qatsi (qatsi) wrote,

How did we get here?

I have to admit, I don't see the logic of the argument that it was fair to fund higher education through general taxation when only a few percent of the population went there, but that it is no longer fair to fund it that way when nearly half do. Granted, increased numbers of students will make the overall bill larger, but as we're so often reminded, these people will earn so much more over their lifetime ... so surely the amount of tax they will pay will foot the bill for their education? Apparently not.

For a long time I've thought the arguments about expansion of higher education were somewhat spurious. The higher earning power of a degree depends in no small way on the laws of supply and demand. If the supply of graduates is inflated, then the earning power falls, and you don't need a degree in rocket science to work that out.

We may all be in this together, but the trouble is, some are in it more deeply than others. I read in The Independent last weekend that in all the heat over the child benefit announcement, Cameron's PR people were desperately trying to get out a message that they didn't think people who earned £44K were "rich". Well, I wouldn't call them super-rich, but I would certainly file them under relatively well-off.
Tags: news, politics
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.