in well paid interesting jobs, and have now retired, not rich by any means, but do not need to worry about bills etc, paid my mortgage up in my 50s, I have had regular overseas holidays for the few years, and a decent car. Isn't this what most people want? If you want to go to Uni, fine, but not necessary to have a good life.
Very different now though mate, you grew up in more sensible times - a small percentage of school leavers went to university (5-10%?), their degrees were worthwhile and helped them get a decent job and they didn't start adult life with a crippling debt. The fact that there weren't huge numbers of graduates floating around meant that those without degrees weren't prevented from getting good careers - get your foot in the door, prove you can do a good job and the rest will look after itself.
Thanks to the wonderful theory that everyone should be allowed to go to university, we now have thousands of graduates every year, many obtaining degrees in ridiculously futile subjects, and (apart from the ones who's parents can pay them through) they start their adult life with a huge debt (£20k to £30k?!) when they should be trying to start saving the astronomical amount they need to buy a house. University has become an extension of sixth form college, but youngsters feel they need to go to just to give themselves a chance of getting a decent job. For those that haven't got degrees, there are lots of doors that are completely closed to you, especially when you're starting out.
I'm 36 now, and it becomes less and less relevant as you get older but I still see jobs advertised, that I really fancy and know I could do well, where the job description states that "you should have a degree at 2.2 or higher".
That's not to say that if you're bright enough and determined enough you can't still have a great career without a degree, but it's a lot more difficult now than it used to be.
This pissing function on instagram that lets people put moving photos up. I don't I'm explaining it properly but it's winding me up. It's mainly my female friends as well, so I'll know if any blokes start doing it they're twats
This pissing function on instagram that lets people put moving photos up. I don't I'm explaining it properly but it's winding me up. It's mainly my female friends as well, so I'll know if any blokes start doing it they're twats
This pissing function on instagram that lets people put moving photos up. I don't I'm explaining it properly but it's winding me up. It's mainly my female friends as well, so I'll know if any blokes start doing it they're twats
The thing with degrees is how useful they are as well. I'm a teacher, so I had to get a degree. The course I did was keen to prove itself as a 'proper' degree, so there was a huge focus on research and essays and not much focus on the actual job we were training to do.
Surprise surprise, I was an incredibly shit teacher when I qualified, and a lot of people on the course quit the job within a year because they weren't adequately prepared for it.
Film has been rolling for 20 minutes then some lumbering fuckwit came in. She straddled the aisles for a good minute or two swinging her iPhone around trying to find her seat, completely oblivious to the distraction she was making.
Then for the next hour parents were having to take their kids out because it was too scary. That's why it's a 12A, not a 4A you total dickheads.
The thing is with degrees is when only 10-15% of people had them it stood out as someone who had applied themselves to further education and imagine majority were used vocationally too. Now you get graduates of Latin and librarianship or art history applying for roles in finance or advertising etc.
I worked with a person who went to uni and got a masters in History, worked in the factory with me for two years before becoming a novice priest (I believe is the title) at the Vatican. Well worth getting that degree then
Left school at 15, did not take any exams. Served a 6-year apprenticeship, then spent the rest of my life in well paid interesting jobs, and have now retired, not rich by any means, but do not need to worry about bills etc, paid my mortgage up in my 50s, I have had regular overseas holidays for the few years, and a decent car. Isn't this what most people want? If you want to go to Uni, fine, but not necessary to have a good life.
Very different now though mate, you grew up in more sensible times - a small percentage of school leavers went to university (5-10%?), their degrees were worthwhile and helped them get a decent job and they didn't start adult life with a crippling debt. The fact that there weren't huge numbers of graduates floating around meant that those without degrees weren't prevented from getting good careers - get your foot in the door, prove you can do a good job and the rest will look after itself.
Thanks to the wonderful theory that everyone should be allowed to go to university, we now have thousands of graduates every year, many obtaining degrees in ridiculously futile subjects, and (apart from the ones who's parents can pay them through) they start their adult life with a huge debt (£20k to £30k?!) when they should be trying to start saving the astronomical amount they need to buy a house. University has become an extension of sixth form college, but youngsters feel they need to go to just to give themselves a chance of getting a decent job. For those that haven't got degrees, there are lots of doors that are completely closed to you, especially when you're starting out.
