NationStates Jolt Archive

The UK Government led by the ever wise Mr Blair has floated the idea of paying students up to £30 a week (means tested) to stay on in the sixth form and take A levels.

Now, I have just a few issues with this. A levels were first introduced in 1951 and were originally aimed at the elite, I believe roughly 20-30% of students though I can't be sure on that.

In 2001 93 of the 150 in my year embarked on A level courses in school, with almost 80 of those making it right through to complete at least three full A levels plus AS levels in other subjects.

Universities are full to bursting point, being forced to accept entries from people who, on paper, are more than capable of meeting their criteria.
So the upshot of that is that an ever growing proportion of the population is spending more time studying and hence not working.

It is a widely accepted fact that some people are academics, some are not, some people are practical in nature. But people are often given false hopes and led to feel that they should do more, that they need more qualifications. But I ask you, do we not need street cleaners, bin men, building site labourers etc. Many of these jobs are highly skilled and demand commitment and natural ability but do not require a degree.

I suspect the aim of this pilot scheme is to reduce the cost of unemployment benefit schemes. £30 per week instead of £50 in dole is a significant difference, but once more people enter education there are less and less people available to work so the economy must undoubtedly suffer.

I realise that I am very uninformed on this matter and having read back through this I'm not sure I make a whole lot of sense, but it's something that's annoyed and frustrated me and I'm curious to hear what others think about it.

i think it's a good idea but that's probably because i'll be starting my AS-Levels in September and will most likely be recieving the £30 a week

i think it's a good idea but that's probably because i'll be starting my AS-Levels in September and will most likely be recieving the £30 a week

i think it's a good idea but that's probably because i'll be starting my AS-Levels in September and will most likely be recieving the £30 a week

Actually education is the single most effective ticket to a better life- studies in the Us have shown that the average college educated individual outearns high-schoolers by atleast one million dollars over their lifetime.

...and there's no such thing as a useless education atleast not here (USA) even with really arcane stuff. As long as people are willing to pay to hear you talk or read your book, it's good for the economy.

The jobs that you're talking about aren't as necessary as you think- once upon a time people used to think that we'd always need those telephone operators, gas station attendants and the like.

I think it's great that kids too stupid to see the merit in school and education can get £30 a week of fag money from the government.

Actually education is the single most effective ticket to a better life- studies in the Us have shown that the average college educated individual outearns high-schoolers by atleast one million dollars over their lifetime.


This however only works if there is a large enough disparity in levels of education: a recent study in the UK, which has been boosting university attendance over the past few years - by arguing that those that go to university earn more than those that don't - has discovered that there is now a surplus of unviersity educated people, and so the earning power of a university education has been devalued. Surprise, surprise - supply and demand, anybody?

Universities are full to bursting point, being forced to accept entries from people who, on paper, are more than capable of meeting their criteria.

Just a thought...but instead of paying students 30 pounds a week to do this higher form of education, why not spend the money on the universities which are "full to bursting point"?

How much does this so called initiative cost exactly as an overall amount?

Does anyone else think that us Americans got the short end of the stick when it comes to colleges and universities?

Does anyone else think that us Americans got the short end of the stick when it comes to colleges and universities?

I like the idea of corporations investing in universities since they are the ones which directly benefit from the graduates.

However, a tertirary education in America is very very costly and I wonder why this is so?

If the government would have payed me to go to school....I would have gone to college ten years ago, instead of waiting, and doing shit jobs.

Does anyone else think that us Americans got the short end of the stick when it comes to colleges and universities?

I like the idea of corporations investing in universities since they are the ones which directly benefit from the graduates.

However, a tertirary education in America is very very costly and I wonder why this is so?

I mean, most Europeans get free college education, and here's England kicking around the idea of paying students. Meanwhile, I'm shelling out $25,000 a year to get a middle-of-the-road education. Where's the justice in that? Land of the free my ass.

I mean, most Europeans get free college education, and here's England kicking around the idea of paying students. Meanwhile, I'm shelling out $25,000 a year to get a middle-of-the-road education. Where's the justice in that? Land of the free my ass.

