Protest (1 Viewer)

[stazi]

that's a silly argument. you're assuming the policy will stay the same for 100 years inthe future. assuming 0.2% of the country will go to uni per year, we will only have 100% of our country having attended university in 500 years time. should we really be so long-term focused?

why should people who have never been to uni fund those who have? many people didn't see the need to go to university 20 years ago, as they went into various trades that didn't require tertiary qualifications. should they be disadvantaged just so Joe Smith could have an education?

Ultimately, it's not an argument about whether X% should benefit from Y% of people funding them. It's an argument about whether or not our universities can survive if education becomes free and full fee places are removed.

 

[^CoSMic DoRiS^^]

Agree with Justin, Dom and Chadd.

I don't believe university should be free. If it's productive and you can get a job out of it, you can offset the payments later. If it's unproductive intellectual wankery you're the only person who will benefit from it, so fund your own damn hobby!

I get sick of how entitled a lot of people are. The "government should pay for just about everything, including free university" people don't realise that the government isn't the one paying, the taxpayers are, and why should they fund things they don't use? For some reason, a bunch of entitled hippies think they deserve to have their degrees paid for... same argument applies to people who think VSU is a bad thing.

EDIT: Stas is right. Bloody socialists. Seriously, income redistribution is idiocy, especially in situations like this.

what she said.

the government is not some magical money tree that pays for whatever you feel you should be entitled to.

...and, um, it's practically free anyway if you're a domestic CSP student. if you do a useless artfag wanker degree you'll probably never have to pay your HECS debt on account of not being able to get a job that pays well enough for it to be taken out of your pay...and if you do a useful degree you'll be making enough money eventually to pay it off without too much pain.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

true, about 30k for my degree all up

in today's money that's nothing

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

the government is not some magical money tree that pays for whatever you feel you should be entitled to.

What I feel entitled to? No. What the majority feels entitled to? Absolutely. That's democracy. As far as I know, the majority of people don't have a problem with tax. Only if you live a useless aristocratfag wanker life would you care.

as lim (posts)-->inf, thread-->gay

But never reaches gay, amirite? :rofl:

Ultimately, it's not an argument about whether X% should benefit from Y% of people funding them. It's an argument about whether or not our universities can survive if education becomes free and full fee places are removed.

Yes, and you're doing a remarkably shitty job of showing me how universities would crumble to the ground if we took away their DFEE places, given what the ALP has said about them.

Do you really think that HECS is currently a barrier for people attending university? I am yet to meet someone who won't go to uni because it is too expensive.

Remember that story a few years back about the international guy at UNSW, doing medicine, who had to live in a tent in a park because he couldn't afford his degree if he didn't? And you're an advocate of user-pays education? :rofl:

ok, at any time we have 0.6-1% of the population at university (3-5 year degrees). Those are the people benefiting from it. That leaves 99% of people funding the 1% currently at university. This would suggest that at any time (even in 20 years) you still have 99% of people funding 1%

Oh heavens above. Ok, how many people do you think are in hospitals at any one time? Less than 1%? Your argument sucks a dick.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

What I feel entitled to? No. What the majority feels entitled to? Absolutely. That's democracy. As far as I know, the majority of people don't have a problem with tax. Only if you live a useless aristocratfag wanker life would you care.

Well only a useless artfag wanker would be so out of step with the majority to think they wanted to pay for your arts degree; since we're appealing to emotion why don't you walk into a bar in western sydney at 5.30 and ask the patrons if they want to pay a few thousand extra tax from their wages each year so you can learn about gender studies and philosophy

Remember that story a few years back about the international guy at UNSW, doing medicine, who had to live in a tent in a park because he couldn't afford his degree if he didn't? And you're an advocate of user-pays education? :rofl:

So you want to live in a fantasy world where people never have to consider their current circumstances before making decisions about how to spend their money?

Holy shit, if I bought a new yacht and a Ferrari I'd probably have to live in a tent in a park because otherwise I couldn't afford them

Oh heavens above. Ok, how many people do you think are in hospitals at any one time? Less than 1%? Your argument sucks a dick.

woo strawman

something very closely approximating 100% of people will use hospitals several times in their life

 

[^CoSMic DoRiS^^]

What I feel entitled to? No. What the majority feels entitled to? Absolutely. That's democracy. As far as I know, the majority of people don't have a problem with tax. Only if you live a useless aristocratfag wanker life would you care.

Yeah, true, but I think most people would have a problem with the idea that they have to fund something the majority of people do not use. I do. We'll all pay our taxes and not have a problem with doing it but we might just have a problem with how the money is being spent. I've got no problem with paying taxes but really, in terms of the population practically noone goes to uni. It's not fair that the rest of the population should have to support them through taxes.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

I've got no problem with paying taxes but really, in terms of the population practically noone goes to uni. It's not fair that the rest of the population should have to support them through taxes.

You, like Captain Gh3y, are ignoring what uni graduates do with their degrees. Quite conviniently too.

woo strawman

Not really. More like "exact analogy".

something very closely approximating 100% of people will use hospitals several times in their life

Something very closely approximating 100% of people will use university graduates several times in their life.

