News1 min ago
Are Some Students Over Indulged By Their Parents?
55 Answers
My teenage daughter who is at college recently informed me that there are a few girls at her college who have had new or nearly new cars bought and insured by their parents as an 18th birthday present. Also I have heard of parents re-mortgaging their homes to pay for their offspring's university fees and living costs. Now I cannot afford to buy her a car and there is no way I would re-mortgage to pay for her university. Are these teenagers way too pampered or am I being mean? What are your thoughts?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by dave50. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
My brother - YES.
Good on him he got a 2:1 and this eventually lead to his dream employment but he was heavily reliant on our parents support, financially in particular. Coming out of uni and being totally skint his first year was 90% funded by my parents. He was insured to drive their cars without contributing anything, fridge was always full, washing done and bills paid!!
Good on him he got a 2:1 and this eventually lead to his dream employment but he was heavily reliant on our parents support, financially in particular. Coming out of uni and being totally skint his first year was 90% funded by my parents. He was insured to drive their cars without contributing anything, fridge was always full, washing done and bills paid!!
The flipside of the argument (I forget the economist's name but it was a Newsnight interview, within the past year or two) is that we absolutely *should not* revert to an elitist system because:
i) we have sent our factories overseas, to lands where the wages, whilst low, are actually high by their local standards. They are grateful for the long hours and can afford to get *their* kids a good education and a shot at the middle-class lifestyle.
ii) We have such a high educational standard in our part of the world that we shouldn't be plugging school leavers into low-tech factory work but should be exploiting their learning capabilities "to the max" (hideous Americanism, sorry) and building our economy around high-skills activities or products which we can sell worldwide. Apple is shifting millions of (pricey) units, for example. Maybe we missed that boat but the next big thing could be from these shores, if we churn out enough people with the right knowledge plus the skills and motivation to turn ideas into a going concern, instead of a secret hobby in a shed.
A graduate rate of 40% proves what everyone knew all along: there are a lot of really smart people out there.
In fact there are more very bright people around than there are job roles for them. Someone has to wait on tables, serve coffee or do other menial tasks because all the 'worthy' jobs are taken and anyone with one of those will hang on like a limpet, if they know what's good for them.
Indeed, a graduate's non-uni contemporaries will have 3-4 years' head start on them in terms of earnings (call that up to £75k more in pocket, or spent) *and* practical work experience. So, for any employer who sees the degree as irrelevant/excess knowledge, the more experienced non-graduate would be the person to hire for the job, if competing with one another.
Over their lifetime, the graduates are supposed to catch up and overtake in earnings but undergoing debt recovery deductions and trying to raise children at the same time can't be conducive to good mental health. If there's been no psychological fallout from student loans, after this length of time then maybe I'm talking out of my 'arris. Otherwise, let us wait and see.
i) we have sent our factories overseas, to lands where the wages, whilst low, are actually high by their local standards. They are grateful for the long hours and can afford to get *their* kids a good education and a shot at the middle-class lifestyle.
ii) We have such a high educational standard in our part of the world that we shouldn't be plugging school leavers into low-tech factory work but should be exploiting their learning capabilities "to the max" (hideous Americanism, sorry) and building our economy around high-skills activities or products which we can sell worldwide. Apple is shifting millions of (pricey) units, for example. Maybe we missed that boat but the next big thing could be from these shores, if we churn out enough people with the right knowledge plus the skills and motivation to turn ideas into a going concern, instead of a secret hobby in a shed.
A graduate rate of 40% proves what everyone knew all along: there are a lot of really smart people out there.
In fact there are more very bright people around than there are job roles for them. Someone has to wait on tables, serve coffee or do other menial tasks because all the 'worthy' jobs are taken and anyone with one of those will hang on like a limpet, if they know what's good for them.
Indeed, a graduate's non-uni contemporaries will have 3-4 years' head start on them in terms of earnings (call that up to £75k more in pocket, or spent) *and* practical work experience. So, for any employer who sees the degree as irrelevant/excess knowledge, the more experienced non-graduate would be the person to hire for the job, if competing with one another.
Over their lifetime, the graduates are supposed to catch up and overtake in earnings but undergoing debt recovery deductions and trying to raise children at the same time can't be conducive to good mental health. If there's been no psychological fallout from student loans, after this length of time then maybe I'm talking out of my 'arris. Otherwise, let us wait and see.