Yes, but European economies are not fairing too well and there is a growing number of unemployed graduates over there.

I think $25,000 a year is rather extreme...my entire degree does not cost that!

The most someone here pays for a degree is $6,500 a year and that's medical students. Yet we have a lot of university students on $4,000 a year (humanities/arts) and there has been protest by some students that they should pay $0 for their degree. Personally I believe in Australia, we have it quite good.

Nothing is free, but paying people to go to school is not a wise move and paying $25,000 a year is ridiculous.

25, 000 dollars a year is only an average tuition cost...try going to a top-rated University like one the Ivy-Leagues..or U Of M.....THEN see how much it is.....

I mean, most Europeans get free college education, and here's England kicking around the idea of paying students. Meanwhile, I'm shelling out $25,000 a year to get a middle-of-the-road education. Where's the justice in that? Land of the free my ass.

Yes, but European economies are not fairing too well and there is a growing number of unemployed graduates over there.

I think $25,000 a year is rather extreme...my entire degree does not cost that!

The most someone here pays for a degree is $6,500 a year and that's medical students. Yet we have a lot of university students on $4,000 a year (humanities/arts) and there has been protest by some students that they should pay $0 for their degree. Personally I believe in Australia, we have it quite good.

Nothing is free, but paying people to go to school is not a wise move and paying $25,000 a year is ridiculous.

Yeah, but the American economy isn't fairing too well and it's one of the worst job markets to graduate into in American history. At least in Europe you guys aren't going into an overcrowded job market with $100,000 in student loans. People that complain that they shouldn't have to pay $4000 don't know how good they have it.

I wish there were an alternative to paying alot of money for college here in America, but unfortunately there isn't, unless I want to make a long and lucrative career bagging groceries. The self-made man doesn't hardly happen anymore. You NEED a college degree.

I live in a city of about 35,000 people...and the World Headquarters of a famous chemical manufacturer...(Saran Wrap, anyone?)
and there are NO jobs for any computer technicians anywhere........

Well in Australia the average HECS debt (assuming you didn't pay it off in installments over the course of your degree) is approx $16,000.

This is apparently far too much (the most would be approx $26,000 for medicine) and frankly I agree...Australian students don't know how good they have it.

And what is even better is that 92% of graduates here find work within 4 months of leaving university (undergrads going into full time work). Employment is at a record high and there are opportunities.

The problem is, that a lot of people leave uni with a $16,000 debt and are then expected to buy a home and start a family (average housing price in Sydney Australia has now hit $500,000 - and that is in the suburbs 60 kilometres away from the centre of the city).

Then again, I see it this way: many young people are becoming selfish and want everything their parents have immediately. A lot don't want to have to work 30 years to get somewhere. I think a lot of young people need to wake up and stop complaining and work hard as many before them have done.

Then again, I see it this way: many young people are becoming selfish and want everything their parents have immediately. A lot don't want to have to work 30 years to get somewhere. I think a lot of young people need to wake up and stop complaining and work hard as many before them have done.

yeah and a lot of them just presume that a couple of extra years at school (ooh I could get instant payment for that, added bonus :) ) and a quick spell at uni is the instant key to fame, fortune and success
shame it doesn't always turn out like that really
:roll:

Ach. Education has value above and beyond whether it helps you get a job or not. Everyone I know who's failed to go into university education, however intelligent they are, have become trapped in boring, repetitive, unfulfilled lives.

Frankly, education should be free for whoever's capable of getting something out of it. Otherwise, you'll have plenty of thick rich kids getting in, and smart poor kids dropping out. (A cash bung for A-level students is a pretty goddamn crude method of going about this, though).

Ach. Education has value above and beyond whether it helps you get a job or not. Everyone I know who's failed to go into university education, however intelligent they are, have become trapped in boring, repetitive, unfulfilled lives.

Frankly, education should be free for whoever's capable of getting something out of it. Otherwise, you'll have plenty of thick rich kids getting in, and smart poor kids dropping out. (A cash bung for A-level students is a pretty goddamn crude method of going about this, though).

And who pays for this "free" education? Oh wait...the taxpayer! The expense is too great.

