latedaytraveler

PATRICK LONDON and FLANNER,

Thank you for your info about funding for universities in the UK.

"All the cash-grabbers are institutions Americans would class as "private" Almost all those leaving us alone Americans would probably regard as 'public.'"

I guess that says it all...

flpab

Very interesting. My niece has over 60,000 in debt after her Master's degree this spring. Of course war is more important for us to fund than education. I was hearing all the money we were spending this week for Syria, the Ukraine and now for Ebola. We are so in debt to China but keep giving away more and our infrastructure in the USA is falling apart. How about taking care of us for a change.
I have followed the tram fiasco in Edinburgh and that was a huge mess. Is it running smoothly now?
One more question, is it hard for the average student to be admitted to schools there? My friends in Edinburgh have their children in a very posh looking day school right now. http://www.george-heriots.com/

annhig

Never mind the separation referendum - The Royal & Ancient is going to allow women members!>>

not so Troon, however. i heard on the radio that they have no intention of going co-ed, though they do have a ladies' club, "who are allowed to play on our courses". says it all really.

I have followed the tram fiasco in Edinburgh and that was a huge mess. Is it running smoothly now? >>

the huge overspends on the Edinburgh tram system and the Scottish Parliament may well have contributed to the success of the "no" campaign of course. I can't personally tell you whether the system is fully up and running as I've not been there since i was about 12, however the map in the link below suggests that it has finally linked up with the airport:

http://edinburghtrams.com/

One more question, is it hard for the average student to be admitted to schools there? >>

sorry, flpab, that may be one question, but it leads to lots of answers. A private school like the one your friends have their children in requires both money and brains - an entrance assessment and in later years an exam plus at least £8K pa per child, despite the fact that it's a charitable foundation. if that is beyond one's means or inclination, every child should be able to find a place at a state school, albeit not necessarily the one that they or their parents wish them to attend. Then there are grammar schools [highly academic state senior schools] prep schools, public schools [which are private] and now, Academies - which are funded by central government with seemingly very little control over what they do or who they do it to.

Hope that's clear!

PatrickLondon

Everyone will find a school somewhere. Whether it's the school their parents/other family members/neighbours/colleagues/general school gate rumour/Daily Mail readers would rate as a "good school" is another matter. Whether it's the right school for the child in question is another matter still (fifty years later, I'm still not entirely sure I followed the right educational path, but I suppose the fact that I'm still not sure suggests that it was).

sofarsogood

<<is it hard for the average student to be admitted to schools there?>>

Fee-paying schools, such as the one in your link, account for 7% of children educated in the UK. Which means 94% go to state schools; while the other 1% can't add up and end up visiting travel forums on a rainy Saturday afternoon.

That 7% end up running the country, which is why the other 93% get p***ed off and feel disengaged from those in power.

thursdaysd

My English niece graduated from Edinburgh university before English universities started charging fees. Do I gather from the explanation above that if she attended Edinburgh now she would have to pay fees, while a French student would not? Also, is this a matter of residence or of birth? I am English by birth and American by naturalisation. If I moved to Scotland, at what point (if any) would I be regarded as Scots for matters of taxation and benefits? I presume that would have changed with a "yes" vote? (In other words, does an "English" person resident in Scotland get treated as English or Scottish, or British?)

Also, this is the first I've heard of the Barnett agreement. How on earth did that happen?

PatrickLondon

>>If I moved to Scotland, at what point (if any) would I be regarded as Scots for matters of taxation and benefits? <<

For taxation and social security, I believe it currently makes no difference whether you live in England or Scotland, since these are either not devolved, or the devolved powers to vary income tax rates haven't been used by the devolved Scottish government. For most practical purposes, it goes on residence anyway, so the fact that you were born here and may be a dual citizen makes no difference if you haven't actually lived here.

However, the Scottish government has used its powers in respect of NHS Scotland to reduce some charges. University tuition fees go by residence:
http://www.studyinscotland.org/how-t...ding-and-fees/

>>Also, this is the first I've heard of the Barnett agreement. How on earth did that happen?<<

Get those matchsticks ready to prop up your eyelids:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_formula

dotheboyshall

For taxation purposes you are treated as Scottish as soon as you start living & working in Scotland regardless of citizenship.

For university fees you have to be resident for at least 3 years before being considered Scottish rather than English/Welsh/Northern Irish

Barnett formula dates back to the late 1970s

annhig

Fee-paying schools, such as the one in your link, account for 7% of children educated in the UK. Which means 94% go to state schools; while the other 1% can't add up and end up visiting travel forums on a rainy Saturday afternoon.>>

lol - sofarsogood - care to run those maths past me again?

sparkchaser

Standard 2% margin of error.

thursdaysd

If I were still living in England I might be a bit miffed. More money per capita going to Scots, Welsh and Irish, and other EU citizens getting free education in Scotland.

Did anyone ask the English if they wanted the Scots to stay? (I hoped they would, but I haven't lived there for a long time.)

PatrickLondon

There's no point trying to force a people to stay when they're resolved not to. It has been tried in the past, remember.

annhig

Did anyone ask the English if they wanted the Scots to stay? (I hoped they would, but I haven't lived there for a long time.)>>

good question Thursdaysd. Of course Patrick has a valid point but OTOH, less than 5 million had the opportunity to change the lives of 60 million, without 55 million of them having any say in the matter. In other circumstances that would be seen as profoundly ant-democratic. Our countries are deeply entwined; there can be few of us who would not have been affected by Scotland becoming completely independent one way or another. as it is, i suspect that many financial institutions will take steps to safeguard themselves against a second vote in a few years time.

flpab

That explains her husbands commute now. He is working near Birmingham and traveling home for weekends expenses paid. She had said it was because of the children's school. They have lived there several years and didn't relocate for the new job.
Hey, stop knocking the Daily mail, it is my guilty pleasure. Honestly, it has crap in it before the US entertainment sites get the news. I think they gleam it all from the early edition.
Bought a car today from one Randy McDonald and he was still waiting for the news of yes or no. We are a very uninformed country. Had a good discussion on it though.

thursdaysd

Errr, Patrick, you seem to be assuming the English would have voted to keep the Scots. Are you sure about that?

PatrickLondon

>>Are you sure about that?<<

No. But I wouldn't have wanted the wishes of whatever tiny fraction of us would have turned out to vote to have produced a stalemate either.

annw

Really interesting thread! Following the aftermath in Telegraph, Guardian, etc.

janisj

Now Salmond is blathering about Scotland possibly declaring independence w/o a referendum!

annhig

jj - I shouldn't worry, I think that most people recognise that he's lost the plot. I suspect that's he's regretting resigning and wants to stay in the limelight for as long as possible.

dotheboyshall

Near the end of the campaign he did start coming across as a Scottish version of Iain Duncan Smith - ie truth beign whatever he believes it to be.

However his resignation could be a simple case of "getting out at the top" as there's nowhere for him to go now politically. Having failed in becoming "The Father Of His Nation", the only option left is "Tragic Hero Who Tried But Failed" which always goes down well in the history books.

The only question left therefore - who plays him in the film? Danny De Vito or Brad Pitt?