I'm 36 now, and it becomes less and less relevant as you get older but I still see jobs advertised, that I really fancy and know I could do well, where the job description states that "you should have a degree at 2.2 or higher".
That's not to say that if you're bright enough and determined enough you can't still have a great career without a degree, but it's a lot more difficult now than it used to be.
I would have to disagree with the debt issue, in that although fees for university are much higher than they should be the money owed is not taken into account when applying for things like mortgages etc. You have to earn above a certain amount to start paying it off and even then it is effectively the same as paying for something like Sky once a month. It is an inconvenience yes, but I wouldn't say that it's crippling, and shouldn't put people off of going to university if they wish to.
People who think their hazard lights are for the same function as indicators. If you need to pull over at the side of the road indicate left (or right depending on where you are driving) and pull over at a safe location, don't just whack you hazards on in the middle of the road and pull over wherever you feel like.
Hazard lights are to warn people when you have unavoidably become a hazard due a breakdown or some-such, they are not licence to deliberately turn yourself into a hazard because you want to park somewhere you are not supposed to.
This pissing function on instagram that lets people put moving photos up. I don't I'm explaining it properly but it's winding me up. It's mainly my female friends as well, so I'll know if any blokes start doing it they're twats
Left school at 15, did not take any exams. Served a 6-year apprenticeship, then spent the rest of my life in well paid interesting jobs, and have now retired, not rich by any means, but do not need to worry about bills etc, paid my mortgage up in my 50s, I have had regular overseas holidays for the few years, and a decent car. Isn't this what most people want? If you want to go to Uni, fine, but not necessary to have a good life.
Very different now though mate, you grew up in more sensible times - a small percentage of school leavers went to university (5-10%?), their degrees were worthwhile and helped them get a decent job and they didn't start adult life with a crippling debt. The fact that there weren't huge numbers of graduates floating around meant that those without degrees weren't prevented from getting good careers - get your foot in the door, prove you can do a good job and the rest will look after itself.
Thanks to the wonderful theory that everyone should be allowed to go to university, we now have thousands of graduates every year, many obtaining degrees in ridiculously futile subjects, and (apart from the ones who's parents can pay them through) they start their adult life with a huge debt (£20k to £30k?!) when they should be trying to start saving the astronomical amount they need to buy a house. University has become an extension of sixth form college, but youngsters feel they need to go to just to give themselves a chance of getting a decent job. For those that haven't got degrees, there are lots of doors that are completely closed to you, especially when you're starting out.
I'm 36 now, and it becomes less and less relevant as you get older but I still see jobs advertised, that I really fancy and know I could do well, where the job description states that "you should have a degree at 2.2 or higher".
That's not to say that if you're bright enough and determined enough you can't still have a great career without a degree, but it's a lot more difficult now than it used to be.
I would have to disagree with the debt issue, in that although fees for university are much higher than they should be the money owed is not taken into account when applying for things like mortgages etc. You have to earn above a certain amount to start paying it off and even then it is effectively the same as paying for something like Sky once a month. It is an inconvenience yes, but I wouldn't say that it's crippling, and shouldn't put people off of going to university if they wish to.
Sorry mate have to disagree with you about the debt thing. The new system js better in some ways but is terrible for anyone with ambition but from a family without money.
Let's use a hypothetical student Charlton fan let's call him Hantersaddick he's from an average family not a huge amount of money but own their home and live comfortably. No way could they pay his uni fees upfront so he's gone for the loan option. Now Hantersaddick is ambitious and works hard and wants to do well. He has completed a years work before returning to finish uni and will be going into a good job after graduation (assuming he doesn't cock it up by spending too much time on some football website called Parlton life).
Now the 'you don't have to pay it off until you earn above a certain point' argument let's look at that. The point is 21000 (fixed, not rising with inflation so basically a real terms fall every year). Show me a graduate job that doesn't pay more than 21000. Any student with ambition should be expecting to earn that fairly quickly and with reasonable progression will earn and fair chuck more. And that's where they kill you. Because it suddenly stops becoming and loan and starts becoming a tax. So if you have a reasonable job with good career progression but can't pay it off early you can easily pay back 10 times what you borrowed. Read money saving expert Martin Lewis on this.