Not so free after all.

I think University education should be free but paying kids to take A-levels? Thats too much.

<rant>Back in Singapore, where I come from, we still use the old format of A-levels where you have to take O-levels to qualify for your A levels (or polytechnic placement if you should so prefer). I think the UK should go back to that system. Right now I'm in a uni in the UK- the academic side is amazingly good but the majority of the students just don't seem to care. Maybe if they had to work harder for the privilege of university they would care more. </rant>

<rant> Maybe if they had to work harder for the privilege of university they would care more. </rant>

That's so true, people just seem to think it's their God-given right to be at university but it's so sad to see so many people just waste it all, spending their time boozing and partying rather than making the most of what their money and the taxpayers money is offering them

Meanwhile, I'm shelling out $25,000 a year to get a middle-of-the-road education. Where's the justice in that? Land of the free my ass.

I'm sorry... but $25,000 is a bit much for college... Stanford charges that much, not your local state university. Even if you had to leave your state, a public school would not charge you $25,000 a year. Try like $13k for out of state tuition.

I think our higher education system in the US is pretty darn good. We have lots of different options for people to advance if they want to. And yes, there's more and more people doing it, but that's partly because our economy sucks.

In some parts of Australia the kids stay on at school simply for the government handout. The rules say that have to attend an educational institution - doesn't say anything about having to perform, A growning number go to school, not for the education, just for the money, so they don't really care whether they pass or fail. At one school, the pass rate for year 12 is less than 36%.

It's no good idea to pay youngster if they go to School, you should instead pay folk to go to the Unversity och High School.

Isn't it rather extrem to pay at six years old girl to go to school?

It dosen't make sense to me...

That's so true, people just seem to think it's their God-given right to be at university but it's so sad to see so many people just waste it all, spending their time boozing and partying rather than making the most of what their money and the taxpayers money is offering them

Tell me about it. I'm a foreign national paying 7 times more than what UK students are charged. I'm not saying that the government should subsidize me but I think that because of the loans and such, UK students tend to have a "live for today" attitude.

Like I said- I think higher education should be free for citizens of the UK but access to universities should also be made more stringent. If I understand the situation correctly, the polytechnics were disbanded and made into universities? I say bring the poly's back and raise the standards of university admission.

Its not as if those who have a poly education will be disadvantaged. If you have a polytechnic education in Singapore in e.g. electrical engineering, you can get admission to a British uni starting in on second year modules (I know people who do this). I'm sure something of the sort could be implemented here. Make higher education free but also meritocratic! Don't waste the taxpayers money- I intend to try to settle down here in the UK and I sure as hell don't want my tax money funding some 18 year old prick's boozing. If they want to get drunk, but can't afford it, let them get a part time job.

It's no good idea to pay youngster if they go to School, you should instead pay folk to go to the Unversity och High School.

Isn't it rather extrem to pay at six years old girl to go to school?

It dosen't make sense to me...

They're not paying 6 year olds. They're paying 6th formers which is like 16-17 year olds I think (can any Brits confirm this?)

It is a widely accepted fact that some people are academics, some are not, some people are practical in nature. But people are often given false hopes and led to feel that they should do more, that they need more qualifications. But I ask you, do we not need street cleaners, bin men, building site labourers etc. Many of these jobs are highly skilled and demand commitment and natural ability but do not require a degree.

I suspect the aim of this pilot scheme is to reduce the cost of unemployment benefit schemes. £30 per week instead of £50 in dole is a significant difference, but once more people enter education there are less and less people available to work so the economy must undoubtedly suffer.


There's a problem with saying everyone should just get a university education. The economy needs low-skilled, low-paid jobs, not everyone can succeed with an education. The problem is... who will be working the jobs if everyone gets an education? Most likely, it won't be the "educated" people, it'll be others that are willing to do the work.

Like in America, illegal immigrants fill the job gaps, but without the protections granted to normal citizens. So the jobs still exist, but they're filled by people that can't go to college and "better" themselves. They're stuck.

I think the only way to change that would be if we had some kind of global system... if it would ever work.