I know, gness....it's too general an assumption, to be fair to dave 50, he did condition the question with the use of 'some'.....
If one wants to see over-indulgence, one needs to see the States. I had just arrived in the US and picked up my new SUV and it was in the first week after my wife got there, we pulled up in front of a fairly swanky supermarket one evening. There was a brand new black, top of the range, Land Rover HSE, a car that I had thought about buying second-hand.
Out of the supermarket came a 17 or 18 year old, very pretty and well dressed. I commented that I had been thinking about getting one but ended up with mine....the response, "Daddy bought me this for University. He wants me to be safe and in a reliable car" and that is a good point as to dependability and security in the southern USA, a $90000 car being a little OTT perhaps.
If one wants to see over-indulgence, one needs to see the States. I had just arrived in the US and picked up my new SUV and it was in the first week after my wife got there, we pulled up in front of a fairly swanky supermarket one evening. There was a brand new black, top of the range, Land Rover HSE, a car that I had thought about buying second-hand.
Out of the supermarket came a 17 or 18 year old, very pretty and well dressed. I commented that I had been thinking about getting one but ended up with mine....the response, "Daddy bought me this for University. He wants me to be safe and in a reliable car" and that is a good point as to dependability and security in the southern USA, a $90000 car being a little OTT perhaps.
"..she won't have a long retirement to enjoy the way I have."
No, she won't, gness. And the reason for that, in part, is that she will begin work at a much older age than you.
Just to put a few numbers to my argument, in 2013 (the most recent figures I can find figures for) the percentage of people of working age in the UK who were graduates was just under 40%. That figure had risen from just 17% in 1992.
At that same time 47% of recent graduates (those who graduated no longer than 5 years earlier) were working in non-graduate jobs. 37% of those who graduated earlier were working in such jobs.
The plain fact is that the percentage of working age people with degrees has more than doubled in 20 years. In that same time the percentage of jobs requiring a degree has remained virtually the same. Of course, because of the abundance of graduates employers can now insist on degrees for jobs which previously would have required a couple of ‘A’ Levels or maybe just some good GCSEs. Young people are being misled terribly by being advised that a degree is the key to their future success and prosperity. In fact at least half of them need not bother and would be better advised to gain a couple of decent 'A' Levels and then set forth to the big wide world of work.
No, she won't, gness. And the reason for that, in part, is that she will begin work at a much older age than you.
Just to put a few numbers to my argument, in 2013 (the most recent figures I can find figures for) the percentage of people of working age in the UK who were graduates was just under 40%. That figure had risen from just 17% in 1992.
At that same time 47% of recent graduates (those who graduated no longer than 5 years earlier) were working in non-graduate jobs. 37% of those who graduated earlier were working in such jobs.
The plain fact is that the percentage of working age people with degrees has more than doubled in 20 years. In that same time the percentage of jobs requiring a degree has remained virtually the same. Of course, because of the abundance of graduates employers can now insist on degrees for jobs which previously would have required a couple of ‘A’ Levels or maybe just some good GCSEs. Young people are being misled terribly by being advised that a degree is the key to their future success and prosperity. In fact at least half of them need not bother and would be better advised to gain a couple of decent 'A' Levels and then set forth to the big wide world of work.
She will have to work for a lot longer than I did because of the rise in the age for qualifying for a pension....if there is still a pension, NJ.
If I hadn't had to retire early I'd have worked until sixty and retired with a good pension.....as it is I still have a very good state pension......from the age of sixty....when I was still young and fit enough to spend it on wine, men and shoes.....☺
If I hadn't had to retire early I'd have worked until sixty and retired with a good pension.....as it is I still have a very good state pension......from the age of sixty....when I was still young and fit enough to spend it on wine, men and shoes.....☺
The equalisation of women's and men's State Pension age was long overdue, g'ness, especcially as life expectancy for women is greater than that for men. So, leaving aside that, the current plans mean that somebody just beginning work now will probably receive their pension at age 69 (so, an increase of four years). Incorporate the fact that around half of young people delay their work start by three years this is not too unreasonable.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank2 mins ago
Road rules4 mins ago
Business & Finance13 mins ago
Crosswords14 mins ago
Society & Culture17 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.