Let's talk about the interest rate, 3% above RPI (notice how they use RPI when you have to pay it and CPI when they have to pay it). That's a big chunk of money. And interest is charged from the second you take the loan out, the old system it was from graduation. So when you finally enter the job market with 35grand debt (if you're lucky) you have to earn 42grand a year just to pay the interest. If you earn less than that your total debt rises every year.
So you are in the terrible situation of, do I pay it off early and delay getting a deposit for a house for 10 years. Do I murder my parents so I can get a house and pay it off. Or do I accept that I am paying an ever increasing chunk of my pay cheque every month as an extra tax.
Our friend Hantersaddick is favouring the murder your family option.
Left school at 15, did not take any exams. Served a 6-year apprenticeship, then spent the rest of my life in well paid interesting jobs, and have now retired, not rich by any means, but do not need to worry about bills etc, paid my mortgage up in my 50s, I have had regular overseas holidays for the few years, and a decent car. Isn't this what most people want? If you want to go to Uni, fine, but not necessary to have a good life.
Very different now though mate, you grew up in more sensible times - a small percentage of school leavers went to university (5-10%?), their degrees were worthwhile and helped them get a decent job and they didn't start adult life with a crippling debt. The fact that there weren't huge numbers of graduates floating around meant that those without degrees weren't prevented from getting good careers - get your foot in the door, prove you can do a good job and the rest will look after itself.
Thanks to the wonderful theory that everyone should be allowed to go to university, we now have thousands of graduates every year, many obtaining degrees in ridiculously futile subjects, and (apart from the ones who's parents can pay them through) they start their adult life with a huge debt (£20k to £30k?!) when they should be trying to start saving the astronomical amount they need to buy a house. University has become an extension of sixth form college, but youngsters feel they need to go to just to give themselves a chance of getting a decent job. For those that haven't got degrees, there are lots of doors that are completely closed to you, especially when you're starting out.
I'm 36 now, and it becomes less and less relevant as you get older but I still see jobs advertised, that I really fancy and know I could do well, where the job description states that "you should have a degree at 2.2 or higher".
That's not to say that if you're bright enough and determined enough you can't still have a great career without a degree, but it's a lot more difficult now than it used to be.
Yes because the government wanted more people going to uni so they had to persuade industry to change a load of jobs to graduate jobs in order to justify that.
Left school at 15, did not take any exams. Served a 6-year apprenticeship, then spent the rest of my life in well paid interesting jobs, and have now retired, not rich by any means, but do not need to worry about bills etc, paid my mortgage up in my 50s, I have had regular overseas holidays for the few years, and a decent car. Isn't this what most people want? If you want to go to Uni, fine, but not necessary to have a good life.
Very different now though mate, you grew up in more sensible times - a small percentage of school leavers went to university (5-10%?), their degrees were worthwhile and helped them get a decent job and they didn't start adult life with a crippling debt. The fact that there weren't huge numbers of graduates floating around meant that those without degrees weren't prevented from getting good careers - get your foot in the door, prove you can do a good job and the rest will look after itself.
Thanks to the wonderful theory that everyone should be allowed to go to university, we now have thousands of graduates every year, many obtaining degrees in ridiculously futile subjects, and (apart from the ones who's parents can pay them through) they start their adult life with a huge debt (£20k to £30k?!) when they should be trying to start saving the astronomical amount they need to buy a house. University has become an extension of sixth form college, but youngsters feel they need to go to just to give themselves a chance of getting a decent job. For those that haven't got degrees, there are lots of doors that are completely closed to you, especially when you're starting out.
I'm 36 now, and it becomes less and less relevant as you get older but I still see jobs advertised, that I really fancy and know I could do well, where the job description states that "you should have a degree at 2.2 or higher".
That's not to say that if you're bright enough and determined enough you can't still have a great career without a degree, but it's a lot more difficult now than it used to be.
I would have to disagree with the debt issue, in that although fees for university are much higher than they should be the money owed is not taken into account when applying for things like mortgages etc. You have to earn above a certain amount to start paying it off and even then it is effectively the same as paying for something like Sky once a month. It is an inconvenience yes, but I wouldn't say that it's crippling, and shouldn't put people off of going to university if they wish to.