That's so true, people just seem to think it's their God-given right to be at university but it's so sad to see so many people just waste it all, spending their time boozing and partying rather than making the most of what their money and the taxpayers money is offering them

Tell me about it. I'm a foreign national paying 7 times more than what UK students are charged. I'm not saying that the government should subsidize me but I think that because of the loans and such, UK students tend to have a "live for today" attitude.

Like I said- I think higher education should be free for citizens of the UK but access to universities should also be made more stringent. If I understand the situation correctly, the polytechnics were disbanded and made into universities? I say bring the poly's back and raise the standards of university admission.

Its not as if those who have a poly education will be disadvantaged. If you have a polytechnic education in Singapore in e.g. electrical engineering, you can get admission to a British uni starting in on second year modules (I know people who do this). I'm sure something of the sort could be implemented here. Make higher education free but also meritocratic! Don't waste the taxpayers money- I intend to try to settle down here in the UK and I sure as hell don't want my tax money funding some 18 year old prick's boozing. If they want to get drunk, but can't afford it, let them get a part time job.

fantastic, someone who actually agrees with me
can I ask what and where you're studying?
I'm a first yr mathematician at Oxford (and yes we have lots of "18 year old boozing pricks" here too!)

dp

Whoa- Oxford!
<Wayne and Garth>We are not worthy! We are not worthy!</Wayne and Garth>

I'm in my second year, reading English at Leicester, planning on possibly going on to a Masters in Criminology also at Leicester.

RE, boozing pricks at Oxford, hasn't the town cracked down on rowdy student parties after finals this year? Fines up to 70 pounds and such for spraying champagne all over the place etc. :)

yeah they have, not quite sure how much of a difference it'll make but we'll soon see

and yeah it is sixth-formers not six year olds so 16-18 yrs old, plus those 19/20 year olds that keep failing and coming back determined to get into university even though it's plain that it's just not them

Disclaimer: I'm not against student drunkenness per se, god knows I'm no teetotaller- its just when I see them pissing away their student loans and then complaining about high fees, I get really irritated.

e.g. my girlfriend has a part time job and gets her drinking money from that.

Its the misappropriation of student loans that pisses me off.

oh yeah, I'm not against drinking, it's drunkeness that annoys me and the wastage of other people's money, it's just not fair

There's a problem with saying everyone should just get a university education. The economy needs low-skilled, low-paid jobs, not everyone can succeed with an education. The problem is... who will be working the jobs if everyone gets an education? Most likely, it won't be the "educated" people, it'll be others that are willing to do the work.

Like in America, illegal immigrants fill the job gaps, but without the protections granted to normal citizens. So the jobs still exist, but they're filled by people that can't go to college and "better" themselves. They're stuck.

I think the only way to change that would be if we had some kind of global system... if it would ever work.

You also forgot that if everyone had a university education, then the value of highly skilled jobs would drop, as would wages (flood the marketplace - happened in the IT sector already).

yeah... it is the supply and demand thing... if you make a list of jobs that exist, there can only be so many positions. and a job sector can only grow so large. Eventually all the people will overwhelm the number of jobs available and have to work in other areas for lower pay.

so right now, a university degree doesn't mean much in some areas, but means a lot in others. Of course, if all else fails, after your undergraduate, you can go on for a Masters or PhD. Extend your schooling! :)

so right now, a university degree doesn't mean much in some areas, but means a lot in others. Of course, if all else fails, after your undergraduate, you can go on for a Masters or PhD. Extend your schooling! :)

These days you pretty much have to. Every other person has a Bachelors. I'll definitely be doing a Masters.

It's absurd. Eventually you need a Bachelor's to work in McDonald's? I don't think an economy can generate an infinite number of skilled jobs.

And everyone trying to continue their education goes back to the university systems. They aren't equipped to handle that many students. Colleges are crowded and wait lists are long. Without more investment in the US in higher education, even the qualified students won't be able to get the education they want.

