and the addition of grants and bursaries are taken into account, for all students from
poor backgrounds, the total payments required on graduation will actually be lower
under the new system than under the old system. The opposite is the case for students
from richer backgrounds, the majority of whom would repay more under the new
system, with the exception of females from the bottom 20% of the graduate earnings
distribution.
Figure . Distributional effects of new system compared to old system of HE
funding: net effects of i) increased government debt, ii) reforms to loan system,
and iii) reduction in requirement for private debts
Poorest students Poorest students

Percentile of the lifetime earnings distribution
New system, £18,340 govt debt
Pre-reform, £12,350 govt debt + £5,990 private debt, poorest students
Richest students Richest students

Percentile of the lifetime earnings distribution
New system, £18,340 govt debt
Pre-refcιm, £9,265 govt debt + £4,925 private debt, richest students
So although graduates in general will be asked to contribute more to the costs of their
education under the new system, the ones who as students were poorest will end up
repaying less in loans than prior to the reforms. This is due to the combination of two
factors: first, the fact that they would not have to borrow as much money privately
under the new system, and second, the two changes to the loan repayment conditions
22
More intriguing information
1. How do investors' expectations drive asset prices?2. National curriculum assessment: how to make it better
3. Improvements in medical care and technology and reductions in traffic-related fatalities in Great Britain
4. The use of formal education in Denmark 1980-1992
5. Improving behaviour classification consistency: a technique from biological taxonomy
6. An institutional analysis of sasi laut in Maluku, Indonesia
7. Regional science policy and the growth of knowledge megacentres in bioscience clusters
8. The name is absent
9. Restructuring of industrial economies in countries in transition: Experience of Ukraine
10. Cultural Neuroeconomics of Intertemporal Choice