Free for certain students to attend free, as you know. Those students don't directly pay so it's free to them. As it was for me back in the dark ages. I even got a grant in my final year so was fekkin minted on the taxpayer - which was nice. I'd much prefer if it was still this way and you didn't require higher education to flip burgers - but, meh, Tony Blair
So it's not "free education", it is charitable education. If I wished to contribute to charitable education, how would I go about signing up? It sounds like a great cause.
So even rich kids with rich parents don't pay for a university education? doesn't sound like redistributing the wealth
It's non-discriminatory so no kids pay, however, when they contribute to society by paying tax they pay it back and hence allow the next generation to benefit - kind of like the entire UK pre-Blair thing really
Since post Brexit we won’t have the isotopes supply to keep the atomic clock running, yellowhammer has suggested using Noobie as the method of keeping our clocks at the correct time. He is wrong so often you can set your watch by him
and funnily enough, its cheeper not to means test. doubly so if that means teasting company isnt a private company that goes on to take their profits offshore.
aww fuck it. we are gonna have to cancell the free education. . oh, hang on Because the headline – based on a report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, who the law dictates must always be referred to as “highly respected” – might well lead a reasonable person to conclude that the IFS had predicted such a shortfall in Scottish tax revenue as a result of the new rates which took effect this week. That’s not actually true, though, as alert readers of the piece will swiftly discover. So what’s actually happened is that the IFS have predicted that the changes – which cut tax slightly for most Scots and redistribute wealth modestly from the rich to the poor – will nevertheless generate over £200m in extra tax for the Scottish Government to spend, even if the supposed flight to England of high earners takes place. (Though we’d be sceptical as to whether most high earners are in fact so dim as not to realise that the few hundred pounds in income tax they might save by doing so would swiftly be swallowed up in higher council tax, higher property prices, prescription fees, tuition fees for their children, etc etc, let alone the personal social impact. Michelle Mone is living proof that epically stupid people CAN get wealthy, but we suspect she’s the exception rather than the rule.) You can call us naive if you like, but less tax for most people and more money for the government sounds like a good thing to us. Readers can form their own view as to why the Scotsman has chosen to portray it from such a bafflingly apocalyptic angle.