The problem is that with the emphasis on completion of year 12 and Marticulation, the system encourages students to believe that they all have the potential to go to University when quite clearly they do not. I am not suggesting that are dumb - far from it, but many of them are not academically inclined. They are, however, pushed into that area with those expectations. We have a shortage of skilled tradespeople, an acute shortage of nurses and a desperate shortage of skilled construction workers, but no one is taking them up. Recently a scholarship of $30,000 was offered to encourage students to take up nursing - no takers. But then if the government is paying you to go to school - and you can keep going until you're 18 and of an age to qualify for unemployment benefit, why bother. As an egalaterian society we can't split the streams into academic and non academic - A High School and a Technical High School - that would be elitist. One employer recently said, and more are agreeing, that we shot ourselves in the foot when we closed down the Technical High Schools in the 1980s.

It's absurd.

I know. I'm not too familiar with the situation in the US but regarding the UK, this is exactly why we need more meritocratic admission policies.

Heres what I envision, based on the Singaporean system which is in turn based on the old UK system
(all ages are approximated)

Age 16- all students take 'O' levels. Those who qualify can choose between college (note for Americans: college in this case means the last two years of High School) and polytechnics. Those below this criteria can either opt for vocational education or can try to retake their 'O's.

College: Age 17-18- At the end of their two year college course, students take their 'A'-levels. Those who get good enough marks can gain admittance to universities for a three year course.

Polytechnics: Age 17-19- At the end of their three year poly course, students who get good enough marks can gain admittance to universities for a two year course in their area of specialty (e.g. engineering, biochemistry etc.

University: Age 18/19-20- A two or three year course for a bachelors degree. This course will be free, funded by taxpayers money. These people have earned the right to a free higher education.

On the nursing thing...

In Australia the government has exempted certain degrees from fee increases such as: nursing and teaching to meet to skills shortage.

Also, there are various state government initiatives where full scholarships are offered to student teachers as long as they teach where the education department sends them for a specified time. The same is with medical students (although the scholarship limit is 230 odd places - more to be added).

Personally, I see such measures as positive steps, however there is a need I believe in the public sector (nurses and teachers) to restructure pay and entitlements. There is a shortage of men in education and as long as private enterprise appears more attractive through incentive, this will remain so.

Governments need to start acting like a business...incentive is paramount.

University: Age 18/19-20- A two or three year course for a bachelors degree. This course will be free, funded by taxpayers money. These people have earned the right to a free higher education.

How have these people earned the right to a "free education"?

NOTE: The term "free education" is redundant, made so by the fact that the taxpayer forks out the money.

As an egalaterian society we can't split the streams into academic and non academic - A High School and a Technical High School - that would be elitist. One employer recently said, and more are agreeing, that we shot ourselves in the foot when we closed down the Technical High Schools in the 1980s.

I agree. thats why we need to reopen the polys. As a society I think the UK has to stop its attempts to ensure that everyone is equally held back. We need to recognise the fact that different people have different capabilities and tailor the education system to respond to that- take a look at my above theoretical system.

University: Age 18/19-20- A two or three year course for a bachelors degree. This course will be free, funded by taxpayers money. These people have earned the right to a free higher education.

How have these people earned the right to a "free education"?

NOTE: The term "free education" is redundant, made so by the fact that the taxpayer forks out the money.

They have shown that they have the ability to function in an academic situation. With the advantages provided by a university education, they will be more likely to pay higher taxes when they enter the workforce. In fact I also would advocate a "graduate tax" for graduates earning above a certain amount.

The taxpayer is forking out even more money right now to support masses of mediocre students who see uni as a three year excuse to get drunk and laid. All I'm saying is that the money should be put to better uses instead of paying people to take their 'A' levels.

At the moment, uni education seems to be seen as a right. I'm saying it should be seen as a privilege. You earn it through constant academic work and you pay for it in the higher tax bracket you will probably be in after recieving the advantage of a government funded free higher education.

University: Age 18/19-20- A two or three year course for a bachelors degree. This course will be free, funded by taxpayers money. These people have earned the right to a free higher education.

How have these people earned the right to a "free education"?

NOTE: The term "free education" is redundant, made so by the fact that the taxpayer forks out the money.

