I went to uni, I think that it's only fair that I repay it. I think that the fact that many will not repay it is testament to how well it works and not the other way round... I am repaying my student loan, when I got my first job I repaid £22.50 a month, I now repay £150 a month, while having a shade under double the gross salary, so it rises exponentially. Manageable.
I am a strong believer in that if things are "free" you won't value them.
Unlike the NHS and a lot of other public services, the University system is an investment in an individual that boosts their earning potential. It's not fair that a lad who left school at 16 to go to work should subsidise my ability to earn more than he ever will.
Completely different for nursing, teaching, medicine etc which in my opinion should be completely free for people who take up these vocations.
I must admit I'm starting to come round to this way of thinking. Spoke to a fair few people involved in widening participation (trying to get those from disadvantaged backgrounds) into uni, and even they agreed. Mind you, I asked if they'd have gone to uni knowing they have insurmountable debt and they couldn't answer. I'm not wholly convinced. I think in principle, if you earn more you pay more is right - but that's what we do with income tax! Also there's the psychological fear of debt especially if you've grown up in a household with no money or spiralling debts - or even never lived in a house where parents paid a mortgage. I can shrug off 100k plus in mortgage, but the idea of half that as a loan frightens me somewhat, even if I don't have to pay it if I'm out of work, as I would a mortgage.
My girlfriend comes from a family like what you describe. Although many try to scare the life out of kids screaming about the debt, she understood the way it is repaid and as a consequence went to uni.
I think the vast majority of people put off uni by the debt levels are done so by precisely the kind of people who should be encouraging them to go, but whom generally have a political axe to grind.... Bailiffs are not going to kick your door in over a tenner you owe to the student loans company. Quite simply it is the "friendliest" debt anyone will ever have, to the extent where some people I knew took it and put it in an ISA even though they didn't need it.
People should stop scaremongering about the debt you leave university in. Instead they should educate them in the way its repaid, and if they come from more deprived backgrounds, the grants that are available, as well as the increased earnings potential.
Pre 2012 uni starters start repaying at above £17,755, and £21k for those that started after.
More than fair. Can you think of any of other debts that are that manageable?
What student can afford to put their student loan into an ISA!
I went to uni, I think that it's only fair that I repay it. I think that the fact that many will not repay it is testament to how well it works and not the other way round... I am repaying my student loan, when I got my first job I repaid £22.50 a month, I now repay £150 a month, while having a shade under double the gross salary, so it rises exponentially. Manageable.
I am a strong believer in that if things are "free" you won't value them.
Unlike the NHS and a lot of other public services, the University system is an investment in an individual that boosts their earning potential. It's not fair that a lad who left school at 16 to go to work should subsidise my ability to earn more than he ever will.
Completely different for nursing, teaching, medicine etc which in my opinion should be completely free for people who take up these vocations.
I must admit I'm starting to come round to this way of thinking. Spoke to a fair few people involved in widening participation (trying to get those from disadvantaged backgrounds) into uni, and even they agreed. Mind you, I asked if they'd have gone to uni knowing they have insurmountable debt and they couldn't answer. I'm not wholly convinced. I think in principle, if you earn more you pay more is right - but that's what we do with income tax! Also there's the psychological fear of debt especially if you've grown up in a household with no money or spiralling debts - or even never lived in a house where parents paid a mortgage. I can shrug off 100k plus in mortgage, but the idea of half that as a loan frightens me somewhat, even if I don't have to pay it if I'm out of work, as I would a mortgage.
My girlfriend comes from a family like what you describe. Although many try to scare the life out of kids screaming about the debt, she understood the way it is repaid and as a consequence went to uni.
I think the vast majority of people put off uni by the debt levels are done so by precisely the kind of people who should be encouraging them to go, but whom generally have a political axe to grind.... Bailiffs are not going to kick your door in over a tenner you owe to the student loans company. Quite simply it is the "friendliest" debt anyone will ever have, to the extent where some people I knew took it and put it in an ISA even though they didn't need it.
People should stop scaremongering about the debt you leave university in. Instead they should educate them in the way its repaid, and if they come from more deprived backgrounds, the grants that are available, as well as the increased earnings potential.
