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.
Is that based on paying minimum amount monthly? Just done a quick loan calculator and 36k at 7% for 25 years is under 250 a month and X2 the original amount.
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.
Is that based on paying minimum amount monthly? Just done a quick loan calculator and 36k at 7% for 25 years is under 250 a month and X2 the original amount.
It's based on paying 9% on everything above 21000. Possibly with the odd overpayment in a vain attempt to pay it off early. I can't remember the details. I'll see if I can find it on money saving expert.
The point is there's little point in paying extra off unless you can pay the whole sum because it's not a loan it's a tax. Just they don't promote it like that. For me there is a huge element of dishonesty about it. So many of my fellow students have no idea...
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.
My advice would be move to Canada and just stop paying your loan. This is a purely hypothetical situation you understand, but if you were looking for a name of a fictional example to use when explaining how something like that is done you might choose to use the name Mrs Axiled_Eddick.
I didn't go to Uni, but if I knew how hard it would be to work abroad without a degree I would have done one.
Even though I now have many years experience and have worked in many countries, In Dubai my work visa is classed as assistant project manager purely because I don't have a degree.
Nothing to do with being a leader in my field and head of a division
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.
Yeah and most people will end up having most of their debt written off before they pay it all back. As the amount you pay is based on how much you earn, you should be able to save for a house at the same time as paying off the student loan. As I said it's an inconvenince but isn't the crippling debt that it's often portrayed to be.
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.
From experience looking at graduate schemes I'd say that most offer less than £28k, in finance and certain other areas it may be that or higher, but there's a lot in London that offer less than £20k! I read somewhere that the average graduate is on a starting salary of about £22k in London.
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.
Yeah and most people will end up having most of their debt written off before they pay it all back. As the amount you pay is based on how much you earn, you should be able to save for a house at the same time as paying off the student loan. As I said it's an inconvenince but isn't the crippling debt that it's often portrayed to be.
Believe me you've been sold a lie there. Most people will still owe something at the end of the 30 years but will have paid off more than they borrowed in the first place. Like I say it's not a loan it's a 30 year tax.
Sure some people won't pay off what they borrowed but these are the people who leave uni and done get a proper job ever. Any full time job with basic career progression and you'll pay off way more than you borrowed. And still 'owe' them money in 30 years when it's written off...
The only redeeming feature is that it doesn't count as borrowings when you come to get a mortgage. However it will reduce your disposable income and so the amount you can repay each month. The bank/mortgage company will take this into account when offering you a mortgage.
This thread seems to have been hijacked - it needs to get back to its original purpose of "general things that annoy you".
So, the general things that annoy me are:- - lane hoggers - rude people - The M25 between the M23 and the M3 on a Friday afternoon - non graduates that have an opinion. I went to a Russell Group university when it was quite exclusive and I begrudge non graduates thinking they are as good as me at, broadly speaking, anything. I wouldn't employ one if you paid me.
Canters, you keep saying it is a tax not a loan but any loan you pay back more than you borrow so why is it a tax not a loan?
Because what you pay back has zero relation to what you borrowed. You pay back 9% of what you earn above 21000 unless you can reach the entirely notional concept of paying it all off early....
It's not so common now but back in the day I used to hate going for a beer with a couple of my mates as they would start fingering R2D2 as soon as we entered any pub and you end up standing around like a spare prick at a wedding whilst they pump their wages into a fruity.
It's not so common now but back in the day I used to hate going for a beer with a couple of my mates as they would start fingering R2D2 as soon as we entered any pub and you end up standing around like a spare prick at a wedding whilst they pump their wages into a fruity.
actually saw a classic the other week at a pub in barnehurst it was a couple that were both playing a machine each and inbetween them was a table and they had there dinner served to it and were scoffing a chip in between every spin.
It's not so common now but back in the day I used to hate going for a beer with a couple of my mates as they would start fingering R2D2 as soon as we entered any pub and you end up standing around like a spare prick at a wedding whilst they pump their wages into a fruity.
There use to be a couple come in The Horse on a Sunday evening all dressed up and the bloke would play the fruity all the time they were there, while she'd stand next to him staring into thin air.