Sorry mate have to disagree with you about the debt thing. The new system js better in some ways but is terrible for anyone with ambition but from a family without money.
Let's use a hypothetical student Charlton fan let's call him Hantersaddick he's from an average family not a huge amount of money but own their home and live comfortably. No way could they pay his uni fees upfront so he's gone for the loan option. Now Hantersaddick is ambitious and works hard and wants to do well. He has completed a years work before returning to finish uni and will be going into a good job after graduation (assuming he doesn't cock it up by spending too much time on some football website called Parlton life).
Now the 'you don't have to pay it off until you earn above a certain point' argument let's look at that. The point is 21000 (fixed, not rising with inflation so basically a real terms fall every year). Show me a graduate job that doesn't pay more than 21000. Any student with ambition should be expecting to earn that fairly quickly and with reasonable progression will earn and fair chuck more. And that's where they kill you. Because it suddenly stops becoming and loan and starts becoming a tax. So if you have a reasonable job with good career progression but can't pay it off early you can easily pay back 10 times what you borrowed. Read money saving expert Martin Lewis on this.
Let's talk about the interest rate, 3% above RPI (notice how they use RPI when you have to pay it and CPI when they have to pay it). That's a big chunk of money. And interest is charged from the second you take the loan out, the old system it was from graduation. So when you finally enter the job market with 35grand debt (if you're lucky) you have to earn 42grand a year just to pay the interest. If you earn less than that your total debt rises every year.
So you are in the terrible situation of, do I pay it off early and delay getting a deposit for a house for 10 years. Do I murder my parents so I can get a house and pay it off. Or do I accept that I am paying an ever increasing chunk of my pay cheque every month as an extra tax.
Our friend Hantersaddick is favouring the murder your family option.
Outside of London it's quite common for graduate jobs to be under £21,000.
Left school at 15, did not take any exams. Served a 6-year apprenticeship, then spent the rest of my life in well paid interesting jobs, and have now retired, not rich by any means, but do not need to worry about bills etc, paid my mortgage up in my 50s, I have had regular overseas holidays for the few years, and a decent car. Isn't this what most people want? If you want to go to Uni, fine, but not necessary to have a good life.
Very different now though mate, you grew up in more sensible times - a small percentage of school leavers went to university (5-10%?), their degrees were worthwhile and helped them get a decent job and they didn't start adult life with a crippling debt. The fact that there weren't huge numbers of graduates floating around meant that those without degrees weren't prevented from getting good careers - get your foot in the door, prove you can do a good job and the rest will look after itself.
Thanks to the wonderful theory that everyone should be allowed to go to university, we now have thousands of graduates every year, many obtaining degrees in ridiculously futile subjects, and (apart from the ones who's parents can pay them through) they start their adult life with a huge debt (£20k to £30k?!) when they should be trying to start saving the astronomical amount they need to buy a house. University has become an extension of sixth form college, but youngsters feel they need to go to just to give themselves a chance of getting a decent job. For those that haven't got degrees, there are lots of doors that are completely closed to you, especially when you're starting out.
I'm 36 now, and it becomes less and less relevant as you get older but I still see jobs advertised, that I really fancy and know I could do well, where the job description states that "you should have a degree at 2.2 or higher".
That's not to say that if you're bright enough and determined enough you can't still have a great career without a degree, but it's a lot more difficult now than it used to be.
I would have to disagree with the debt issue, in that although fees for university are much higher than they should be the money owed is not taken into account when applying for things like mortgages etc. You have to earn above a certain amount to start paying it off and even then it is effectively the same as paying for something like Sky once a month. It is an inconvenience yes, but I wouldn't say that it's crippling, and shouldn't put people off of going to university if they wish to.
Sorry mate have to disagree with you about the debt thing. The new system js better in some ways but is terrible for anyone with ambition but from a family without money.
Let's use a hypothetical student Charlton fan let's call him Hantersaddick he's from an average family not a huge amount of money but own their home and live comfortably. No way could they pay his uni fees upfront so he's gone for the loan option. Now Hantersaddick is ambitious and works hard and wants to do well. He has completed a years work before returning to finish uni and will be going into a good job after graduation (assuming he doesn't cock it up by spending too much time on some football website called Parlton life).