Pre 2012 uni starters start repaying at above £17,755, and £21k for those that started after.
More than fair. Can you think of any of other debts that are that manageable?
What student can afford to put their student loan into an ISA!
Ones who had parents paying their way for them. Not that I am trying to paint them as anything other than the exception, but it highlights how friendly the terms of the debt are.
Interest for the higher graduate earners (over £40k?) could go up a lot soon, isn't it 3% plus RPI? RPI is over 3% currently meaning interest over 6%.
Whether you agree with the principal of student loans of not over 6% seems high right now, it might not in 18 months time when interest rates are likely to have risen, but right now it seems very high to me.
I don't personally have an issue in the main with the loan system but that rate of interest in the current financial cycle is too high.
I went to uni, I think that it's only fair that I repay it. I think that the fact that many will not repay it is testament to how well it works and not the other way round... I am repaying my student loan, when I got my first job I repaid £22.50 a month, I now repay £150 a month, while having a shade under double the gross salary, so it rises exponentially. Manageable.
I am a strong believer in that if things are "free" you won't value them.
Unlike the NHS and a lot of other public services, the University system is an investment in an individual that boosts their earning potential. It's not fair that a lad who left school at 16 to go to work should subsidise my ability to earn more than he ever will.
Completely different for nursing, teaching, medicine etc which in my opinion should be completely free for people who take up these vocations.
I must admit I'm starting to come round to this way of thinking. Spoke to a fair few people involved in widening participation (trying to get those from disadvantaged backgrounds) into uni, and even they agreed. Mind you, I asked if they'd have gone to uni knowing they have insurmountable debt and they couldn't answer. I'm not wholly convinced. I think in principle, if you earn more you pay more is right - but that's what we do with income tax! Also there's the psychological fear of debt especially if you've grown up in a household with no money or spiralling debts - or even never lived in a house where parents paid a mortgage. I can shrug off 100k plus in mortgage, but the idea of half that as a loan frightens me somewhat, even if I don't have to pay it if I'm out of work, as I would a mortgage.
My girlfriend comes from a family like what you describe. Although many try to scare the life out of kids screaming about the debt, she understood the way it is repaid and as a consequence went to uni.
I think the vast majority of people put off uni by the debt levels are done so by precisely the kind of people who should be encouraging them to go, but whom generally have a political axe to grind.... Bailiffs are not going to kick your door in over a tenner you owe to the student loans company. Quite simply it is the "friendliest" debt anyone will ever have, to the extent where some people I knew took it and put it in an ISA even though they didn't need it.
People should stop scaremongering about the debt you leave university in. Instead they should educate them in the way its repaid, and if they come from more deprived backgrounds, the grants that are available, as well as the increased earnings potential.
Pre 2012 uni starters start repaying at above £17,755, and £21k for those that started after.
More than fair. Can you think of any of other debts that are that manageable?
What student can afford to put their student loan into an ISA!
A question - I genuinely don't know. Are student loans paid out on an annual basis and it's a student's job to mange its use? Or is it a 3 times a year term loan or monthly? Because if you get a significant lump sum, you'd have to be pretty dumb not to keep it the most efficient account you could find. (Although that might be a regular TSB or Santander account rather than an ISA these days!) I'm asking about loans/grants for living costs here. I assume the tuition fees bit goes straight to the uni?
What would be the problem with reducing that amount by half for all degrees and abolishing it completely for degrees in medicine and allied essential professions where we currently have a skills shortage.
I went to uni, I think that it's only fair that I repay it. I think that the fact that many will not repay it is testament to how well it works and not the other way round... I am repaying my student loan, when I got my first job I repaid £22.50 a month, I now repay £150 a month, while having a shade under double the gross salary, so it rises exponentially. Manageable.
I am a strong believer in that if things are "free" you won't value them.
Unlike the NHS and a lot of other public services, the University system is an investment in an individual that boosts their earning potential. It's not fair that a lad who left school at 16 to go to work should subsidise my ability to earn more than he ever will.
Completely different for nursing, teaching, medicine etc which in my opinion should be completely free for people who take up these vocations.
