Stop the Cuts - National Demonstration

Of these ones who went before and paid nothing for their education, many went on to get jobs and pay tax and so between then and now have been paying for all the free education that other people have been getting since then.

The next batch of students will get a debt against their names with rather gentle tax-like repayment terms, but won't have to pay as much tax for the education of those who come after. So yes, tomorrow's students will be worse off than the 'free' education generations, but no, the difference isn't as big as the headline value of their loans.

Obviously the ones who do rather well out of this are those who have had their degree for free, still have most of their tax-paying lives ahead of them, and now won't have to pay as much for other people's education as was paid for theirs. I agree that this is shit, but note that this group will still have to pay:

[]for the bits of direct grant not abolished by the government
[]to put up the money the students will be borrowing (at least until the govt. sells the debt)
[*]about as much tax as the economy can bare to dig us out of the current crisis.

so needn't start rubbing their hands with avaricious glee just yet.

Personally, i think there are plenty of problems with the govt.'s policy, but i'm getting fed up with the opposition's failure to accurately identify them.

You responded to me. Where did I fail, or attempt, to identify a problem in government policy just now? I was talking about student anger vs non-student acceptance of the policy, and argue that both groups would act (largely) the same, but they're not in the same boat.

I did, a few pages back discuss cuts to non-Stem courses, and make my opinion clear that I think that's a horrible way of dealing with academia. So if you want a more substantial attack on policy (from me), you can look there.