tzijlstra Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Not overly impressed with the 'free' university tuition idea. I saw earlier today that university students earn on average £200,000 more, over their lifetime, than people who don't go to university. Won't it mean that people who are not getting the benefit of a university education, and who will earn less that those who do; will be contributing to the cost (through taxation) of tuition fees? Seems a bit like take from the poor and give to the rich... Agree with not liking the plan, your reasoning is a bit backwards though (sorry). The reason it is a bad idea is because it takes away a fund-stream for Universities that is actually challenging them to provide better service to the students - which it is doing, more than. Taking away that incentive will not only cost a lot to replace with central funding, it will also lead us down the dark garden path where most Universities in this country will become run down as money will be spend on other things than facilities and students. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny5 Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Sheffield man who lives in the past in "I will vote Labour SHOCKER" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 So in order to fund nationalisation, we shouldn't go forward with a major project to modernise infrastructure. Figures, as lets face it, if the utilities and railways were nationalised again there wouldn't be any reason for modernisation, as without competition there is no incentive to improve. That is such a wrong-headed argument when after years of privatisation: The railways have not improved are still massively subsidised and have practically the highest fees in the world Electricity generation is on its knees and the distribution grid is creaking at the seams We are facing a major drought caused in part by continued leaks that water companies have failed to fix What the hell is the point of having a shiny new white elephant of a railway when our basic infrastructure is crumbling to bits. ---------- Post added 12-05-2017 at 08:20 ---------- Not overly impressed with the 'free' university tuition idea. I saw earlier today that university students earn on average £200,000 more, over their lifetime, than people who don't go to university. Won't it mean that people who are not getting the benefit of a university education, and who will earn less that those who do; will be contributing to the cost (through taxation) of tuition fees? Seems a bit like take from the poor and give to the rich... The reality is that they couldnt do this overnight. It'd have to be phased in over maybe a decade, and I reckon they'd never get it back to zero fees. Maybe to something in line with other countries like £3k a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
top4718 Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Re-nationalisation is a great idea but it wont happen. Manifesto's are a complete waste of paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 Re-nationalisation is a great idea but it wont happen. Manifesto's are a complete waste of paper. It could partially happen, and being outside the EU makes it possible again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairyloon Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 It could partially happen, and being outside the EU makes it possible again. How many times do we have to go over the fact that the EU does not prohibit state owned businesses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 (edited) How many times do we have to go over the fact that the EU does not prohibit state owned businesses?The EU doesn't prohibit state owned businesses, and it seems happy enough permitting small-scale, geo-located state appropriation ("region-alisation", so to call it). But it certainly does prohibit market-distorting (at the national and international (EU) scale) nationalisation and its lesser form, subsidizing. Corbyn would get severe head- and heartache with his program, both from Brussels and the existing shareholders. To say nothing of the unending resource- and money-gulping litigations. Edited May 12, 2017 by L00b Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
top4718 Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 The EU doesn't prohibit state owned businesses, but it certainly does prohibit market-distorting nationalisation (and its lesser form, subsidizing). Corbyn would get severe head- and heartache with his program, both from Brussels and the existing shareholders. I believe some of them are tied up on very long term contracts as well (mostly Foreign owed) to buy these out would cost untold billions. It wont happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davyboy Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 You are completely wrong. A nationalised British rail was the envy of the world - state of art trains, a reliable workforce and bargain prices. All that could be ours again when St. Jezza rides to victory! You cannot be serious:suspect: Ironic possibly??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalkleyIan Posted May 12, 2017 Share Posted May 12, 2017 In looney land I am afraid. Labour will NEVER win without Scotland. Seeing Labour win Scotland? 1997? Remove all Scottish seats from Labour and however you redistribute them Blair still has a huge majority. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now