I must admit I'm starting to come round to this way of thinking. Spoke to a fair few people involved in widening participation (trying to get those from disadvantaged backgrounds) into uni, and even they agreed. Mind you, I asked if they'd have gone to uni knowing they have insurmountable debt and they couldn't answer. I'm not wholly convinced. I think in principle, if you earn more you pay more is right - but that's what we do with income tax! Also there's the psychological fear of debt especially if you've grown up in a household with no money or spiralling debts - or even never lived in a house where parents paid a mortgage. I can shrug off 100k plus in mortgage, but the idea of half that as a loan frightens me somewhat, even if I don't have to pay it if I'm out of work, as I would a mortgage.
My girlfriend comes from a family like what you describe. Although many try to scare the life out of kids screaming about the debt, she understood the way it is repaid and as a consequence went to uni.
I think the vast majority of people put off uni by the debt levels are done so by precisely the kind of people who should be encouraging them to go, but whom generally have a political axe to grind.... Bailiffs are not going to kick your door in over a tenner you owe to the student loans company. Quite simply it is the "friendliest" debt anyone will ever have, to the extent where some people I knew took it and put it in an ISA even though they didn't need it.
People should stop scaremongering about the debt you leave university in. Instead they should educate them in the way its repaid, and if they come from more deprived backgrounds, the grants that are available, as well as the increased earnings potential.
Pre 2012 uni starters start repaying at above £17,755, and £21k for those that started after.
More than fair. Can you think of any of other debts that are that manageable?
What student can afford to put their student loan into an ISA!
A question - I genuinely don't know. Are student loans paid out on an annual basis and it's a student's job to mange its use? Or is it a 3 times a year term loan or monthly? Because if you get a significant lump sum, you'd have to be pretty dumb not to keep it the most efficient account you could find. (Although that might be a regular TSB or Santander account rather than an ISA these days!) I'm asking about loans/grants for living costs here. I assume the tuition fees bit goes straight to the uni?
I went to uni, I think that it's only fair that I repay it. I think that the fact that many will not repay it is testament to how well it works and not the other way round... I am repaying my student loan, when I got my first job I repaid £22.50 a month, I now repay £150 a month, while having a shade under double the gross salary, so it rises exponentially. Manageable.
I am a strong believer in that if things are "free" you won't value them.
Unlike the NHS and a lot of other public services, the University system is an investment in an individual that boosts their earning potential. It's not fair that a lad who left school at 16 to go to work should subsidise my ability to earn more than he ever will.
Completely different for nursing, teaching, medicine etc which in my opinion should be completely free for people who take up these vocations.
I must admit I'm starting to come round to this way of thinking. Spoke to a fair few people involved in widening participation (trying to get those from disadvantaged backgrounds) into uni, and even they agreed. Mind you, I asked if they'd have gone to uni knowing they have insurmountable debt and they couldn't answer. I'm not wholly convinced. I think in principle, if you earn more you pay more is right - but that's what we do with income tax! Also there's the psychological fear of debt especially if you've grown up in a household with no money or spiralling debts - or even never lived in a house where parents paid a mortgage. I can shrug off 100k plus in mortgage, but the idea of half that as a loan frightens me somewhat, even if I don't have to pay it if I'm out of work, as I would a mortgage.
My girlfriend comes from a family like what you describe. Although many try to scare the life out of kids screaming about the debt, she understood the way it is repaid and as a consequence went to uni.
I think the vast majority of people put off uni by the debt levels are done so by precisely the kind of people who should be encouraging them to go, but whom generally have a political axe to grind.... Bailiffs are not going to kick your door in over a tenner you owe to the student loans company. Quite simply it is the "friendliest" debt anyone will ever have, to the extent where some people I knew took it and put it in an ISA even though they didn't need it.
People should stop scaremongering about the debt you leave university in. Instead they should educate them in the way its repaid, and if they come from more deprived backgrounds, the grants that are available, as well as the increased earnings potential.
Pre 2012 uni starters start repaying at above £17,755, and £21k for those that started after.
More than fair. Can you think of any of other debts that are that manageable?
What student can afford to put their student loan into an ISA!
A question - I genuinely don't know. Are student loans paid out on an annual basis and it's a student's job to mange its use? Or is it a 3 times a year term loan or monthly? Because if you get a significant lump sum, you'd have to be pretty dumb not to keep it the most efficient account you could find. (Although that might be a regular TSB or Santander account rather than an ISA these days!) I'm asking about loans/grants for living costs here. I assume the tuition fees bit goes straight to the uni?