Now the 'you don't have to pay it off until you earn above a certain point' argument let's look at that. The point is 21000 (fixed, not rising with inflation so basically a real terms fall every year). Show me a graduate job that doesn't pay more than 21000. Any student with ambition should be expecting to earn that fairly quickly and with reasonable progression will earn and fair chuck more. And that's where they kill you. Because it suddenly stops becoming and loan and starts becoming a tax. So if you have a reasonable job with good career progression but can't pay it off early you can easily pay back 10 times what you borrowed. Read money saving expert Martin Lewis on this.
Let's talk about the interest rate, 3% above RPI (notice how they use RPI when you have to pay it and CPI when they have to pay it). That's a big chunk of money. And interest is charged from the second you take the loan out, the old system it was from graduation. So when you finally enter the job market with 35grand debt (if you're lucky) you have to earn 42grand a year just to pay the interest. If you earn less than that your total debt rises every year.
So you are in the terrible situation of, do I pay it off early and delay getting a deposit for a house for 10 years. Do I murder my parents so I can get a house and pay it off. Or do I accept that I am paying an ever increasing chunk of my pay cheque every month as an extra tax.
Our friend Hantersaddick is favouring the murder your family option.
Outside of London it's quite common for graduate jobs to be under £21,000.
Well in finance/economics that's not the case but I guess it does happen in some industries outside London.
I haven't seen a graduate scheme offering less than 28 may say something more about the type of firm I'm looking at.
Point still stands. If you're going to uni you should really be expecting to earn more than 21000 within a few years of graduation. And so the screwing over process will start.
Many graduates are considering the work abroad option to avoid the grad tax.
You are still supposed to pay it when abroad but they have no way of enforcing it.
I'm considering a role in Hong Kong, pays 6 times what I'd get over here and is a much more senior role. A luxuary apartment paid for and a big English speaking community. Do that for 3 years, come back and pay it off in a lump sum, deposit on a house. Take a pay cut to work in the UK but would have a few years experience by then...
Left school at 15, did not take any exams. Served a 6-year apprenticeship, then spent the rest of my life in well paid interesting jobs, and have now retired, not rich by any means, but do not need to worry about bills etc, paid my mortgage up in my 50s, I have had regular overseas holidays for the few years, and a decent car. Isn't this what most people want? If you want to go to Uni, fine, but not necessary to have a good life.
Very different now though mate, you grew up in more sensible times - a small percentage of school leavers went to university (5-10%?), their degrees were worthwhile and helped them get a decent job and they didn't start adult life with a crippling debt. The fact that there weren't huge numbers of graduates floating around meant that those without degrees weren't prevented from getting good careers - get your foot in the door, prove you can do a good job and the rest will look after itself.
Thanks to the wonderful theory that everyone should be allowed to go to university, we now have thousands of graduates every year, many obtaining degrees in ridiculously futile subjects, and (apart from the ones who's parents can pay them through) they start their adult life with a huge debt (£20k to £30k?!) when they should be trying to start saving the astronomical amount they need to buy a house. University has become an extension of sixth form college, but youngsters feel they need to go to just to give themselves a chance of getting a decent job. For those that haven't got degrees, there are lots of doors that are completely closed to you, especially when you're starting out.
I'm 36 now, and it becomes less and less relevant as you get older but I still see jobs advertised, that I really fancy and know I could do well, where the job description states that "you should have a degree at 2.2 or higher".
That's not to say that if you're bright enough and determined enough you can't still have a great career without a degree, but it's a lot more difficult now than it used to be.
I would have to disagree with the debt issue, in that although fees for university are much higher than they should be the money owed is not taken into account when applying for things like mortgages etc. You have to earn above a certain amount to start paying it off and even then it is effectively the same as paying for something like Sky once a month. It is an inconvenience yes, but I wouldn't say that it's crippling, and shouldn't put people off of going to university if they wish to.
Sorry mate have to disagree with you about the debt thing. The new system js better in some ways but is terrible for anyone with ambition but from a family without money.
Let's use a hypothetical student Charlton fan let's call him Hantersaddick he's from an average family not a huge amount of money but own their home and live comfortably. No way could they pay his uni fees upfront so he's gone for the loan option. Now Hantersaddick is ambitious and works hard and wants to do well. He has completed a years work before returning to finish uni and will be going into a good job after graduation (assuming he doesn't cock it up by spending too much time on some football website called Parlton life).
