To EVERY Dutch student!
- Thread starter TIMMAH
- Start date
-
Hey - turns out IRC is out and something a little more modern has taken it's place... A little thing called Discord!
Join our community @ https://discord.gg/JuaSzXBZrk for a pick-up game, or just to rekindle with fellow community members.
I don't. 'Gift of the gab' certainly helps, and will improve your chances, but the fact that the average graduate earns £400k more than the someone who is not degree educated speaks for itself. I'm sure there is a proportion is both categories of people who can blag well, but the degrees are a clear winner overall.
Spirit, what's the source of that figure??
I have only heard that sort of stat thrown around by the government (both flavours) when they were trying to screw students over further...
In stark contrast, I worked at the Student Loans Company for 2 years, and seem to remember at that point, that about 40% of students never reach the salary threshold for paying back.
That's, AIUI, one of the reasons why the repayment threshold was dropped a bit when the repayment scheme moved to Inland Revenue.
A single average figure is a pretty nasty tool to use for this, as I'm pretty certain that one or two occupations, and a relatively small number of ridiculously high earners are skewing the number badly.
![:\](/images/smilies/submitted/smark/ohwell.gif "Oh Well :\")
The figure can be backed up by looking through adverts for jobs. Look at the average wage for a position advertised without a degree, then look at the ones which say minimum education to degree level. The wages offered are vastly different in the majority of cases.
The loans figure you quoted there isn't really a stark contrast. If 40% never reached the threshhold that means 60% are earning above the threshhold and therefore above average wage for the country (as I believe average country wage is about 15k, the same as the threashold for repayments). Also, student loans haven't been used for a great length of time yet - the figures you are seeing there only really relate to the first say, 20 years of those students working life. You need also to take into account what they are earning when they are 40-50 and have had a few more pomotions.
The repayment threshold was dropped, and that is something I do not agree with. As mentioned previously I agree with the loan system, but the threshold should never be at a level where it causes the student any difficulty.
There are, of course, a few proffesions which earn a great deal more than others, and likewise there are a few ridiculously high earners but there occur in both degree and non-degree careers. Accountants can still work their way to the top without a degree, it just may take a bit longer. Look at Richard Branson - he was only educated to GCSE level and now is one of the richest men in the world. There are people both with and without degrees that have managed to achieve this status. And yes, there are more careers / high earners in the degree catergory, however what is the reason for this? Because they do have a degree. Those one or two occupations don't skew the figures at all really, because they are only accessible with a degree and therefore are a direct benfit of going to Uni!
Well, the threshold for repayment was originally 3/4 of the Average UK wage, after the move to Inland Revenue, It dropped to 2/3 of the UK average.
I'm *very* dubious that a University Degree realy makes much difference in earning potential, if you take other factors (like the ability to work hard enough to get to uni in the first place) into
account also.
That being said, you make a very valid point about the length of the Student Loan scheme in the UK. It's probably too early to say.
Thing is, I haven't seen a single job advert in months that asked for a degree...
I'm *very* dubious that a University Degree realy makes much difference in earning potential, if you take other factors (like the ability to work hard enough to get to uni in the first place) into
account also.
That being said, you make a very valid point about the length of the Student Loan scheme in the UK. It's probably too early to say.
Thing is, I haven't seen a single job advert in months that asked for a degree...
2/3 of the UK average is too low imho, although it does also depend on the value of the monthly demand - if they are only asking £20 a month then it's not really a concern if you are earning £10k (which is 2/3 of the UK Av), but if its £100 then obv somethings wrong. imho a value of about £50 a month when you are earning £15k is about right, then it should increase proportionately with your earnings.