Tuition fee goes straight to the uni and the student doesn't see a penny of that.
Maintenance loan is paid out usually in 3 periods over the year from memory. If you're from a disadvantaged background you get a maintenance grant on top that is free. You don't have to pay it back.
What would be the problem with reducing that amount by half for all degrees and abolishing it completely for degrees in medicine and allied essential professions where we currently have a skills shortage.
The problem would be that either the universities would have less money to educate the students or the shortfall would have to come from the Public purse - you know the fund that is, already, so stretched that all public servants are having a pay freeze and there are, apparently, not enough Police on the streets to stop Terrorists from killing people and we have tower blocks that are not safe and need upgrading to prevent fires that kill up to 100 people a time.
Oh and we need to drop £1b on new buildings in Northern Ireland.
On a serious note I would think that Doctors (degrees in medicine) receive enough benefits from the acquisition of their licence. In reality it is the pay and conditions, compared to other health services around the world, that leaves the NHS short.
What would be the problem with reducing that amount by half for all degrees and abolishing it completely for degrees in medicine and allied essential professions where we currently have a skills shortage.
The problem would be that either the universities would have less money to educate the students or the shortfall would have to come from the Public purse - you know the fund that is, already, so stretched that all public servants are having a pay freeze and there are, apparently, not enough Police on the streets to stop Terrorists from killing people and we have tower blocks that are not safe and need upgrading to prevent fires that kill up to 100 people a time.
Oh and we need to drop £1b on new buildings in Northern Ireland.
On a serious note I would think that Doctors (degrees in medicine) receive enough benefits from the acquisition of their licence. In reality it is the pay and conditions, compared to other health services around the world, that leaves the NHS short.
I'm not aware that any Bank of England staff have ever before gone on strike. The news stories say "first time in over 50 years" but I reckon that they've got no records at all of a strike and have just gone back to the Bank's nationalisation in 1946.
I'm not aware that any Bank of England staff have ever before gone on strike. The news stories say "first time in over 50 years" but I reckon that they've got no records at all of a strike and have just gone back to the Bank's nationalisation in 1946.
Well the statement is technically correct as long as there hasn't been a strike since July 1967.
I'm not aware that any Bank of England staff have ever before gone on strike. The news stories say "first time in over 50 years" but I reckon that they've got no records at all of a strike and have just gone back to the Bank's nationalisation in 1946.
Well the statement is technically correct as long as there hasn't been a strike since July 1967.
Yeah sure, but "first time ever" would have been a punchier tagline.
Edited to say. Ignore me I'm talking bollocks again. Some staff at the BoE Printing Works went on strike in early 1977. It collapsed, seemingly without any concession having been made on the part of management. So "first time in over 40 years" would have been correct.
I think it'll be a damp squib the strike, it's not likely to be many people. 84 people we're balloted and 80 called for a strike. Four days though, not sure what Unite pay for a strike day but 4 days lost pay will likely hurt some people.
What would be the problem with reducing that amount by half for all degrees and abolishing it completely for degrees in medicine and allied essential professions where we currently have a skills shortage.
The problem would be that either the universities would have less money to educate the students or the shortfall would have to come from the Public purse - you know the fund that is, already, so stretched that all public servants are having a pay freeze and there are, apparently, not enough Police on the streets to stop Terrorists from killing people and we have tower blocks that are not safe and need upgrading to prevent fires that kill up to 100 people a time.
Oh and we need to drop £1b on new buildings in Northern Ireland.
On a serious note I would think that Doctors (degrees in medicine) receive enough benefits from the acquisition of their licence. In reality it is the pay and conditions, compared to other health services around the world, that leaves the NHS short.
Yes the 50% of the revenue lost would be made up out of government funds. I don't have any problem with that.
Half way house compromise which ought to satisfy both sides of the argument.
I know from experience that since this lunatic government abolished the bursaries for students undertaking essential degree courses in professions in for example nursing or other professions allied to medicine that the number of students applying for these courses is falling. In part this is because a good proportion of those wanting to work in the NHS are now mature students most of whom have responsibilities, families, mortgages etc. The bursary system was a way by which these prospective applicants could get through a three year degree.