Now the 'you don't have to pay it off until you earn above a certain point' argument let's look at that. The point is 21000 (fixed, not rising with inflation so basically a real terms fall every year). Show me a graduate job that doesn't pay more than 21000. Any student with ambition should be expecting to earn that fairly quickly and with reasonable progression will earn and fair chuck more. And that's where they kill you. Because it suddenly stops becoming and loan and starts becoming a tax. So if you have a reasonable job with good career progression but can't pay it off early you can easily pay back 10 times what you borrowed. Read money saving expert Martin Lewis on this.
Let's talk about the interest rate, 3% above RPI (notice how they use RPI when you have to pay it and CPI when they have to pay it). That's a big chunk of money. And interest is charged from the second you take the loan out, the old system it was from graduation. So when you finally enter the job market with 35grand debt (if you're lucky) you have to earn 42grand a year just to pay the interest. If you earn less than that your total debt rises every year.
So you are in the terrible situation of, do I pay it off early and delay getting a deposit for a house for 10 years. Do I murder my parents so I can get a house and pay it off. Or do I accept that I am paying an ever increasing chunk of my pay cheque every month as an extra tax.
Our friend Hantersaddick is favouring the murder your family option.
Outside of London it's quite common for graduate jobs to be under £21,000.
Well in finance/economics that's not the case but I guess it does happen in some industries outside London.
I haven't seen a graduate scheme offering less than 28 may say something more about the type of firm I'm looking at.
Point still stands. If you're going to uni you should really be expecting to earn more than 21000 within a few years of graduation. And so the screwing over process will start.
Yeah fair enough. Completely agree. Uni is there to hopefully get you further in your career and therefore earn more money and pay the loan back.
I know far to many people I went to school with who went and got a degree for the sake of it and don't have the real drive to go and make a career and pay it back.
So the degree earns you a starting point of 28k rather than a starting point of say16k
Three years of earning 12k more equals 36 k which is around principal amount of the debt. Plus your annual 28k is more likely to increase quicker than the 16k entrant as presumably would be fast tracked as you are on 'the grad scheme'
Not sure see what the issue is here.
If you don't want to pay for the degree, join at lower level.
So the degree earns you a starting point of 28k rather than a starting point of say16k
Three years of earning 12k more equals 36 k which is around principal amount of the debt. Plus your annual 28k is more likely to increase quicker than the 16k entrant as presumably would be fast tracked as you are on 'the grad scheme'
Not sure see what the issue is here.
If you don't want to pay for the degree, join at lower level.
I'm not disputing that. I'm more than happy to pay back what I borrowed. What I'm not happy to do is pay back 10 times that of I work hard and make a success of myself.
That is what this current system does. Money saving expert carried out projections using a fairly average paced career progression where they ended up on 100000 30 years after graduation (less than it sounds coz of inflation). That person would pay back 7 times what they borrowed. It is entirely possible someone will pay back 10 times what they borrowed or more under this system. How is that fair? It's a tax on success and hard work.
And obviously I have paid for the degree as in the long term I still think I will benefit. But I am allowed to point out the flaws in what is a terrible and unfair system.
Comments
Anyway this seems to have all stemmed from a massive misunderstanding which has unfortunately shown a rather unpleasant side to certain posters.
I recently came across the CV of someone I managed, I was shocked to see that he had a MSc in Software Development.. This guy had a few natural intuitions about key topics, but nothing that his 5 years in industry wouldn't have provided. (Perhaps the fact he was being managed by someone about 10 years his junior says a lot.)
I've interviewed fresh graduates from Computer Science programmes who have struggled with pure CS topics - i.e algorithmic complexity, or basic networking principles - so applied knowledge - i.e basic problem solving and logic - is non existent.
Its sad, because it's one area that could really use with a proper syllabus and teaching method. You see stories everyday about insecure software and data breaches, then you look at the knowledge of the average developer and the root cause suddenly becomes obvious.
