1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Another EMA Rant

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Tommy B, 16 Jun 2006.

  1. Tommy B

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 23 Nov 2004

    Posts: 8,027

    Location: The Place To Be

    OK. We all know that EMA is a pathetic, *abused benefit.

    What I can't get over is Labour actually spend money advertising it! I wonder how much they've spent on that EMA advert that comes on TV quite a bit? Why are they trying to advertise a benefit? Surely it's best to keep such benefits spread by word of mouth?

    * I am at a public school. I know countless people who get £30/week through complete fraud. Their parents earn absolutely outrageous sums of money, but always come up with sneaky ways to break the benefit rules.
     
    Last edited: 16 Jun 2006
  2. cleanbluesky

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Nov 2004

    Posts: 24,654

    The idea of EMA is a practical solution to a problem of economic deprivation.

    I just find it strange that beyond A-Levels you are expected to financially tether yourself for significant sums of money, and beyond degree finance becomes even harder...

    Still, on the bright side it ensures that only the properly motivated step up to the next level of education
     
  3. Tommy B

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 23 Nov 2004

    Posts: 8,027

    Location: The Place To Be

    The idea behind EMA is excellent, but once again Labour somehow manage to screw it up. Why are they paying rich public school boys £30/week? Labour need to crack down HARD on fraud, and make their benefits more secure.

    I consider myself spoilt. I have no problem whatsoever with kids who are less well off getting the money, but I can't express my anger at "rich kids" getting the money. It really Ps me off.

    I agree with your point though. Most people at school have support from their parents. When you get to UNI, you're all on your own.
     
  4. Saberu

    Mobster

    Joined: 25 Feb 2003

    Posts: 3,263

    Location: Stafford (uni)

    Not when most of the people who claim it end up doing mickey mouse degrees and even the ones on proper degrees aren't helping much because theres too many people doing these degree courses and therefore oversupply in academic industries and undersupply in skill trade industries.

    I made a thread about EMA last year but it got a frankly shocking number of replies. It's more important than cultural integration yet gets hardly any attention.

    My arguments here are a small part of what I said in my orignal thread which is pruned now I think.

    Not to mention the well known opinion that the government is aiming to get 50% of students into further education (uni) to mask the low unemployment levels. I predict when this growth of students in further education ends people will realise how shocking unemployment in our country really is.

    Not to mention the countless stories I hear from graduates who can't find a job and end up on the dole. Labour have done an excellent job of hiding social and economic problems of our country and I believe things are worse than even the cynicists on this forum say they are.
     
    Last edited: 17 Jun 2006
  5. Saberu

    Mobster

    Joined: 25 Feb 2003

    Posts: 3,263

    Location: Stafford (uni)

    The idea of EMA is to mask the huge increase in university fees students will get once they start university. Think about it, A-levels students are all ignorant and happy about getting EMA and this stops them and the parents worrying about the massive financial hit of high uni fees once they leave college/6th form.

    Lest not I forget that EMA retracts from the true reason to study on at A-level which is for the academic benefits.

    I for one am happy I was in the year just above the year that got EMA, and so even though I didn't get EMA it also meant I didn't have to pay outrageous university fees :)

    And yes I realise that uni fees are required as the money needs to come from somewhere, but then think about the reason behind this. It's clearly gross missmanagement of funds at various levels in further education.

    I'd like to finish this post by saying that most people my age and younger are blissfully ignorant of these things and too busy going out getting sloshed or playing games to pay a thought to their future.
     
    Last edited: 17 Jun 2006
  6. Psyk

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 8,444

    Location: Leamington Spa

    I think EMA should go to the parents. Because it goes to the students it's like government funded pocket money. It's unfair on students whose parents have incomes just over the limit because it assumes their parents will give them similar amounts of spending money.
     
  7. Augustus

    Gangster

    Joined: 13 Nov 2005

    Posts: 208

    Location: Manchester

    EMA strikes me as being a bribe and nothing else.
     
  8. Saberu

    Mobster

    Joined: 25 Feb 2003

    Posts: 3,263

    Location: Stafford (uni)

    It is a bribe..
     
  9. Tommy B

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 23 Nov 2004

    Posts: 8,027

    Location: The Place To Be

    That's another fantastic point about Labour.

    Blair wants EVERYONE to go to uni, but he doesn't understand that there is NO NEED for many people to go there, bar to have a good time. People who want to be builders, plumbers, electricians etc - what need is there for uni? They need to get out there and learn the tricks of the trade, not sit learning theory which is useless.
     
  10. JonC

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 11 Aug 2003

    Posts: 1,318

    Location: Here, there, everywhere.