I've seen a few adverts asking for degrees recently and the wages offered are reasonably higher than those without, although not as many as there should / used to be. It is also dependant on proffesion - some proffesions require a degree to get anywhere, others such as IT are more dependant on experience and knowledge. But this takes us into a nice circle back to my point about Uni being to easy to get into and degrees not holding as much value as they should these days because too many people are degree qualified and not enough with a skilled trade
here's something that may be of interest, I know three people whos parents are millionaires, none of em went to uni and they made their millions in the building trade, roof insulating and making metal cases eg for computers.
good degrees help a lot but if you are clever or very motivated or hardworking etc and prepared to take chances you can still do very well for yourself.
just a thought I had so don't go nuts pointing out my flaws lol
good degrees help a lot but if you are clever or very motivated or hardworking etc and prepared to take chances you can still do very well for yourself.
just a thought I had so don't go nuts pointing out my flaws lol
that's very true.
being smart has nothing to do with being rich.
basically if you keep working for your employer you will never be rich (exception for lawyers and so on)
It's people with an idea and the balls to take a risk who will be rich.
being smart has nothing to do with being rich.
basically if you keep working for your employer you will never be rich (exception for lawyers and so on)
It's people with an idea and the balls to take a risk who will be rich.
fair play to them, but i dont think thats terribly relevant. if i came from a rich family and had the capital and security required to set up my own business, then I wouldnt still be paying off my university debts seven years after I graduated.
having said that though, i have benefitted tremendously from having a degree, so i dont begrudge the debt i left with that much. i guess if you know the course you are doing is worthwhile then you can live with the fact that you will have to struggle in the early part of your post university life.
personally i believe that grants should be re-established for students from low income families, as one thing that pissed me off at uni was ppl being thrown money from their parents but still getting the same grant (back in the days when there still was one) as me. i know thats not really the topic though so ill leave it there...
Nice to see an example of someone benefiting from their degree (my arguments were kinda flawed without that!
). Grants should be established for low income families, although they don't necessarily have to be huge because a lot of the costs can be covered by the loan system which in theory they will be able to pay back once they are benfitting from their degree anyway. A bit of help towards living costs etc would be well appreciated still, I'm sure.Completely agree about well off people getting grants too - that should never be allowed to happen because that is a situation which is unfair on the tax payers. I'm not too bothered if I know my tax money is helping a poor person go through Uni (although I support the loan system over grants regardless), but if it's being given to someone who has more cash than me in the first place I am very resentful.
Also, people with balls who take a risk will often benefit more from that than any education, however those people and the opportunities are few and far between and are taken into account with the averages. The chances of any of us or anyone you know ending up like Richard Branson are pretty damn slim
dont get me wrong I aint dissin uni, afterall I am the astrophysicsmeister and already this good degree has opened up doors for me ie a Masters course rated second in UK after a similar one at Oxford. ....I know I'm damn good thxu thxu.
I don't have sympathy for people who go to uni just for a piss about basically, doing a worthless degree ( I know lots of people who decided what to do at uni by choosing whatever looked easy) and not even trying hard with their studying!...no doubt these are the folk complaining loudest about the cost of uni!
same old story...u get out what u put in.
grizz: "personally i believe that grants should be re-established for students from low income families"
mmm well thats very noble of you but it would only make matters worse, first of all many well off people worked hard to get there, why should they be punished? Also if u gave grants only to to poorer people and left everything else such as entrance qualifications the same, u would end up with even more overcrowding than there is now, which can only mean lower standards, and where do universities get this huge sum of money from?
either you have higher entrance qualifications, less students and more support, or you have lower entrance qualifications, lower standards, more students and less support as is happening now.
there just isn't the money to maintain standards of education and support in endlessly growing universities.
before you call my posts irrelevant grizz maybe u better think thro ur own replies better
....I know I'm damn good thxu thxu.I don't have sympathy for people who go to uni just for a piss about basically, doing a worthless degree ( I know lots of people who decided what to do at uni by choosing whatever looked easy) and not even trying hard with their studying!...no doubt these are the folk complaining loudest about the cost of uni!
same old story...u get out what u put in.
grizz: "personally i believe that grants should be re-established for students from low income families"
mmm well thats very noble of you but it would only make matters worse, first of all many well off people worked hard to get there, why should they be punished? Also if u gave grants only to to poorer people and left everything else such as entrance qualifications the same, u would end up with even more overcrowding than there is now, which can only mean lower standards, and where do universities get this huge sum of money from?
either you have higher entrance qualifications, less students and more support, or you have lower entrance qualifications, lower standards, more students and less support as is happening now.
there just isn't the money to maintain standards of education and support in endlessly growing universities.
before you call my posts irrelevant grizz maybe u better think thro ur own replies better
Last edited:
I think I degree is beneficial if your focused in want you want to acheive from it, and have a vague idea of what u want to do after you leave.. ie. a degree in medicine leads to being a doctor, a degree in law could lead to being a lawyer etc...