Thanks to the wonderful theory that everyone should be allowed to go to university, we now have thousands of graduates every year, many obtaining degrees in ridiculously futile subjects, and (apart from the ones who's parents can pay them through) they start their adult life with a huge debt (£20k to £30k?!) when they should be trying to start saving the astronomical amount they need to buy a house. University has become an extension of sixth form college, but youngsters feel they need to go to just to give themselves a chance of getting a decent job. For those that haven't got degrees, there are lots of doors that are completely closed to you, especially when you're starting out.
I'm 36 now, and it becomes less and less relevant as you get older but I still see jobs advertised, that I really fancy and know I could do well, where the job description states that "you should have a degree at 2.2 or higher".
That's not to say that if you're bright enough and determined enough you can't still have a great career without a degree, but it's a lot more difficult now than it used to be.
Surprise surprise, I was an incredibly shit teacher when I qualified, and a lot of people on the course quit the job within a year because they weren't adequately prepared for it.
Film has been rolling for 20 minutes then some lumbering fuckwit came in. She straddled the aisles for a good minute or two swinging her iPhone around trying to find her seat, completely oblivious to the distraction she was making.
Then for the next hour parents were having to take their kids out because it was too scary. That's why it's a 12A, not a 4A you total dickheads.
Hazard lights are to warn people when you have unavoidably become a hazard due a breakdown or some-such, they are not licence to deliberately turn yourself into a hazard because you want to park somewhere you are not supposed to.
Let's use a hypothetical student Charlton fan let's call him Hantersaddick he's from an average family not a huge amount of money but own their home and live comfortably. No way could they pay his uni fees upfront so he's gone for the loan option. Now Hantersaddick is ambitious and works hard and wants to do well. He has completed a years work before returning to finish uni and will be going into a good job after graduation (assuming he doesn't cock it up by spending too much time on some football website called Parlton life).
Now the 'you don't have to pay it off until you earn above a certain point' argument let's look at that. The point is 21000 (fixed, not rising with inflation so basically a real terms fall every year). Show me a graduate job that doesn't pay more than 21000. Any student with ambition should be expecting to earn that fairly quickly and with reasonable progression will earn and fair chuck more. And that's where they kill you. Because it suddenly stops becoming and loan and starts becoming a tax. So if you have a reasonable job with good career progression but can't pay it off early you can easily pay back 10 times what you borrowed. Read money saving expert Martin Lewis on this.
Let's talk about the interest rate, 3% above RPI (notice how they use RPI when you have to pay it and CPI when they have to pay it). That's a big chunk of money. And interest is charged from the second you take the loan out, the old system it was from graduation. So when you finally enter the job market with 35grand debt (if you're lucky) you have to earn 42grand a year just to pay the interest. If you earn less than that your total debt rises every year.
So you are in the terrible situation of, do I pay it off early and delay getting a deposit for a house for 10 years. Do I murder my parents so I can get a house and pay it off. Or do I accept that I am paying an ever increasing chunk of my pay cheque every month as an extra tax.
Our friend Hantersaddick is favouring the murder your family option.
I haven't seen a graduate scheme offering less than 28 may say something more about the type of firm I'm looking at.
Point still stands. If you're going to uni you should really be expecting to earn more than 21000 within a few years of graduation. And so the screwing over process will start.
You are still supposed to pay it when abroad but they have no way of enforcing it.
I'm considering a role in Hong Kong, pays 6 times what I'd get over here and is a much more senior role. A luxuary apartment paid for and a big English speaking community. Do that for 3 years, come back and pay it off in a lump sum, deposit on a house. Take a pay cut to work in the UK but would have a few years experience by then...
I know far to many people I went to school with who went and got a degree for the sake of it and don't have the real drive to go and make a career and pay it back.
Three years of earning 12k more equals 36 k which is around principal amount of the debt. Plus your annual 28k is more likely to increase quicker than the 16k entrant as presumably would be fast tracked as you are on 'the grad scheme'
Not sure see what the issue is here.
If you don't want to pay for the degree, join at lower level.
That is what this current system does. Money saving expert carried out projections using a fairly average paced career progression where they ended up on 100000 30 years after graduation (less than it sounds coz of inflation). That person would pay back 7 times what they borrowed. It is entirely possible someone will pay back 10 times what they borrowed or more under this system. How is that fair? It's a tax on success and hard work.
And obviously I have paid for the degree as in the long term I still think I will benefit. But I am allowed to point out the flaws in what is a terrible and unfair system.