5 Oct
4:23pm, 5 Oct 2024
23,162 posts
|
rf_fozzy
LindsD wrote: The problem is that students and families of students see it as a debt. Even my kids. And I'm am academic and I've explained it until I'm blue in the face. Even just a rebrand would help. Yes I agree with this. Apparently Blair and Brown wanted to call it a student loan for some reason which I currently forget. But you're with Martin Lewis in wanting to change the name. But it's a graduate contribution scheme. Not a debt. He did a podcast before the summer on his BBC show in which he did an outstandingly clear explanation. Will try and find the link. |
|
5 Oct
4:24pm, 5 Oct 2024
23,163 posts
|
rf_fozzy
Here you go: bbc.co.uk |
5 Oct
6:42pm, 5 Oct 2024
256 posts
|
Yakima Canutt
Johnny Blaze wrote: Ocean-based wind farms are generally more expensive to install than land-based wind farms: Installation cost In 2021, the average cost to install a land-based wind project was $1,500 per kilowatt, while the average cost to install an offshore wind project was $3,461 per kilowatt in 2022. Foundation costs Offshore wind turbines require more expensive foundations than land-based turbines. The cost of the foundation depends on the type of foundation and the depth of the sea. Transmission costs Offshore wind farms require additional costs for transformer stations and sea transmission cables. Maintenance costs Offshore wind farms require additional costs for maintaining machinery at sea. All seems fairly clear cost-wise, but if it were me I'd still have a mix of the two, which is why an effective ban on land based sounds daft on a number of levels. Fair points JB. Offshore costs also went up in 2022 due to steel cost increase which onshore wasn't so impacted by. I think there is more future cost benefit to come with offshore - especially as turbines are still getting bigger. All good though. |
5 Oct
7:24pm, 5 Oct 2024
70,165 posts
|
LindsD
THank you fozzy. It's really causing a lot of problems in my house rn for reasons I can't really go into.
|
5 Oct
7:36pm, 5 Oct 2024
33,216 posts
|
Johnny Blaze
It is, yes, YC. Back in 2009 a politician said that by 2020 30% of our power would come from wind power. This was around the time the first round of licenses for the North Sea wind farms were being handed out. Currently it's slightly over 30%. Ed Miliband. New Labour. And to be fair, this was one predicted development the Tories were unable to fuck up. |
5 Oct
10:30pm, 5 Oct 2024
6,625 posts
|
paulcook
Chrisull wrote: I note Labour has posted a 20 things we've done since getting in: x.com and by number 3, I'm like yeah but did you? (Number 3 is dealt decisively with far right riots - I kinda feel that people power was far more effective) Number 5 is reset relations with Europe, and you kind of realise they are already scraping the barrel. There is some good stuff in there, but surely even Tories would have got around to banning ninja swords? Num 7 in doubt ? |
6 Oct
12:24pm, 6 Oct 2024
22,225 posts
|
Chrisull
I'm well aware it's a graduate tax effectively. BUT it also functions like a debt, in that it has to be declared on mortgage applications (which is surely the single most important thing you are likely to borrow money on), and while it doesn't affect your credit rating, surely affecting their decision on whether you can pay back your mortgage (and remember a mortgage lender will look at say a credit card with say £3000 and multiply it by 4 on your application, so you can imagine similar on a student loan calculation). You carry around a nomimal 30,000 albatross any time you earn vaguely enough money to consider owning your house.
|
|
6 Oct
12:30pm, 6 Oct 2024
22,226 posts
|
Chrisull
Here's one for the Labour "will do their bit for the environment" crowd: " I will not sacrifice Great British industry to the drum-banging, finger-wagging Net Zero extremists" from Starmer, in the Sun of all places. thesun.co.uk And I said I knew about the river walks, they are not anywhere near a right to roam. A vague sop. Crikey, I could organise my own river walks/access, I know enough landowners round here. Also CCS doesn't actually exist as a technology yet properly on the hydrogen side, it's still theoretical. cleanair.org Bit like those Brexit border checks and the computerised systems the Tories mooting for doing them on the NI border - just drive though and computer will sort it. Labour are the Tories. Also Labour quite possibly supporting an attack on Iran: theguardian.com I'm done with Labour. Sorry to go all fields on you, but he (and jda) have been correct all along. No point voting Labour, I regret my vote now. F**K em. Like the Tories and Reform who I would never vote for, I join the NEVER Labour crowd. |
|
6 Oct
12:39pm, 6 Oct 2024
23,164 posts
|
rf_fozzy
Chrisull wrote: I'm well aware it's a graduate tax effectively. BUT it also functions like a debt, in that it has to be declared on mortgage applications (which is surely the single most important thing you are likely to borrow money on), and while it doesn't affect your credit rating, surely affecting their decision on whether you can pay back your mortgage (and remember a mortgage lender will look at say a credit card with say £3000 and multiply it by 4 on your application, so you can imagine similar on a student loan calculation). You carry around a nomimal 30,000 albatross any time you earn vaguely enough money to consider owning your house. This is still the wrong way to look at it. moneysavingexpert.com Lots of things can affect whether a mortgage lender assesses your affordability rating positively or negatively. Having a degree is likely to lead to higher end potential earnings (on average) and so increases your affordability. It isn't a debt in normal terms. And you're still missing the key point that was raised to your point. Raising tution fees is necessary to stop universities going bust now (I suspect it is insufficient too) Labour didn't promise to change the way they were funded, so being angry at the fact that theyve not changed it strikes me as the worst kind of left-wing student politics - faux outrage at something that was never going to happen just so you can justify being angry because the government isn't purist enough It has been on display on here quite a lot. |
6 Oct
12:48pm, 6 Oct 2024
17,899 posts
|
jda
Oh, I wouldn't say *never* Labour. I could even persuade myself to vote for Starmer's Labour in future, if the Pollyanna-ish tendencies of his fan club come to pass. I'll always vote based on what credible policies the parties put forward in their campaigns, and I'd love to be proved wrong on what Labour do over the next 4 years. But all the recent indications are very much against this. It's starting to look like the talk of VAT on private schools and the non-dom stuff were just feelgood verbiage not backed up by much actual planning, and Great British Energy is already heading down the path towards being a CCS boondoggle for the oil industry. Both the main parties have the fundamental problem of trying to marry xenophobic populism with economic competence. The difficulty is that these are completely antithetical philosophies. Promising both will deliver neither to anyone's satisfaction. Their refusal to be honest with the electorate over this will only further feed disillusionment. |
Useful Links
FE accepts no responsibility for external links. Or anything, really.Related Threads
-
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024
-
EU Referendum - In or Out? Vote here
Aug 2018
-
March to Parliament Against Brexit - Sat 2nd July
Jun 2016
-
EU Referendum
Feb 2016
-
Ads on Fetch - anyone else getting Leave and Remain?!
Feb 2017
-
The Environment Thread :-)
Oct 2024
-
Economics
Aug 2023
-
Dear Scottish Fetchies
Jan 2023
-
Any economists out there - question
Oct 2022
-
Power and exploitation - please check my sanity
Oct 2018