More often that not, I'd have emptied it before they arrived, but I never wanted to spoil their evenings entertainment
There's a guy who gets in my local every night of the week and spends a few hours and God knows how much money on the two that are back to back in there. Given that they are a pound a spin now he must do really well out of them.
I used to play them at 20p and 25p a spin if i was on me todd waiting for someone but once that went up I was out.
It's not so common now but back in the day I used to hate going for a beer with a couple of my mates as they would start fingering R2D2 as soon as we entered any pub and you end up standing around like a spare prick at a wedding whilst they pump their wages into a fruity.
I remember once when on holiday, years ago, my wife and I sat in a bar with one fruit machine and this young woman was putting money in like it was going out of fashion. My wife who also likes to play the machine was waiting money in hand when she would finish. The woman ran out of change and went up to the bar to get some more, my wife saw her chance, went up to the machine put her first coin in and won the jackpot. For some reason the other woman started shouting at her so we left.
Canters, you keep saying it is a tax not a loan but any loan you pay back more than you borrow so why is it a tax not a loan?
Because what you pay back has zero relation to what you borrowed. You pay back 9% of what you earn above 21000 unless you can reach the entirely notional concept of paying it all off early....
Yeah but you are still only paying back the principal and interest. Like a loan...
Sorry, don't mean it to sound like I am having a pop at you.
Canters, you keep saying it is a tax not a loan but any loan you pay back more than you borrow so why is it a tax not a loan?
Because what you pay back has zero relation to what you borrowed. You pay back 9% of what you earn above 21000 unless you can reach the entirely notional concept of paying it all off early....
Yeah but you are still only paying back the principal and interest. Like a loan...
Sorry, don't mean it to sound like I am having a pop at you.
No I see where you are coming from. It's hard to correctly explain. Basically it's because the debt and interest are so weighted that it is impossible to pay it off before you reach the 30 year cut off. So you will always be paying that 9%. Unless you get a huge windfall and can afford to pay it off early.
As I said it's a horrendously complex system. If you are interested I suggest checking out what Martin Lewis has to say about it on money saving expert. He calls it a hybrid tax.
Comments
It's a big call.
The point is there's little point in paying extra off unless you can pay the whole sum because it's not a loan it's a tax. Just they don't promote it like that. For me there is a huge element of dishonesty about it. So many of my fellow students have no idea...
Even though I now have many years experience and have worked in many countries, In Dubai my work visa is classed as assistant project manager purely because I don't have a degree.
Nothing to do with being a leader in my field and head of a division
Sure some people won't pay off what they borrowed but these are the people who leave uni and done get a proper job ever. Any full time job with basic career progression and you'll pay off way more than you borrowed. And still 'owe' them money in 30 years when it's written off...
The only redeeming feature is that it doesn't count as borrowings when you come to get a mortgage. However it will reduce your disposable income and so the amount you can repay each month. The bank/mortgage company will take this into account when offering you a mortgage.
Also annoyed am going to have to increase contributions to the lad's accumulation and maintenance trust
1.) it looks ridiculous walking round sucking on some sort of electrical box
2.) the burst of smoke is annoying
we get it you vape.
So, the general things that annoy me are:-
- lane hoggers
- rude people
- The M25 between the M23 and the M3 on a Friday afternoon
- non graduates that have an opinion. I went to a Russell Group university when it was quite exclusive and I begrudge non graduates thinking they are as good as me at, broadly speaking, anything. I wouldn't employ one if you paid me.
It's not so common now but back in the day I used to hate going for a beer with a couple of my mates as they would start fingering R2D2 as soon as we entered any pub and you end up standing around like a spare prick at a wedding whilst they pump their wages into a fruity.
More often that not, I'd have emptied it before they arrived, but I never wanted to spoil their evenings entertainment
I used to play them at 20p and 25p a spin if i was on me todd waiting for someone but once that went up I was out.
Sorry, don't mean it to sound like I am having a pop at you.
As I said it's a horrendously complex system. If you are interested I suggest checking out what Martin Lewis has to say about it on money saving expert. He calls it a hybrid tax.