[manfredo]

> if you are on the receiving end of a crap course that doesn't help you get a job is it really good that you'll have to pay for it (when you get a well paying job from entirely unconnected means)?

When the alternative is:

> if you are on the receiving end of a crap course that doesn't help you get a job is it really good that you'll have to pay for it (with interest, even if you're still unemployed after taking the course)?

Yeah, the former is really good.

Sure, it'd be better if the courses were free. But are you going to spend two years teaching computer science without pay? I'm not going to, and I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that most people won't either.

[untog]

> When the alternative is

Your supposition is that there are two options for everyone:

a) go deep into student debt

b) go deep into ISA debt

and no others. I contend that isn't the case. You could do neither. When you're in danger of getting into serious debt via an ISA to a company that doesn't seem to be competently running courses that will lead to employment it's only sensible to question whether it's worth signing up in the first place.

[manfredo]

There's no "ISA debt". There's no interest racking up. You may not even pay anything if you don't get a well paying job.

Sure, an ISA from a bad program is not good. But at least you're not paying unless you get a well compensated job.

[untog]

> There's no "ISA debt"

?!?! Of course there is! What are you repaying when you get a high paying job?

[manfredo]

You're paying a percentage of your income, if you're making above a threshold. This is in comparison to debt which has interest that makes the debt increase over time until paid off - regardless of whether you are employed in a well paying job or even whether you're employed at all.

Yes, under both system money is being paid back to someone. But crucially, there's no interest with an ISA. And furthermore, no money is taken until people get a job that pays a certain amount.