I'm a great believer in Eduction for educations sake... but if thats ur reason for going to uni, then you cant really complain if it doesnt lead you into a well paid job. I think if people starting uni were more focused and had a clearer idea of why they want to do their course and job prospects after, they'd be better off.
I use my own example... I wanted to do a degree in English Lit, coz i loved the subject, and thats a good a reason as any when you have no career in mind... but then for reasons to boring and complicated to go into, I 've ended up doing a degree in Classical Studies 
Unless I wanna teach history... or want to work with a museum... Tbh its pretty much a useless degree in the fact it doesnt lead on to anything specific without taking it to a Masters... My only hope would be to find a job that just required an education to degree level. However I have a master plan which involves another 2 (maybe 3) yrs of study....
I'm a great believer in Eduction for educations sake... but if thats ur reason for going to uni, then you cant really complain if it doesnt lead you into a well paid job. I think if people starting uni were more focused and had a clearer idea of why they want to do their course and job prospects after, they'd be better off.
I use my own example... I wanted to do a degree in English Lit, coz i loved the subject, and thats a good a reason as any when you have no career in mind...
but then for reasons to boring and complicated to go into, I 've ended up doing a degree in Classical Studies Unless I wanna teach history... or want to work with a museum... Tbh its pretty much a useless degree in the fact it doesnt lead on to anything specific without taking it to a Masters... My only hope would be to find a job that just required an education to degree level. However I have a master plan
which involves another 2 (maybe 3) yrs of study....
foxy, i thought my post through, and stand by it 100%
doubt you would understand my point though foxy as an unfortunate side effect of you being very intellectual (which you quite clearly are) is that you also appear very elitist (and condescending). i know next to nothing about you, nor you i, so lets just allow each other to have different opinions yes?
you say many ppl worked very hard to get to be well off, but it isnt them that are going to university, it is their children, so im sorry but i think that is irrelevant too. please notice use of the term 'i think' which is not definitive.
doubt you would understand my point though foxy as an unfortunate side effect of you being very intellectual (which you quite clearly are) is that you also appear very elitist (and condescending). i know next to nothing about you, nor you i, so lets just allow each other to have different opinions yes?
you say many ppl worked very hard to get to be well off, but it isnt them that are going to university, it is their children, so im sorry but i think that is irrelevant too. please notice use of the term 'i think' which is not definitive.
"you say many ppl worked very hard to get to be well off, but it isnt them that are going to university, it is their children, so im sorry but i think that is irrelevant too"
yep good point actually lol I agree with that oops me was talking shit in that post maybe....
well perhaps u are right, maybe I have become arrogant, but that is only because I have worked very hard to achieve what I have and I'm proud of it, I am cheeky person to but I wouldn't like to think I was condescending, so sorry if I was
as for the elitist thing, my opinions arent just they way they are cos I think they benifit only people like me. elitist unis would benifit everyone.....
1) clever people regardsless of wealth, class etc could have fair chance of getting to uni. and doing well.
2)less clever people could concentrate on achieving things that suit them better.
trying to force everyone into uni. requires the assumption that everyone is equally intelligent when they are not....this just makes everyone suffer.
Our whole society at the moment trys to say everyone is the same (to be pc), men same as women....etc etc. This works for some things but not for all.
I think peoples differences should be recognised (and we should be proud of their differences) and their abilities catered for appropriately.
btw when I use words like thick, less clever I only mean in terms of being able to do well at uni. Things like IQ measure only a small area of peoples intelligence or gifts in my opinion.
for example Plenty of famous artists had very low IQs and some were even mad lol, but that is not to say they did not have great gifts or talents.
I think forcing everyone to uni will leave many people with unrecognised gifts since uni (in general) only recognises your academic ability.
yep good point actually lol I agree with that oops me was talking shit in that post maybe....
well perhaps u are right, maybe I have become arrogant, but that is only because I have worked very hard to achieve what I have and I'm proud of it, I am cheeky person to but I wouldn't like to think I was condescending, so sorry if I was
as for the elitist thing, my opinions arent just they way they are cos I think they benifit only people like me. elitist unis would benifit everyone.....