Well.... In a way I think I agree. In the US, education to the age of 18 is free, but that started when at 18 you could get a good job when you graduated from high school.

However, now you can't get a good job without graduating from college. So if everyone needs to go to college, shouldn't we put all of our children through college? It's basically built into every budget anyways, but taking money from taxes might just be easier than individual payments and loans.

However, now you can't get a good job without graduating from college. So if everyone needs to go to college, shouldn't we put all of our children through college? It's basically built into every budget anyways, but taking money from taxes might just be easier than individual payments and loans.

Like I said, I can't speak about the US because the education system is very different at university level here in the UK.

However, we shouldn't be putting all our children through uni because then a uni degree will be worthless- this is the state of affairs rapidly being approached in the UK. I'm arguing for stricter and more stringent admission structures.

I would ask people to stop using the words "free education".

There is no such thing.

Also...

Anglo, how do we taxpayers afford to pay all the fees of every university student?

I would ask people to stop using the words "free education".

There is no such thing.

Stop nitpicking. I made it perfectly clear what I meant by "free education". However, I will try to keep this in mind and in the interest of perfect clarity request everyone to read "taxpayer-funded higher education" instead of "free education".

25, 000 dollars a year is only an average tuition cost...try going to a top-rated University like one the Ivy-Leagues..or U Of M.....THEN see how much it is.....

That's a load as well..I could have spent $1500 a year tuition at my local community college and gotten a very good associate's degree in business thank you very much....

Also...

Anglo, how do we taxpayers afford to pay all the fees of every university student?

The taxpayers here in the UK manage to subsidise the current hordes of uni students and apparently now will be paying 30 pounds to 'A'-level students.

Instead of partially subsidising the curent hordes, I'm sure the same funds could be used to completely cover the educational costs of a much smaller group of uni students under my scheme.

Also...

Anglo, how do we taxpayers afford to pay all the fees of every university student?

The taxpayers here in the UK manage to subsidise the current hordes of uni students and apparently now will be paying 30 pounds to 'A'-level students.

Instead of partially subsidising the curent hordes, I'm sure the same funds could be used to completely cover the educational costs of a much smaller group of uni students under my scheme.

I see...so less skilled workers. Can the UK afford economically to reduce the number of students at universities?

Also, how many students are there in UK univerisities, how much does it currently cost the taxpayer but more importantly: how many students would you cut and what are the costings for this program?

[quote="Lord Pheonix Benicius"]On the nursing thing...


Personally, I see such measures as positive steps, however there is a need I believe in the public sector (nurses and teachers) to restructure pay and entitlements. There is a shortage of men in education and as long as private enterprise appears more attractive through incentive, this will remain so. quote]

I agree yet at the same time we did many of our students a great disservice when we took Nursing out of the hospitals and put it into University. Now you need a degree to become a nurse, and as I said, that means having the academic mental horsepower to get into university in the first place. I have no arguement about lifting the status of nursing, but I don't think this was the right way to go about it.

Yes there is a shortage of men in education and I believe this is partly because teaching is seen (in the eyes of the community) to have a low status (please - no offence intended) and is not very well paid. Plus, from what I have seen, the respective state education departments don't really do enough to support their teachers anyway. If we could go back to the system of two High Schools - academic and technical, then perhaps we might go some way to address the shortage of skilled trades people in Australia. As the ad says, it wont happen overnight, but it will happen.

It will not happen until the current generation of politicians leave the stage.

Sad but true, but in the meantime we can always continue to import nurses, doctors, teachers and skilled tradespeople from the Asia-Pacific Region. We might even encourage some of our young teachers to stay at home for a while and NOT go off teaching in the UK..

There's never a Guy Ffawkes around when you really need one :roll:

Also...

Anglo, how do we taxpayers afford to pay all the fees of every university student?

The taxpayers here in the UK manage to subsidise the current hordes of uni students and apparently now will be paying 30 pounds to 'A'-level students.

Instead of partially subsidising the curent hordes, I'm sure the same funds could be used to completely cover the educational costs of a much smaller group of uni students under my scheme.

I see...so less skilled workers. Can the UK afford economically to reduce the number of students at universities?