The same government that says it recognises the shortage in these 100% essential occupations and wants more British people to fill the roles and for us not to rely on foreign professionals, without whom the NHS would fall over. Instead we scare them off and make them feel unwelcome whilst making the transition to British trained staff more difficult.
Quite frankly they couldn't be trusted to organise my sock draw never mind come up with a coherent plan to train the people we need.
Oh and we need to drop £1b on new buildings in Northern Ireland.
Really? Its a bit of a hole but £1bn is over the top for a village of that size. Can you imagine how many flags and buckets of blue red and white paint they would get for that? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newbuildings
Oh and we need to drop £1b on new buildings in Northern Ireland.
Really? Its a bit of a hole but £1bn is over the top for a village of that size. Can you imagine how many flags and buckets of blue red and white paint they would get for that? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newbuildings
I was chatting to my boss about some of the grimmer parts of Norn Iron recently and, having rightly described Fintona, Dungiven, Donemana, Upperlands, Larne and Strabane as shitholes, proceeded to add Newbuildings to that list.
Imagine my deep and abiding joy on discovering it to be his home town....
Coming from the county town of Tyrone, it is of no surprise to hear Athens being described as the Omagh of the south...
Newbuildings is just outside Derry and we'd often travel through there on our way to football games. As a southern "catholic" I got quite the shock when we went through there the first time, Union Flags everywhere, kerbs, lampposts even walls covered in red white and blue. I'd never seen anything like it.
A few years back when the Israel Palestine conflict was at its height in the media they had Israel flags up which surprised me, I didn't think anyone was really "pro" Israel in these parts - not enough to put up flags anyway. Asked the Derry fans if they knew why, their response was as follows: "Sure if we put up Batman flags they would put up Joker ones."
Decent article in the guardian today about the disparity in public sector pay. Off the back of the report commissioned by manpower economics.
The joke for me is that I thought all this austerity was meant to help cut the budget deficit
Last time I looked, the budget deficit is still very high and front line public sector workers have been shafted for 7 years earning less in real terms.
They mentioned a meeting today to discuss how the government could address the cap through other measures. Personally I just wish they break the whole tax system down and start again.
If you earn over the 40% threshold in income (through whatever means), you pay 40%. No more clever accountancy or loopholes or whatever else it is that gives people the ability to get away with it.
Of course they won't do that though because they'd be pulling the rug out from underneath their and their chum's feet
I know of very good public servants who have left because of the pay cap. It isn't just the cap - replacement pensions were introduced which were significantly less favourable and required bigger contributions -so the net effect was a pay cut year in year out!
I believe there's enough support within the Tory's to push to remove the cap, I'll be very surprised if they don't do something anyway. They will of course have a decision as to how to fund that, will they put 1p on all tax rates, I think I would and raise the personal allowance £500. The easier and non discriminatory way is to simply raise the personal allowance substantially for everyone, although without other tax changes that will help everyone sub circa £130k so you'd probably want to do something else in addition, I'd still go with the 1p on all bands.
I think the 40% tax payer being able to somehow dodge the system is a bit of a myth, these are not mega earners but generally PAYE people. The 40% starts at 32k taxable pay so even if you have the full personal allowance it starts on gross earnings of 43.5k. No way an 'employee' can do anything at that level.
I think @bobmunro will concur even much higher PAYE earners and 45% tax payers it's almost impossible to avoid paying the correct amount of tax. You can of course limit the tax you pay by giving to charity or paying into a pension (to a limit) but all tax payers can do that at any level and it's actually reduced once you get to the 45p band.
The only people I know who potentially manage to 'avoid' paying the correct amount are self employed with 'cash' jobs or the mega earners and the now high profile schemes such as 'film' investments. I've lost count over the years of the number of self employed tradesman who bemoan the fact they can only borrow small amounts on a mortgage as their 'accounts' show they are low earners.
Let's hope they see sense & do something, but I'm still of the mind it needs to help the lower earners across the board, not just public sector.
I know of very good public servants who have left because of the pay cap. It isn't just the cap - replacement pensions were introduced which were significantly less favourable and required bigger contributions -so the net effect was a pay cut year in year out!