1) clever people regardsless of wealth, class etc could have fair chance of getting to uni. and doing well.
2)less clever people could concentrate on achieving things that suit them better.
trying to force everyone into uni. requires the assumption that everyone is equally intelligent when they are not....this just makes everyone suffer.
Our whole society at the moment trys to say everyone is the same (to be pc), men same as women....etc etc. This works for some things but not for all.
I think peoples differences should be recognised (and we should be proud of their differences) and their abilities catered for appropriately.
btw when I use words like thick, less clever I only mean in terms of being able to do well at uni. Things like IQ measure only a small area of peoples intelligence or gifts in my opinion.
for example Plenty of famous artists had very low IQs and some were even mad lol, but that is not to say they did not have great gifts or talents.
I think forcing everyone to uni will leave many people with unrecognised gifts since uni (in general) only recognises your academic ability.
Last edited:
i agree with some of what you say, but how would 'clever' ppl from low income families get to go to university? i am assuming that borrowing limits do not / will not cover the full cost btw. i suppose american style scholarships could work, but being somewhat removed from the academic world nowadays i have no idea whether anything like that is implemented here.... i suppose that would be a fair solution, but im not sure who actually pays for the scholarships and what obligations the student will have toward them.
i think the thing that bothers me most about people having to borrow the money is that if you are doing a degree such as that which ezby descibes above, then you may have little chance of being able to pay the back loan quickly or at all after graduating. i think that is a terrible shame because it will mean that only students whose parents can assist them will be able to study such things. i think classical studies sounds like a wonderfully romantic subject (correct me if i am wrong) and it pisses me off to think it could be denied to someone on the grounds that they couldnt justify it financially.
i know the counter argument to this is to say 'i dont want my taxes paying for someone to do a degree which will not benefit society in any way' (or something similar), but all i can say to that is i dont feel that way myself. which may leave me open to ridicule but hey hey what can i do.....
however please dont misunderstand, when it comes to some of the modern daft degrees which have clearly been made up for the sake of gaining fees, then i would have to agree with you 100%.
and on that note i better get back to work, cos if i get sacked ill never pay my debts off.....
i think the thing that bothers me most about people having to borrow the money is that if you are doing a degree such as that which ezby descibes above, then you may have little chance of being able to pay the back loan quickly or at all after graduating. i think that is a terrible shame because it will mean that only students whose parents can assist them will be able to study such things. i think classical studies sounds like a wonderfully romantic subject (correct me if i am wrong) and it pisses me off to think it could be denied to someone on the grounds that they couldnt justify it financially.
i know the counter argument to this is to say 'i dont want my taxes paying for someone to do a degree which will not benefit society in any way' (or something similar), but all i can say to that is i dont feel that way myself. which may leave me open to ridicule but hey hey what can i do.....
however please dont misunderstand, when it comes to some of the modern daft degrees which have clearly been made up for the sake of gaining fees, then i would have to agree with you 100%.
and on that note i better get back to work, cos if i get sacked ill never pay my debts off.....
"but how would 'clever' ppl from low income families get to go to university?" .....
I think the old way was best ie if u did well in school u go to grammer school based only on grades not money! then those good enough go to uni and get full grants which cover all cost of uni. There was no resit exams before...if u fucked up ur out! That way not so many at uni and goverment can afford full grants, and no matter how poor u were u could go to uni if bright.
I think this system worked well and I think eventually when people see sense we'll go back to it...
my father went through the old University system when it was like this. He came from poorish family so he got a full grant...which covered fees, books, flat, food, clothes and some to spare!!!
I think the old way was best ie if u did well in school u go to grammer school based only on grades not money! then those good enough go to uni and get full grants which cover all cost of uni. There was no resit exams before...if u fucked up ur out! That way not so many at uni and goverment can afford full grants, and no matter how poor u were u could go to uni if bright.
I think this system worked well and I think eventually when people see sense we'll go back to it...
my father went through the old University system when it was like this. He came from poorish family so he got a full grant...which covered fees, books, flat, food, clothes and some to spare!!!
