Sunday, December 12, 2010
Progressive Graduate Contribution - the NUS Blueprint
Those that have followed the link in the previous post will have also noted the following text on the NUS webpage (previously linked and currently linked).
Progressive graduate contribution
NUS' Blueprint proposes that students contribute to the costs of their degree once they have graduated. Under this system those who benefit most from university by earning more will contribute more.
In other words the system proposed by the goverment is much the same as that proposed by the NUS - and supporting the system cannot be seen to be a contravention of the NUS pledge. posted by John Hemming ¶ 5:42 am
Progressive graduate contribution
NUS' Blueprint proposes that students contribute to the costs of their degree once they have graduated. Under this system those who benefit most from university by earning more will contribute more.
In other words the system proposed by the goverment is much the same as that proposed by the NUS - and supporting the system cannot be seen to be a contravention of the NUS pledge. posted by John Hemming ¶ 5:42 am
Comments:
<< Home
No. It. Isn't.
The NUS scheme proposes supplementing government spend with additional money through graduate tax.
It abolishes tuition fees, rather than tripling them.
You aren't a stupid man, so stop torturing logic to breaking point.
The NUS scheme proposes supplementing government spend with additional money through graduate tax.
It abolishes tuition fees, rather than tripling them.
You aren't a stupid man, so stop torturing logic to breaking point.
The NUS blueprint is consistent with the Lib Dem policy aim of funding HE through progressive taxation. However, the changes being made to tuition fees result in progressive taxation only below middle incomes. Above middle incomes the changes are regressive, with high earning graduates contributing a smaller proportion of their 30 year gross salary than those on middle incomes.
Not only that but because of the raising of the cap and reduction in the teaching budget, the new system is replacing funding from general taxation (progressive) with tuition fees (regressive above middle incomes) meaning that the system is more regressive than the previous system when looked at holistically.
Not only that but because of the raising of the cap and reduction in the teaching budget, the new system is replacing funding from general taxation (progressive) with tuition fees (regressive above middle incomes) meaning that the system is more regressive than the previous system when looked at holistically.
By "holistically" do you mean making the assumption that the General Taxation used to subsidise the current system outweighs the fact that comparing system to system the newer one is more progressive - which I accept is arguable even if it is not true.
I would ask to see your detailed calculations as to this.
Post a Comment
I would ask to see your detailed calculations as to this.
<< Home