So you want to live in a fantasy world where people never have to consider their current circumstances before making decisions about how to spend their money?

Holy shit, if I bought a new yacht and a Ferrari I'd probably have to live in a tent in a park because otherwise I couldn't afford them

Woo strawman. :rofl:

In terms of education though, yes. Much like healthcare.

Well only a useless artfag wanker would be so out of step with the majority to think they wanted to pay for your arts degree; since we're appealing to emotion why don't you walk into a bar in western sydney at 5.30 and ask the patrons if they want to pay a few thousand extra tax from their wages each year so you can learn about gender studies and philosophy

I'm doing the arts part to become a teacher, silly boy.

 

[^CoSMic DoRiS^^]

You, like Captain Gh3y, are ignoring what uni graduates do with their degrees. Quite conviniently too.

What, get jobs?
I think you're going to have to explain this one a little further for me. Not sure what you're saying.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

What, get jobs?
I think you're going to have to explain this one a little further for me. Not sure what you're saying.

Because everyone will need to see a doctor it should be free to become a doctor, basically.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Exactly. But my friend, don't limit it to doctors! Think of all the different possibilities!

 

[^CoSMic DoRiS^^]

Oh okay.

But what about degrees that are pretty much glorified toilet paper *coughARTScough*

should they be free? and how could you justify this if you say yes?

 

[stazi]

Yes, and you're doing a remarkably shitty job of showing me how universities would crumble to the ground if we took away their DFEE places, given what the ALP has said about them.

Hyperbole. I'm not saying they'd crumble to the ground. I'm saying that they would have less funding. If you have less money in your wallet, will you have the funds to purchase a subscription to the latest databases, to upgrade your computers, to fund Photoshop licenses, to renovate and restore amenities, to attract talent from overseas (marketing costs money), etc etc? All of a sudden, you can't pay as high salaries as other top universities from across the world, and your academic staff becomes worse: if someone had the chance to make more money in another country where education isn't free and where the budget has to be tightened, who wouldn't go overseas?

Furthermore, just because the ALP says something doesn't make it the truth.

Remember that story a few years back about the international guy at UNSW, doing medicine, who had to live in a tent in a park because he couldn't afford his degree if he didn't? And you're an advocate of user-pays education? :rofl:

He wasn't on a HECS degree, he was a full international student. So, this international guy should've just gotten in for free? He probably should've also received Centrelink even though he wasn't a citizen?

Oh heavens above. Ok, how many people do you think are in hospitals at any one time? Less than 1%? Your argument sucks a dick.

Yes, but how many people use roads, how many people use public facilities, how many people need a better education in primary and secondary schools? Tax dollars don't JUST go to hospitals.

Something very closely approximating 100% of people will use university graduates several times in their life.

That's quite a stupid assertion. The people who benefit from using graduates will be employers. However, to repay them for their degrees, graduates will typically get paid more money than non-graduates upon entering the workforce.

 

[stazi]

Exactly. But my friend, don't limit it to doctors! Think of all the different possibilities!

The reason people become doctors isn't for purely altruistic reasons. They will become really fucking rich. To train those doctors, you need to attract the best medical teachers from around the world > this costs money. Having students pay for their degrees after graduation isn't absurd, as they will make up their fees very quickly.

Similarly, why are business subjects more expensive than arts subjects? Because people who graduate in these roles will have a higher salary. I am prepared to pay $8,000 more than Arts students for my degree because I know that I'll be earning $200K in 8 years time.

I am going to become a marketer upon graduation. Why should some plumber pay for my education? How does he benefit from my marketing? How does he benefit from someone studying gender studies? Degrees benefit the individual

 

[stazi]

Oh okay.

But what about degrees that are pretty much glorified toilet paper *coughARTScough*

should they be free? and how could you justify this if you say yes?

I think the only degrees that can be justified to be free (or at least subsidised) are those that are national priorities such as nursing. From what I understand, nursing isn't that well paid and we have a shortage.

 

[blakegman]

Stazi uses logic.

Logic is super effective!

 

[withoutaface]

I think the only degrees that can be justified to be free (or at least subsidised) are those that are national priorities such as nursing. From what I understand, nursing isn't that well paid and we have a shortage.

It's still probably better to address the core problem, though, which is that nurses in the public sector just aren't paid enough.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

It's still probably better to address the core problem, though, which is that nurses in the public sector just aren't paid enough.

We won't be able to do that because all the funding will be going to pay for degrees to train them

 

[scarybunny]

$200K in 8 years, Staz?

Daymn. Introduce me to some hawt marketing boys quicksmart. Ones that can supplement my income after uni.


Priority degrees are the cheapest, with loads of scholarships available, but there still isn't a lot of competition for places. Which would suggest that the cost of the degree has nothing to do with its attractiveness.

 

[stazi]

yep, should be quite possible. most marketers would be on about 70-100k 8 years after graduation though

 

[kokodamonkey]

$5 says nebuchanezzar thinks vsu was an ideological pursuit rather then giving freedom to students.