All walks of life public & non public have suffered with pensions being worse. Whether that's removal of final salary schemes or having to pay more, have you seen annuity rates lately!?!
This is the same public sector (The NHS bit) which went on strike three years ago and got pretty much zip support from the media and not much more from the general public?
I forget how many times I was reminded about my "gold plated pension" and job security. It's secure because no one wants to do it.
I was also reminded more times than I can remember that if I didn't like it I could find another job. It's good to know that what those people are now getting their wish because front line workers are leaving in droves.
It's good to know that the NHS is safe in Tory hands.
I know of very good public servants who have left because of the pay cap. It isn't just the cap - replacement pensions were introduced which were significantly less favourable and required bigger contributions -so the net effect was a pay cut year in year out!
All walks of life public & non public have suffered with pensions being worse. Whether that's removal of final salary schemes or having to pay more, have you seen annuity rates lately!?!
Good to see you have joined the race to the bottom.
I can't speak for every public sector occupation but certainly in the NHS the graduate entry jobs are initially paid and remain lower than those of equal responsibility in the private sector and with no benefits. I say equal responsibility but I'm not sure where you find any with more responsibility than front line health workers.
The trade off for years of lower pay was always job security and safe reasonable pension.
The lowest paid public servents really struggle - we have all heard the stories of nurses going to food banks. The thing is, a lot of Tory MPs have discovered that there is a magic money tree and they need to shake it or face losing their jobs! The fact is, the magic money tree is higher taxes and compensating by increasing growth around sound economic policy. Tory MPS that were ridiculing this during the election are now saying this is the way forward. You couldn't make it up!
It's not about a race to the bottom @ShootersHillGuru when it comes to pensions, it's fact that pensions today are far more expensive compared to yester year simply we are living longer and to a lesser extent lower returns.
In 2009 a basic pension (non index linked, single life) for £100k would have bought around 8k per annum pension. That £100k now buys a little over £5k, a 35%+ drop for those in a money purchase scheme. How many in a defined benefit scheme have seen their pension reduce 35%, especially those nearing retirement?
Despite the increased cost and a move away in some aspects to average earnings rather than final salary, public sector pensions are still very good, just not as good as they once were and cost the individual a little more.
It's not about a race to the bottom @ShootersHillGuru when it comes to pensions, it's fact that pensions today are far more expensive compared to yester year simply we are living longer and to a lesser extent lower returns.
In 2009 a basic pension (non index linked, single life) for £100k would have bought around 8k per annum pension. That £100k now buys a little over £5k, a 35%+ drop for those in a money purchase scheme. How many in a defined benefit scheme have seen their pension reduce 35%, especially those nearing retirement?
Despite the increased cost and a move away in some aspects to average earnings rather than final salary, public sector pensions are still very good, just not as good as they once were and cost the individual a little more.
You don't address the salary anomaly in your argument though. As I posted earlier, the trade off was always lower salary and benefits versus security and decent pension.
Well I can tell you that for many public sector workers, job security is no longer assured and now the pension is worse too.
No real surprise after 10 years of wage cuts that people are moaning and voting with their feet.
From what I know, job security is definitely not what it was, performance assessments are very draconian, divisive, unfair and demotivating and the pensions are more expensive and much worse. Of course the argument may be that even though the penions are significantly worse than what they were, they are still better than the pensions of many non civil servants. I think this is the wrong way to look at it, but if you are having to eat dog shit, you might be manouvered to complain about the person who is lucky enough to be eating horse shit rather than the people eating caviar!
It's not about a race to the bottom @ShootersHillGuru when it comes to pensions, it's fact that pensions today are far more expensive compared to yester year simply we are living longer and to a lesser extent lower returns.
In 2009 a basic pension (non index linked, single life) for £100k would have bought around 8k per annum pension. That £100k now buys a little over £5k, a 35%+ drop for those in a money purchase scheme. How many in a defined benefit scheme have seen their pension reduce 35%, especially those nearing retirement?
Despite the increased cost and a move away in some aspects to average earnings rather than final salary, public sector pensions are still very good, just not as good as they once were and cost the individual a little more.
