The argument is simple, benefits (as in added potential for future earning) from the state (at the cost of the taxpayer whole not the individual) should be paid for after the event to recoup costs.|
It is a very simple one. Conservative libertarians think of it as a decent half-way house to the closing of big government.
Now that broken leg we fixed on the NHS, I'm not saying you need to pay for it sir but we will be taxing your future earnings to recoup our costs, and with the extra earnings you'll be getting from the ability to work without a gangrenous leg we all win. You get to work and we get paid.
That example often puts a slightly different spin on the student scroungers who get away with only paying £3300 cash for their £9000 annual tuition (so 1/3rd of the cost to the Gov_t is paid by the student) and costing even more by being able to borrow this fee and an additional £4500 maintenance loan to cover their annual living expenses. The poor ones might even get £1000 of that maintenance as a grant they never need to repay.
Yes, if you agree to borrow £7800 a year for 3 years we will give you £4500 of that as cash (£3300 of it is instantly ours for your tuition, deal as it should cost £9k if this wasn't Gov_t funded at all) and expect you'll find a way to make that work for housing and life costs over a year with some extra work when you're not 9-5 lectures + research work for 33 weeks a year. You've got 19 weeks to make that £4500 up to the £10-15k any normal person expects to survive on.
Damn students living on easy street! £6k a year they steal from the taxpayer and what do we get from it, beyond centres of education and an ability to compete internationally in any sector of industry you care to mention.
#6440895, By Shivoa Graduate Tax, wtf.
Shivoa 5,681 posts
Seen 4 hours ago
Registered 15 years ago