In the news this week, there are ideas from our MPs to abolish student loans and replace them with a new tax called graduate tax. Vince Cable, the business secretary, suggests that, the more students earn once they enter the working world, the more they pay (with the support of the National Union of Students).
Im not keen on this idea. Currently, we have tens of thousands of pounds worth of debt that fund our studies and living expenses. Under this proposal, we do not receive a loan but, instead, the cost of our studies is accrued and, once in employment, removed via the tax office, with the suggestion that those students who earn more should pay more.
For those of us who spend 4 or 5 years at university (and who get in more debt than those students on 3-year courses), why should we have to pay more if we earn more? Surely we are already in more debt to the Government than the students on shorter courses?
How will this system work? If the universities only receive money from students who have graduated and have employment, the amount of money that they receive would be dependent on the amount of salary that graduates receive. What if the students can't find a job? What about if certain courses are niche and present difficulties for new graduates to find a job?
So potentially those students who go to uni, struggle to get on the job ladder or don't earn over the income threshold to pay back their tuition costs are better off. What about those graduates who have found employment and are making a living for themselves, are they paying for the students that won't or can't find a job? How would this work for international students?
What are your thoughts?
General taxation
I think along the same lines of Kristy, this is more a form of general taxation and not the person paying off their personal cost of being educated.
There are debates at the moment on the whole of the funding of education, including Scotland where tuition is free. The system has to be fair and there must be a point at where you have paid off your "debt" but if you remain a graduate tax payer all your life then you will be subsidising another student who can't pay off their debt or doesn't work.
One suggestion I would have , is it really necessary to have degrees of 3 and 4 years? Perhaps our pharmacy degree course could go back to 3 years and be more relevant to the job. We could then have specialist courses for different branches of pharmacy that could be taken later?