You don't address the salary anomaly in your argument though. As I posted earlier, the trade off was always lower salary and benefits versus security and decent pension.
Well I can tell you that for many public sector workers, job security is no longer assured and now the pension is worse too.
No real surprise after 10 years of wage cuts that people are moaning and voting with their feet.
I thought I had if you are comparing public v's private, but more specifically then the public sector pension may be worse than it once was but it is in the main still far superior to the private sector and hasn't reduced to the same extent as the private sector has. Therefore if you look at the numbers the gap has actually widened on pensions between the public and private sector. How many public sector workers have seen their pension reduce by 35% almost over night or been moved to defined contribution schemes in the last 7 years? I'd put my neck on the line and say none or almost none.
Pensions have nothing to do with austerity etc, the Hutton report was 2010/2011 wasn't it?
Do you really believe that the private sector has somehow seen huge pay rises? I can show you many people in the private sector who since 2010 have seen lower pay rises (or none at all) than the public sector in those 7 years, those that still have their jobs anyway. How much has the minimum wage increased in that period? How much has the average salary in Supermarkets, Costa Coffee, Pret etc increased since 2010? All those people have additionally seen a considerable decrease in their pension value, far greater than the public sector and for many approaching retirement it's been a huge hit that they can never recover from.
@MuttleyCAFC The unions have fought performance related pay for years in the public sector to varying successful degrees, which personally I think was always a little naïve in some aspects. The same teachers who were on strike a few years back over this were also the same one's who subsequently moaned to me that they were a much better teacher and worked much harder than their colleague in the classroom next door and it was unfair they earned the same or sometimes less!
Comments
Whether you agree with the principal of student loans of not over 6% seems high right now, it might not in 18 months time when interest rates are likely to have risen, but right now it seems very high to me.
I don't personally have an issue in the main with the loan system but that rate of interest in the current financial cycle is too high.
I'm asking about loans/grants for living costs here. I assume the tuition fees bit goes straight to the uni?
What would be the problem with reducing that amount by half for all degrees and abolishing it completely for degrees in medicine and allied essential professions where we currently have a skills shortage.
Maintenance loan is paid out usually in 3 periods over the year from memory. If you're from a disadvantaged background you get a maintenance grant on top that is free. You don't have to pay it back.
Oh and we need to drop £1b on new buildings in Northern Ireland.
On a serious note I would think that Doctors (degrees in medicine) receive enough benefits from the acquisition of their licence. In reality it is the pay and conditions, compared to other health services around the world, that leaves the NHS short.
bbc.co.uk/news/business-40478754
I'm not aware that any Bank of England staff have ever before gone on strike. The news stories say "first time in over 50 years" but I reckon that they've got no records at all of a strike and have just gone back to the Bank's nationalisation in 1946.
Edited to say. Ignore me I'm talking bollocks again. Some staff at the BoE Printing Works went on strike in early 1977. It collapsed, seemingly without any concession having been made on the part of management. So "first time in over 40 years" would have been correct.
Can't wait for the inevitable general strike. Make this country completely ungovernable and kick these goons out.
isn't that where our leader works?
Think it's security & maintenance staff.
Half way house compromise which ought to satisfy both sides of the argument.
I know from experience that since this lunatic government abolished the bursaries for students undertaking essential degree courses in professions in for example nursing or other professions allied to medicine that the number of students applying for these courses is falling. In part this is because a good proportion of those wanting to work in the NHS are now mature students most of whom have responsibilities, families, mortgages etc. The bursary system was a way by which these prospective applicants could get through a three year degree.
The same government that says it recognises the shortage in these 100% essential occupations and wants more British people to fill the roles and for us not to rely on foreign professionals, without whom the NHS would fall over. Instead we scare them off and make them feel unwelcome whilst making the transition to British trained staff more difficult.
Quite frankly they couldn't be trusted to organise my sock draw never mind come up with a coherent plan to train the people we need.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newbuildings
Imagine my deep and abiding joy on discovering it to be his home town....
Coming from the county town of Tyrone, it is of no surprise to hear Athens being described as the Omagh of the south...