Last edited:
well that is pretty much what i meant several posts ago! i guess the difference you are pointing out is that it should only be in cases where people are deserving academically which i cant really argue with.
although i would have to say that i made a mess of my A levels for reasons that are my own, but managed to get into university on the condition that i did an extra year. whilst i am not top notch academic material by any means, i am working pretty much at the forefront of my industry now and doing relatively ok (i think). under the rules we have tentatively agreed above i probably wouldnt have made it to university, and i wouldnt like to think anyone in a similar position could be denied such an opportunity.
I'm in complete agreement. (there's a first)
it's funny, but I don't actually see anything wrong with the concept of 11+ exams, and three way streaming.
Let's be blunt about this.. very few people can go all the way to the very top of a field, doing cutting edge research. A Nation like the UK, wth decent infrastructure and a fairly literate population could expect to produce only a few dozen people per generation with the drive/insight/insanity to drive the world forward. To waste that resource by not nurturing it is insanity.
We recognise that remedial education helps underperforming students to catch up, and in some cases exceed the average, why is I so hard to see that having really intelligent kids sitting around scratching their asses and disrupting classes out of boredom is helping no-one?
It offends me deeply that the Political Correctness of the Eighties has reached insane proportions. Sorry, *BUT* we are not all the same. Some are smarter, some dimmer, some stronger, some weaker. I think we have to mature as a society, and understand that acknowledging differences is fine, it's only when you discriminate on them that it's a problem.
I remember reading about Richard Feynman (for me, one of the most intelligent Human Beings ever to live) being reviled and demonised, simply because he had publicly discussed The results of studies into the differences in IQ between people from different "races"..
Whichever way you cut it, it's a statistical fact that people of Caucasian descent have a higher General Intelligence on average than Africans, and Mongol people have higher IQ on average than both of them. Africans are statistically more prone to Sickel Cell Anaemia, Caucasians statistically more prone to Heart Disease.
People are Not all the same, which is something I'm very glad about. I do, however, believe that we are all entitled to the same human rights. It's a shame that people in general can't seem to seperate homogeneity from discrimination.
And I can't help but feel that this is what's causing so many problems for Universities. We simply cannot fund every student in the country through Uni, and at the end of the day, why should we? Isn't it better to have Technical Colleges, and Academic universities?
Since when has one-size-fits-all ever been a good idea?
it's funny, but I don't actually see anything wrong with the concept of 11+ exams, and three way streaming.
Let's be blunt about this.. very few people can go all the way to the very top of a field, doing cutting edge research. A Nation like the UK, wth decent infrastructure and a fairly literate population could expect to produce only a few dozen people per generation with the drive/insight/insanity to drive the world forward. To waste that resource by not nurturing it is insanity.
We recognise that remedial education helps underperforming students to catch up, and in some cases exceed the average, why is I so hard to see that having really intelligent kids sitting around scratching their asses and disrupting classes out of boredom is helping no-one?
It offends me deeply that the Political Correctness of the Eighties has reached insane proportions. Sorry, *BUT* we are not all the same. Some are smarter, some dimmer, some stronger, some weaker. I think we have to mature as a society, and understand that acknowledging differences is fine, it's only when you discriminate on them that it's a problem.
I remember reading about Richard Feynman (for me, one of the most intelligent Human Beings ever to live) being reviled and demonised, simply because he had publicly discussed The results of studies into the differences in IQ between people from different "races"..
Whichever way you cut it, it's a statistical fact that people of Caucasian descent have a higher General Intelligence on average than Africans, and Mongol people have higher IQ on average than both of them. Africans are statistically more prone to Sickel Cell Anaemia, Caucasians statistically more prone to Heart Disease.
People are Not all the same, which is something I'm very glad about. I do, however, believe that we are all entitled to the same human rights. It's a shame that people in general can't seem to seperate homogeneity from discrimination.
And I can't help but feel that this is what's causing so many problems for Universities. We simply cannot fund every student in the country through Uni, and at the end of the day, why should we? Isn't it better to have Technical Colleges, and Academic universities?
Since when has one-size-fits-all ever been a good idea?
Last edited: