Third level education no longer a fee

[Royal rover]

Taken from - http://www.independent.ie/education/latest-news/okeeffe-to-end-free--thirdlevel-education-1679714.html

This is a joke with things the way they are - unemployment on the rise etc, the re-introduction of tuition fees it make it virtually impossible for some people to further there careers -

[Dodge]

Presume you didn't receive a third level education with that headline and the general standard of the post.

If you did, and you got it for free, you've just argued for fees...

[pete]

At the time when there are cuts across the board it is hard to argue that our future doctors & barristers would get free third level education. It could hardly be said that it is free at the moment with the rate of registration fees but some sort of the student loan system would be best.

[Shilts]

People will soon realise that the free ride is over.
If you want education, decent healthcare, housing or anything else that was given out for nothing during the boom times, then you are just going to have to pay for it.

We are broke and if you want something, then pay for it. The option is yours.

[John83]

People will soon realise that the free ride is over.
If you want education, decent healthcare, housing or anything else that was given out for nothing during the boom times, then you are just going to have to pay for it.

We are broke and if you want something, then pay for it. The option is yours.
I assume you're in favour of fees for primary schools so?

[superfrank]

People will soon realise that the free ride is over.
If you want education, decent healthcare, housing or anything else that was given out for nothing during the boom times, then you are just going to have to pay for it.

We are broke and if you want something, then pay for it. The option is yours.
Are you saying that when people were rich, things were free but now that people are poor, things should be paid for?

:confused:

[Bald Student]

I assume you're in favour of fees for primary schools so?

I think that's a pretty dubious assumption.


As far as could be learnt it appeared that the poor
young dog, still under the impression that since he was
kept for running after sheep, the more he ran after
them the better, had at the end of his meal off the
dead lamb, which may have given him additional energy
and spirits, collected all the ewes into a corner, driven
the timid creatures through the hedge, across the upper
field, and by main force of worrying had given them
momentum enough to break down a portion of the
rotten railing, and so hurled them over the edge.
George's son had done his work so thoroughly that
he was considered too good a workman to live, and was,
in fact, taken and tragically shot at twelve o'clock that
same day -- another instance of the untoward fate which
so often attends dogs and other philosophers who
follow out a train of reasoning to its logical conclusion,
and attempt perfectly consistent conduct in a world
made up so largely of compromise.

[osarusan]

At the time when there are cuts across the board it is hard to argue that our future doctors & barristers would get free third level education.
It is hardly fair that those two kinds of students should have to pay while the rest don't.

[NeilMcD]

I think Fine Gaels idea of introducin a system where the student pays for it through their PRSI when they are employed in the future. This means that they pay for it when they are able to pay for it and it is not done through the bank who cannot be trusted for something like this. It was a good idea from Fine Gael in my view.

[pete]

It is hardly fair that those two kinds of students should have to pay while the rest don't.

I was only using them an example of students who could potentially earn high salaries (from the state) while the state paid for their education. In the case of medicine the actual cost of their degree is multiples times that of an average degree.

Not sure if the PRSI system would work as could easily avoid by emigrating hence the student loan scheme.

Some courses have very high failure rates in 1st year so maybe this would be reduced.

[John83]

I think that's a pretty dubious assumption.
Easy to dismiss it, but I've yet to read an argument for reintroduction of third level fees that couldn't be applied to first and second level too. I know there are some points, but they should be debated on. No one argues these things even vaguely logically. It's really quite annoying.


I think Fine Gaels idea of introducin a system where the student pays for it through their PRSI when they are employed in the future. This means that they pay for it when they are able to pay for it and it is not done through the bank who cannot be trusted for something like this. It was a good idea from Fine Gael in my view.
If the student earns more money from having studied at college, they're already paying more tax (directly and indirectly) than if they don't. I don't see the point in additional taxes. It just makes educated immigrants even cheaper to hire than Irish graduates. Meanwhile, the guy with a masters in Middle English who's about as employable as a paraplegic paedophile doesn't pay for his education. Why is this fair?


Not sure if the PRSI system would work as could easily avoid by emigrating hence the student loan scheme.

Some courses have very high failure rates in 1st year so maybe this would be reduced.
Australia has a student loan system. They also have a very impressive figure in defaulted student loans where the defaulter emmigrated and was never heard from again.

[Bald Student]

Easy to dismiss it, but I've yet to read an argument for reintroduction of third level fees that couldn't be applied to first and second level too. I know there are some points, but they should be debated on. No one argues these things even vaguely logically. It's really quite annoying.Because it's not necessary for every argument to reach it's logical conclusion. If something is free, it doesn't necessarily follow that everything should be free. Equally, if I'm willing to pay for something, it doesn't follow that I'm willing to pay for everything.

Most decision making is built out of finding a compromise to balance the competing merits of various actions.

[John83]

Are you deliberately trying to do what you've criticised me for?

You're correct, but you're arguing against a straw man.

[Bald Student]

Are you deliberately trying to do what you've criticised me for?

You're correct, but you're arguing against a straw man.
Have I misunderstood you? Did you not just assume that the person above who favours college fees must also favour primary school fees, to be logically consistent?

[John83]

Have I misunderstood you?
Perhaps a little, though I guess I've been less than clear.

I don't think that; I merely haven't found any argument from someone in favour of reintroducing college fees which didn't apply to primary school, so I've taken to punching my own straw man in the hopes that someone will explain why they think the cases are different. So far, your answer, that it's a matter of chosing a compromise, is the closest I've gotten, but it doesn't satisfy me. You have to justify your choice of cut off.

[Bald Student]

Perhaps a little, though I guess I've been less than clear.

I don't think that; I merely haven't found any argument from someone in favour of reintroducing college fees which didn't apply to primary school, so I've taken to punching my own straw man in the hopes that someone will explain why they think the cases are different. So far, your answer, that it's a matter of chosing a compromise, is the closest I've gotten, but it doesn't satisfy me. You have to justify your choice of cut off.

It's a bit like putting a football team together. If you have a hundred quid a week, you can hire Kilduff. If you have a grand a week, you can hire Glen Crowe. If you have 50k per week, you can hire Robbie Keane. Your choice of cut off is not decided by the merits of the players but by your club's budget.

If you have a hundred quid a week and you hire Glen Crowe, you're following the Shelbourne school of economics and you're club will go bust. It's not enough to know what you want, you have to also consider what you can afford and hire the best team of players your budget will allow.

If the budget isn't big enough to allow free primary and free third level education, then the government will have to cut one of them and keep the other. There's nothing inconsistent about picking which of them is more important.

[John83]

It's a bit like putting a football team together. If you have a hundred quid a week, you can hire Kilduff. If you have a grand a week, you can hire Glen Crowe. If you have 50k per week, you can hire Robbie Keane. Your choice of cut off is not decided by the merits of the players but by your club's budget.

If you have a hundred quid a week and you hire Glen Crowe, you're following the Shelbourne school of economics and you're club will go bust. It's not enough to know what you want, you have to also consider what you can afford and hire the best team of players your budget will allow.

If the budget isn't big enough to allow free primary and free third level education, then the government will have to cut one of them and keep the other. There's nothing inconsistent about picking which of them is more important.
That is a bad analogy. The argument isn't about whether we can reduce spending on education, it's whether or not the government pays for the universities and ITs at all. In the short term, it removes a cost from the budget, but in the long run it has lots of other social and economic implications that a government should be considering too.

[Bald Student]

In the short term, it removes a cost from the budget, but in the long run it has lots of other social and economic implications that a government should be considering too.
I agree with that and the government is tasked with weighing up the various competing claims.

[John83]

We've had another argument over semantics again, haven't we? I'm going home.

[Bald Student]

We've had another argument over semantics again, haven't we? I'm going home.

I'm already at home,
Good evening.

[Macy]

I assume you're in favour of fees for primary schools so?
Every heard of "voluntary contributions" plus you have to pay for books. No element of our education is free as it is...

3rd level education should be paid for through general taxation. If the argument is that some professions earn a lot of money on the basis of the education, then you tax them at such a level as to provide for the next generation coming through.

If this Government hadn't eroded the direct taxation base so much, this wouldn't be an issue. Similarly if they weren't providing so many tax shelters for the rich, O'Keefe's notion of millionaires getting away with paying nothing towards the education of their children wouldn't be true either.

[John83]

I was thinking about this when I went home last night, and I think I've been less than clear, probably because I didn't have the argument coherently in my head.

The discussion I have seen seems to be between one side which says that the government should not (implicitly ever) fund third level, and another side that says that they should fund it. Bald Student correctly pointed out that the real issue is whether it is reasonable to reduce or suspend funding for third level give the current financial situation, and I'm much more amenable to this.

Macy, people are already taxed based on how much they earn. The education provided at third level increases the total income and therefore the total tax revenue in the country. It does this in a progressive way. Taxing graduates just means that wealthy people will pay for private education (here or abroad) and the children of lower and middle class folks will pay more over their lifetime for no reason. That, or we tax all graduates regardless of how and where they were trained, which makes engineers and scientists even more expensive here and screws us in terms of international competitiveness.

[Macy]

Macy, people are already taxed based on how much they earn. The education provided at third level increases the total income and therefore the total tax revenue in the country. It does this in a progressive way. Taxing graduates just means that wealthy people will pay for private education (here or abroad) and the children of lower and middle class folks will pay more over their lifetime for no reason. That, or we tax all graduates regardless of how and where they were trained, which makes engineers and scientists even more expensive here and screws us in terms of international competitiveness.
I probably wasn't clear - my point was that it should be through the standard general taxation, rather than any additional graduate tax. If the argument is that graduates earn more, if we had a progressive system then they would pay more anyway without a specific additional tax. The problem is we don't have a progressive system - the rich still avoid paying their fair share (a further example this morning is a Green appointee to the Dublin Docklands Authority), facilitated by the Government.

One of the reasons that fee's were scrapped in the first place was that if you had a good enough accountant you could avoid them. No surprise this Government wants to reintroduce them, and the burden will again fall on PAYE workers. Similarly, I'm sure those that avoid tax at the moment will get their accountant to get Tristan and Trudy off the graduate tax hook if that was the policy.

[NeilMcD]

One crucial thing is there anyway to introduce a system where PAYE do not get screwed in comparision to a person who owns their own business and is making money. Does anybody know about other countries that have a PAYE system that does not result in the PAYE worker getting screwed in comparison to the self employed person. Not saying all self employed do this and I do know there i huge stress in owning your own business

[Billsthoughts]

One crucial thing is there anyway to introduce a system where PAYE do not get screwed in comparision to a person who owns their own business and is making money. Does anybody know about other countries that have a PAYE system that does not result in the PAYE worker getting screwed in comparison to the self employed person. Not saying all self employed do this and I do know there i huge stress in owning your own business

leave your paye job. borrow shed loads of money you cant afford. take the risk. enjoy benefits if any that come your way.;)

[pete]

leave your paye job. borrow shed loads of money you cant afford. take the risk. enjoy benefits if any that come your way.;)

Exactly. I sometimes wonder what planet Irish politicians are on when they talk about low Capital Gains taxes. If someone is willing to invest their own money & create jobs then they should be rewarded. Increasing taxes such CGT in a recession would be idiotic.

[Macy]

I sometimes wonder what planet Irish politicians are on when they talk about low Capital Gains taxes.
Isn't it zero Capital Gains, if you have the right accountant? Sure avoid it, and still get appointed to several Government positions...

[pete]

Isn't it zero Capital Gains, if you have the right accountant? Sure avoid it, and still get appointed to several Government positions...

Thats only for the corrupt FF party! Oh wait...

[anto1208]

It was mentioned the other night on Q&A that some one coming out of college will end up paying 70% more tax than some one that didn’t go. An average of course but pretty much ends all arguments for bringing back fee's for 3rd level.

To expect an 18 year old to take out a loan that could easily hit 60 grand + for a 4 year course and to think that will not cause a drop off in figures is mental.

Im in my 9th year of working since i left college and im just about breaking even now having a mini mortgage would have crippled me, and would have meant i wouldn’t get a car loan or mortgage both pretty much essential in this country. a 60K mortgage would mean you end up paying back prob 90K thats 500 euro a month for the first 15 years of working !!

[NeilMcD]

I have neither a car or a car loan or a house or a mortgage and I get by pretty fine. Lets get back to essentials. Too many people felt that having a car and owning a home were essentials. Well they are not.

[micls]

I have neither a car or a car loan or a house or a mortgage and I get by pretty fine. Lets get back to essentials. Too many people felt that having a car and owning a home were essentials. Well they are not.

Whatever about a house but in many many places having a car is essential simply to get to work. If we had a half decent public transport system it might be a different story but we don't

[kingdom hoop]

Whatever about a house but in many many places having a car is essential simply to get to work. If we had a half decent public transport system it might be a different story but we don't

Back in the '50s, when there was training with Kerry Mick O'Connell used to leave his home on Valentia Island, hop in his little boat and row across the choppy strait to the mainland. He'd then undertake a 40-mile car journey on terrible roads, train for a few hours, drive back to the quay, and then row back to the island.

Our sense of what is essential has become tainted by luxuries.

[micls]

He'd then undertake a 40-mile car journey on terrible roads

Our sense of what is essential has become tainted by luxuries.

So you agree with me? Even he needed a car....

[John83]

Back in the '50s, when there was training with Kerry Mick O'Connell used to leave his home on Valentia Island, hop in his little boat and row across the choppy strait to the mainland. He'd then undertake a 40-mile car journey on terrible roads, train for a few hours, drive back to the quay, and then row back to the island.

Our sense of what is essential has become tainted by luxuries.
Back in 50,000BC, when his island ran out of food, Ug abandoned his home, swam across a rough strait in his weakened, starving condition. He then hiked for miles over rough, forrested terrain, hunted wild animals using only sticks and rocks for tools and built a new home with his bare hands.

Our sense of what is essential has become tainted by luxuries.

No, wait, the other thing. We've come to expect a certain standard of living as our society has progressed to support it.

[pete]

To expect an 18 year old to take out a loan that could easily hit 60 grand + for a 4 year course and to think that will not cause a drop off in figures is mental.

How do you come with 15k fees a year? It is not so long ago that fees were charged & they were no more than 2k. I have heard before that when you charge fees the standard of education improves as students concerned about the standard they receive.

The argument that someone who earns more pays more tax is a valid one it doesn't match with all the calls for tax increases for the higher paid in the next budget.

[Bald Student]

No, wait, the other thing. We've come to expect a certain standard of living as our society has progressed to support it.
And over the last couple of years, that development was based on false money.

[kingdom hoop]

So you agree with me? Even he needed a car....

No, he didn't need a car, but he used one alright. ;)
That probably confused things I suppose, sorry. It wasn't about the car really, more the rowing part and his commitment to arriving at his destination. He undertook the journey by whatever affordable means. For example, he didn't buy a motorised boat.
I sympathise with anyone who has to travel long distances to work, and of course cars are needed by some, but for the vast majority of people cars aren't truly essential. If you can afford one and want one fire away though.



We've come to expect a certain standard of living as our society has progressed to support it.

I get your point John, I think, but in the context of Neil's and my post I don't see how it's appropriate.
The broad moral is spot on alright: we're reactive to our context. Our demands and expectations are shaped by what is or isn't available. But while you seem to think that's a good thing (I presume anyway given the tone of your response to my post :)), I think it is a terribly bad thing: it is an illusion that leads to false expectations on the part of individuals - a 'disease' that blights our personal-debt-ridden nation in particular.

The crucial classification that needs to be made to your truism (and what I think is Neil's and my general point), is that you must think of how YOU have progressed too, not just how broader society has progressed. So why take out a loan for a car or a house if it's overly burdensome? -just because society has progressed to the stage where most people have cars? That might entitle you to the expectation that you should own a car, but legitimising that expectation is entirely down to your progress, not society's.

[Macy]

How do you come with 15k fees a year? It is not so long ago that fees were charged & they were no more than 2k. I have heard before that when you charge fees the standard of education improves as students concerned about the standard they receive.
I personally think that's just a way of trying to justify it. I went through the UK system before fees, but with very low levels of grants. I can tell you, amongst my peers even that did influence choice of University/ College, choice of course and for some whether they even went to 3rd level at all. That has been multiplied several times since the introduction of fee's.


The argument that someone who earns more pays more tax is a valid one it doesn't match with all the calls for tax increases for the higher paid in the next budget.
It is a valid one, because people earning more paying more is based on a progressive tax system, which we don't have. Not a system where the rich can avoid paying through Government sanctioned tax shelters.


Back in the '50s, when there was training with Kerry Mick O'Connell used to leave his home on Valentia Island, hop in his little boat and row across the choppy strait to the mainland. He'd then undertake a 40-mile car journey on terrible roads, train for a few hours, drive back to the quay, and then row back to the island.
Milking it even then - a car! A pony and trap obviously below him. Still, I suppose still less flaithiulacht than him bombing around in a helicopter like in recent years...

[anto1208]

I have neither a car or a car loan or a house or a mortgage and I get by pretty fine. Lets get back to essentials. Too many people felt that having a car and owning a home were essentials. Well they are not.

Im guessing you live in Dublin with the Luas, the Dart, Dublin bus along with a host of private operators in which case a car is far from an essential. But if you live outside of Dublin you have none of these.If you live in a smaller city you only have access to a terrible bus service. If you live in the country side your on your own. So to a large % in the country a car is very essential.


How do you come with 15k fees a year? It is not so long ago that fees were charged & they were no more than 2k. I have heard before that when you charge fees the standard of education improves as students concerned about the standard they receive.

The argument that someone who earns more pays more tax is a valid one it doesn't match with all the calls for tax increases for the higher paid in the next budget.

The registration fee this year will be close to 2 grand alone and you have to pay for Rent, Bills, food, books etc etc. ( a room in a student apartment near UL is 80 euro a week !! add 20 to that for bills then another 50 for food etc just a very quick sum shows 40 weeks at 150 is 6 grand so thats 8 grand and we still havent paid the college fees if they come in at 3-5 grand then its well over 10 grand a year ) and thats the bare minimun.

[pete]

The registration fee this year will be close to 2 grand alone and you have to pay for Rent, Bills, food, books etc etc. ( a room in a student apartment near UL is 80 euro a week !! add 20 to that for bills then another 50 for food etc just a very quick sum shows 40 weeks at 150 is 6 grand so thats 8 grand and we still havent paid the college fees if they come in at 3-5 grand then its well over 10 grand a year ) and thats the bare minimun.

You still have to pay for food & rent whether fees are charged or not.

[OneRedArmy]

A couple of points more central to the original post:
1) Primary and secondary education can't self-fund through research
2) Primary and secondary education can hardly be described as free. There is a strong minority fee-paying structure and for those that are nominally "free" parents and teachers effectively fund a sizable part of the operating budget through donating time and money.
3) The idea that an argument could be made as equally for primary and secondary education as could for tertiary is, frankly, absurd. For one, it ignores the indisputable fact that different levels of education are not independent. Tertiary education requires completion of primary and secondary education. It also ignores the fact that a base level of education (we can dispute where that level is, but it doesn't change the point) is a public good.

[John83]

My last post has been criticised on several valid grounds. However, I did not intend to make a full and consistent argument with it, but rather to ridicule the argument I quoted.


A couple of points more central to the original post:
1) Primary and secondary education can't self-fund through research
2) Primary and secondary education can hardly be described as free. There is a strong minority fee-paying structure and for those that are nominally "free" parents and teachers effectively fund a sizable part of the operating budget through donating time and money.
3) The idea that an argument could be made as equally for primary and secondary education as could for tertiary is, frankly, absurd. For one, it ignores the indisputable fact that different levels of education are not independent. Tertiary education requires completion of primary and secondary education. It also ignores the fact that a base level of education (we can dispute where that level is, but it doesn't change the point) is a public good.
Interesting post.

1) Neither can universities.


If you want research that pays for itself, you'll have to shut down the humanities and, well, everything except for the sciences, medicine and engineering. The point of university research is that it's not forced to be commerically motivated. Fundamental research is vitally important to technological progress, but it rarely brings in much money. The work the humanities researchers do is hardly financially viable, but it's valuable in other ways.
Universities are already very research focussed. Making it even more so would hurt the amount of time lecturers can devote to teaching.
The universities already do bring in funding from their research - anything that gets commercialised, they have a stake in. It offsets costs, but it doesn't pay for everything.

2) I'm not sure what point you're making here? No, primary and secondary education are not entirely free. They are heavily subsidised.

3) I never said it could be made as equally. In fact, I said, "I know there are some points, but they should be debated on. "

So, let's try that one. How about we start with this: Describe please what general good the public funding of the Leaving Certificate cycle does. Describe why it is deserving of public funding on the assumption that third level is not.

[NeilMcD]

Im guessing you live in Dublin with the Luas, the Dart, Dublin bus along with a host of private operators in which case a car is far from an essential. But if you live outside of Dublin you have none of these.If you live in a smaller city you only have access to a terrible bus service. If you live in the country side your on your own. So to a large % in the country a car is very essential.



The registration fee this year will be close to 2 grand alone and you have to pay for Rent, Bills, food, books etc etc. ( a room in a student apartment near UL is 80 euro a week !! add 20 to that for bills then another 50 for food etc just a very quick sum shows 40 weeks at 150 is 6 grand so thats 8 grand and we still havent paid the college fees if they come in at 3-5 grand then its well over 10 grand a year ) and thats the bare minimun.

I cycle for the reasons it is healthy and good for the environment and cheaper.