A few years back when the Israel Palestine conflict was at its height in the media they had Israel flags up which surprised me, I didn't think anyone was really "pro" Israel in these parts - not enough to put up flags anyway. Asked the Derry fans if they knew why, their response was as follows:
"Sure if we put up Batman flags they would put up Joker ones."
The joke for me is that I thought all this austerity was meant to help cut the budget deficit
Last time I looked, the budget deficit is still very high and front line public sector workers have been shafted for 7 years earning less in real terms.
They mentioned a meeting today to discuss how the government could address the cap through other measures. Personally I just wish they break the whole tax system down and start again.
If you earn over the 40% threshold in income (through whatever means), you pay 40%. No more clever accountancy or loopholes or whatever else it is that gives people the ability to get away with it.
Of course they won't do that though because they'd be pulling the rug out from underneath their and their chum's feet
I believe there's enough support within the Tory's to push to remove the cap, I'll be very surprised if they don't do something anyway. They will of course have a decision as to how to fund that, will they put 1p on all tax rates, I think I would and raise the personal allowance £500. The easier and non discriminatory way is to simply raise the personal allowance substantially for everyone, although without other tax changes that will help everyone sub circa £130k so you'd probably want to do something else in addition, I'd still go with the 1p on all bands.
I think the 40% tax payer being able to somehow dodge the system is a bit of a myth, these are not mega earners but generally PAYE people. The 40% starts at 32k taxable pay so even if you have the full personal allowance it starts on gross earnings of 43.5k. No way an 'employee' can do anything at that level.
I think @bobmunro will concur even much higher PAYE earners and 45% tax payers it's almost impossible to avoid paying the correct amount of tax. You can of course limit the tax you pay by giving to charity or paying into a pension (to a limit) but all tax payers can do that at any level and it's actually reduced once you get to the 45p band.
The only people I know who potentially manage to 'avoid' paying the correct amount are self employed with 'cash' jobs or the mega earners and the now high profile schemes such as 'film' investments. I've lost count over the years of the number of self employed tradesman who bemoan the fact they can only borrow small amounts on a mortgage as their 'accounts' show they are low earners.
Let's hope they see sense & do something, but I'm still of the mind it needs to help the lower earners across the board, not just public sector.
I forget how many times I was reminded about my "gold plated pension" and job security. It's secure because no one wants to do it.
I was also reminded more times than I can remember that if I didn't like it I could find another job. It's good to know that what those people are now getting their wish because front line workers are leaving in droves.
It's good to know that the NHS is safe in Tory hands.
I can't speak for every public sector occupation but certainly in the NHS the graduate entry jobs are initially paid and remain lower than those of equal responsibility in the private sector and with no benefits. I say equal responsibility but I'm not sure where you find any with more responsibility than front line health workers.
The trade off for years of lower pay was always job security and safe reasonable pension.
In 2009 a basic pension (non index linked, single life) for £100k would have bought around 8k per annum pension. That £100k now buys a little over £5k, a 35%+ drop for those in a money purchase scheme. How many in a defined benefit scheme have seen their pension reduce 35%, especially those nearing retirement?
Despite the increased cost and a move away in some aspects to average earnings rather than final salary, public sector pensions are still very good, just not as good as they once were and cost the individual a little more.
Well I can tell you that for many public sector workers, job security is no longer assured and now the pension is worse too.
No real surprise after 10 years of wage cuts that people are moaning and voting with their feet.
Pensions have nothing to do with austerity etc, the Hutton report was 2010/2011 wasn't it?
Do you really believe that the private sector has somehow seen huge pay rises? I can show you many people in the private sector who since 2010 have seen lower pay rises (or none at all) than the public sector in those 7 years, those that still have their jobs anyway. How much has the minimum wage increased in that period? How much has the average salary in Supermarkets, Costa Coffee, Pret etc increased since 2010? All those people have additionally seen a considerable decrease in their pension value, far greater than the public sector and for many approaching retirement it's been a huge hit that they can never recover from.
@MuttleyCAFC The unions have fought performance related pay for years in the public sector to varying successful degrees, which personally I think was always a little naïve in some aspects. The same teachers who were on strike a few years back over this were also the same one's who subsequently moaned to me that they were a much better teacher and worked much harder than their colleague in the classroom next door and it was unfair they earned the same or sometimes less!