Also, how many students are there in UK univerisities, how much does it currently cost the taxpayer but more importantly: how many students would you cut and what are the costings for this program?


If you want a highly skilled workforce then the government ought to focus more on vocational courses than it currently does. Instead the government is more content with working towards this ludicrous target of getting 50% of teenagers into university regardless of the facts that many of them will not be suited for higher education, the value of a degree will be almost eradicated, the cost will be enormous resulting in the introduction (as has already occurred) and eventual raising of tuition fees.

As for cutting universities/students I think it is perfectly reasonable to ask that if a person is going to to be the beneficiary of taxypayers money by going to university they should display the academic credentials to justify it. Personally I think 3C's at A level should be the bare minimum required to gain access.

Ok, perhaps I am not quite as articulate as some of you are, but that really is my arguement - too much emphasis on University Education, and there are many, many students who are not suited for it. As a result we have a high failure rate because the academic stream turns many of them off. Our local High School has a year 12 pass rate of less than 36%. In any civilised society that should be setting off alarum bells, but it does not appear to do so. And that is a worry. Are we then saying to these kids that because they don't have the mental horsepower to go to University thay are failures in life? By the continued emphasis on University entrance, we are really setting them up for failure in the first place. This cannot go on. As a society we cannot continue to look overseas for our professional and skilled workforce and have a large percentage of our own youth ignored.

Sad but true, but in the meantime we can always continue to import nurses, doctors, teachers and skilled tradespeople from the Asia-Pacific Region. We might even encourage some of our young teachers to stay at home for a while and NOT go off teaching in the UK..

There's never a Guy Ffawkes around when you really need one :roll:

The Asia-Pacific is the most undesireable place to find skilled workers...for the most the people in these areas are unskilled and poorly educated. Many of the immigrants from these places take up menial jobs and there is really little demand for that now.

Europe and America are the places Australia should seek skills...but we need to create incentive first.

Ach. Education has value above and beyond whether it helps you get a job or not. Everyone I know who's failed to go into university education, however intelligent they are, have become trapped in boring, repetitive, unfulfilled lives.

Frankly, education should be free for whoever's capable of getting something out of it. Otherwise, you'll have plenty of thick rich kids getting in, and smart poor kids dropping out. (A cash bung for A-level students is a pretty goddamn crude method of going about this, though).

Scholarships

Scholarships

Scholarships

Scholarships

Scholarships

Scholarships


And that would be assuming that smart poor kids are a common case, which they are not. Lets face it, from the beginning rich kids have more opportunity in education. They are pushed harder. You can't assume that all rich kids are lazy - which they aren't - and/or stupid, which they aren't either.

There is such a thing as being naturely smart, but that drops out somewhere around the age of 13, the point where kids have to work for their grades.

The problem is, that nowadays everybody has their own dreams of success- most of which will remain as dreams. A long time ago, university was for the smart kids. Now the average person is attending it. With the aid of computers and other resources, humans are becoming alot smarter. They need to up the level needed to get into university.

I wish they'd do that over here in the US, and pay you more for the higher classes you are in (as long as you're passing). like $5 for Honors, $4 for A, etc. And since I'm in like tons of honors classes i could laugh all the way to the bank at all the frigging slackers at my school

I wish they'd do that over here in the US, and pay you more for the higher classes you are in (as long as you're passing). like $5 for Honors, $4 for A, etc. And since I'm in like tons of honors classes i could laugh all the way to the bank at all the frigging slackers at my school

Someones in a bad mood ...

One of the problems is that these days there seems to be some sort of a taboo about saying that someone is stupid or that they aren't smart enough etc. Politicians are always flattering the electorate and telling them how smart they are, all the while the sun is the biggest selling newspaper in Britain and most people know virtually nothing about the merits of any given issue.

I was watching Tony Blair during question time once and he made a statement that I found incredibly alarming, he stated that such and such a % of people with 2 or more good A-levels were getting into university (implying that this was a huge achievement rather than just a crap policy). TWO!!!!. I mean do people actually think that it's hard to get two A-levels because it's both sad and pathetic if they do. Even the Tories don't dare to say that 50% of students aren't intelligent enough to go to university because of fears of how the electorate will react (I wouldn't worry too much if I was them, most students never bother to vote anyway), it really is quite tragic.