    Sounds about the same as means tested student loans then....




    jonc
     
  11. p4radox

    Capodecina

    Joined: 1 Oct 2004

    Posts: 10,767

    Location: Prague

    I've outlined many times why I oppose EMA so much, mostly in this thread:

    http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17534639

    Here's my OP from that thread:
    Too many people are being 'encouraged' into staying on school and going to university, when the fact is we need just as many practical labourers as graduates. There seems to be a growing stigma attached to leaving school at 16 and getting a job, and it's only going to get worse. There's nothing wrong with leaving school at 16 - in Germany they almost encourage it by offering loads of vocational and practical qualifications as well as apprenticeships.
     
  12. cleanbluesky

    Capodecina

    Joined: 2 Nov 2004

    Posts: 24,654

    Academia does seem to be the most significant thing seperating the social classes at the moment, given that many skilled jobs that do not require academic qualifications can be as highly paid or moreso than jobs that require degrees etc...
     
  13. Phil99

    Capodecina

    Joined: 29 Oct 2004

    Posts: 10,900

    Another flaw with the means testing being that a family with a single child with a household income of £29'950 will get £10 a week but a family with two or three children with a household income of £30'050 will get absolutely nothing...

    Aside from bus fares there's nothing you really need for most 6th form courses, as has been said it's purely a bribe. It was scary how many people were doing Media Studies and other "easy" subjects just to get their £30 a week and £100 bonuses.
     
  14. Thing

    Gangster

    Joined: 7 Oct 2005

    Posts: 204

    I got EMA for my first year of college, then my dad took on another post which took us over the limit. I fully agree that the money will be blown on crap, I spent mine on vedeogames and fast food mostly.

    However, my parents couldn't afford (before the payrise) to give me much in the way of pocket money. The paper-delivery job I'd had for 3 years beforehand got moved to a new shop who then fired me after they failed to keep up their end of the deal (they were a good mile from the round so they agreed to dump the papers on my doorstep and I'd take them from there, they failed to do it and then complained when I was left running late...)

    Without that cash I would have been pretty well stuck for money through that whole year. And believe me I've tried to get a new job but so far no luck.

    I went to college intending to carry on through uni, as does everyone else I know (a lot of people were shocked whe I decided I wasn't going to uni midway through this year, even the most yobbish stereotypes were planning to go to uni) the EMA to most of us was gravy, after all we'd have MORE if we went straight into the jobs market full-time.
     
  15. Visage

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 13 Jan 2005

    Posts: 10,708

    Does anyone know how the economics work out though?

    30 quid a week for a two year A-Level course is about 3 grand.

    Given that someone with A-levels is likely, on average to earn more than someone without, and hence pay tax on that extra income, doesnt it make sense, financially at least, for the governmenmt to use this scheme, regardless of how deserving the recipients are?
     
  16. Saberu

    Mobster

    Joined: 25 Feb 2003

    Posts: 3,263

    Location: Stafford (uni)

    Not when the money could have been used to lower the "top up" on university fees. I use the term top up in brackets because it's a funny term for increasing the cost 3-fold.

    As has been said the money is being wasted by these students on games and booze because they don't have the financial sense to realise how much university will cost them. The whole scheme stinks of bribery because it's being advertised so widely even on American websites and if the government had just used the money to lower the university fee top ups then the incentive wouldn't be as obvious to students and probably cause only the serious students to go on to university rather than the ones doing crappy degree courses.

    I think i'm actually repeating myself here so read my previous posts please.
     
  17. memphisto

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 17 Oct 2002

    Posts: 12,918

    more people on ema, more people likely to go to uni, more people to pay the extra 9% graduate tax (student loan)

    50% of the population go to uni that means 50% more people paying an extra 9% of there wages as graduate tax, hence keeping there promise not to raise income tax, but sneakily bringin in a tax that raises income tax for 50% of the population under the guise of a loan by 9p in the pound.
     
  18. Visage

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 13 Jan 2005

    Posts: 10,708

    If its a graduate tax, as you describe it, why dont *I* pay it?

    Im a graduate, yet i cant see any entry on my payslip.....
     
  19. Saberu

    Mobster

    Joined: 25 Feb 2003

    Posts: 3,263

    Location: Stafford (uni)

    It's only for new students who pay top up fees that will have to pay it I think. Instead of paying the full 3k cost each year most of the cost is deffered as a tax you pay after graduating. I'm assuming they only have to pay back the cost of their uni fees though.

    Heres my admitadly old source:
    http://education.guardian.co.uk/specialreports/tuitionfees/story/0,,872046,00.html
     
  20. Visage

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 13 Jan 2005

    Posts: 10,708

    So its a payment on a loan then?