So it's a system that benefits the less well off then.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
Printable View
So it's a system that benefits the less well off then.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
The whole point of tuition is that you're training yourself for a future career and will thus earn more. If you don't achieve higher earnings, you don't pay it back. If you do well enough, you pay some of it back but not all of it. If you do very well, you pay all of it back.
Ergo it operates as a progressive taxation on future earnings.
This isn't hard.
Indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
Here's an objective money saving expert to explain it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1izMDidvJtE
I'd hope we weren't actively trying to bankrupt the poor so yes?
How in the fuck is that bankrupting the poor? It's 9% on everything over 21K. If you drop below that in earnings, you pay nothing back for the duration.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
This is quite the opposite of your 'corporations shouldn't pay taxes because their employees pay income tax' argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
So what's the problem with it then? If not sure you can even have a legitimate problem over something you don't understand, but crack on.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
I said it wasn't bankrupting the poor?Quote:
Originally Posted by GS
The original reply:Quote:
Originally Posted by Yevrah
Where does that say tuition fees shouldn't exist?Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
Crack on though.
What?Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
Phonics, do you disagree with Labour's plans to scrap tuition fees then?
Ok, I guess we're done then.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
I agree with it in principle but I can't see how you can have the same amount of people going to university AND have no tuition fees and I can't see a way for us to go back to a time where you didn't need to have some form of a university degree to do pretty much anything.
I do think having to pay 9 grand a year to go to a shitty former polytechnic with an arse reputation for your BA in David Beckham is too much as well as taking advantage of the thick though.
It's almost like the world needs nuance.
I've not had the qualified financial advisor card pulled out against me before.
What happened? Did you advise someone that they should pay something when they didn't need to?Quote:
Originally Posted by leedsrevolution
:rasta:
Back to politics, what channel is this debate on tonight?
Beeb
BBC.
Can something be done about Plaid Cymru please? Can English regions be played a soothing bit of Miles Davis or similar when their woman is talking?
Leanne Wood is afforded a ridiculous amount of publicity for a party at 13%. In Wales.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40030197
These are quite fun.
Not turning up for the loser debate was a good idea. Sending somebody else in your place is a bad idea, because now they actually have somebody to direct BOTTLER taunts at rather than just being losers amongst themselves.
If they were going to send anyone, they should just have sent Boris Johnson. Amber Rudd is useless.
Send Jacob Rees-Mogg.
Amber Rudd is effectively the deputy PM, so if she doesn't embarrass herself here she's going to be a frontrunner when the 1922 committee decide to move against May.
And with that post I've just found out you don't have to have a Deputy PM?
Whats the point of the role then?
To make somebody who isn't important think that they are.
http://www.electiondaypledge.co.uk/pledge
I'm busy mate soz.
I pledge allegiance to Theresa May.
Labour claim that they will invest (waste) five per cent of all the football broadcasting monies in grassroots football. Whilst that is probably something football should be doing anyway, wouldn't the government forcing them to do it be classed as the sort of political interference that FIFA pretends to be against?
Jim Messina trolling YouGov on Twitter.
Her shit joke at the end is so cringeworthy.
Debates are always shit. With that said, refusing to attend is a wanker's trick.
Look at the state of her. Zero backbone.
She does come across as a massive chancer in that video.
If you go on to the actual tweet and look at the replies, someone says the last 5 seconds (the crap joke about ITV) is pure David Brent. It's so spot on.
Tim Farron is more Gareth.
Christ that joke at the end really was cringeworthy.
We could do with Caroline Lucas DONNING everyone here and causing a Green surge.
Corbyn's doing pretty well here, but then he is up against some absolute shit.
Have to say, as a neutral viewer (never really followed UK politics much before), Corbyn seems way better at this than anyone else in the room. That Theresa May video is cringeworthy.
Red and green and yellow money? Have a day off, Amber.
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
What the fuck was that? Has she never played monopoly?
*turn it on*
*see Tim Farron blaming UKIP for a Muslim doctor being shouted at after the terrorism*
*turn it off*
Corbyn is donning this. I'm off to stock up on baked beans.
No one is demonising anyone you stupid jock twat.
That said, the audience is probably more left-slanted than those classic Toxteth Question Times.
It looks like an episode of the Weakest Link.
They said how the audience was put together fairly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
The Monopoly thing was so weird. :D
Caroline Lucas is doing well.
The moderator needs to do a better job.
Aberdeen McAngus is a condescending prick.
Caroline Lucas keeps getting cheered for nuclear disarmament and punitive taxation, what is this, the student union?
I can't think of a better single question and answer that shows you're completely unfit for government than a yes to getting rid of trident.