I write this as a student.

I'm annoyed, when I do my AS Levels I won't get a penny because my dad earns too much. Doh :(

BUMP

I'm annoyed, when I do my AS Levels I won't get a penny because my dad earns too much. Doh :(

yeah I had the same thing with going to uni, parents earn too much between them so we can't get a grant, fees are paid but I'm not entitled to a student loan

The Asia-Pacific is the most undesireable place to find skilled workers...for the most the people in these areas are unskilled and poorly educated. Many of the immigrants from these places take up menial jobs and there is really little demand for that now.

Europe and America are the places Australia should seek skills...but we need to create incentive first.

I think you missed his point. The majority of people in the Asia-Pacific region are indeed unskilled but what they're trying to do is encourage trained doctors and nurses (especially nurses) to emigrate to the UK.

RE- the figures you asked for, I haven't had time to go look for them yet. Sorry about that- maybe one of the other people who agrees with me can help out?

One of the problems is that these days there seems to be some sort of a taboo about saying that someone is stupid or that they aren't smart enough etc. Politicians are always flattering the electorate and telling them how smart they are, all the while the sun is the biggest selling newspaper in Britain and most people know virtually nothing about the merits of any given issue.

I was watching Tony Blair during question time once and he made a statement that I found incredibly alarming, he stated that such and such a % of people with 2 or more good A-levels were getting into university (implying that this was a huge achievement rather than just a crap policy). TWO!!!!. I mean do people actually think that it's hard to get two A-levels because it's both sad and pathetic if they do. Even the Tories don't dare to say that 50% of students aren't intelligent enough to go to university because of fears of how the electorate will react (I wouldn't worry too much if I was them, most students never bother to vote anyway), it really is quite tragic.

Yes. The UK seems to be sliding down the slippery slope of anti-intellectualism that is already prevalent in the US. It's un-PC to acknowledge the fact that not everyone is equally smart.

Once again- Meritocracy in Higher Education now! Bring back the polytechnics!

The Asia-Pacific is the most undesireable place to find skilled workers...for the most the people in these areas are unskilled and poorly educated. Many of the immigrants from these places take up menial jobs and there is really little demand for that now.

Europe and America are the places Australia should seek skills...but we need to create incentive first.

I think you missed his point. The majority of people in the Asia-Pacific region are indeed unskilled but what they're trying to do is encourage trained doctors and nurses (especially nurses) to emigrate to the UK.

RE- the figures you asked for, I haven't had time to go look for them yet. Sorry about that- maybe one of the other people who agrees with me can help out?

One of the problems is that these days there seems to be some sort of a taboo about saying that someone is stupid or that they aren't smart enough etc. Politicians are always flattering the electorate and telling them how smart they are, all the while the sun is the biggest selling newspaper in Britain and most people know virtually nothing about the merits of any given issue.

I was watching Tony Blair during question time once and he made a statement that I found incredibly alarming, he stated that such and such a % of people with 2 or more good A-levels were getting into university (implying that this was a huge achievement rather than just a crap policy). TWO!!!!. I mean do people actually think that it's hard to get two A-levels because it's both sad and pathetic if they do. Even the Tories don't dare to say that 50% of students aren't intelligent enough to go to university because of fears of how the electorate will react (I wouldn't worry too much if I was them, most students never bother to vote anyway), it really is quite tragic.

Yes. The UK seems to be sliding down the slippery slope of anti-intellectualism that is already prevalent in the US. It's un-PC to acknowledge the fact that not everyone is equally smart.

Once again- Meritocracy in Higher Education now! Bring back the polytechnics!

Yes. The UK seems to be sliding down the slippery slope of anti-intellectualism that is already prevalent in the US. It's un-PC to acknowledge the fact that not everyone is equally smart.


Got it in one

Got it in one

Thank you.
For my next trick, I shall turn Tony Blair into a small poodle.

Oh wait...too late.