I have AUD$3.87 to my name
Pages
- 1
- 2
| Author | Topic: I have AUD$3.87 to my name |
|---|---|
|
Infiltrator
Member # 3220
|
written Wednesday, April 21 2004 14:21
Profile
Hurrah for Majordomo's money coming through! As for myself, I just spent an instructive day reading the rentals section of the classifieds. Hurrah for fairly cheap housing, but boo to still not quite having the money for it yet. Posts: 437 | Registered: Sunday, July 13 2003 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 618
|
written Wednesday, April 21 2004 14:49
Profile
Homepage
Jeez. The government over there sounds about as bureaucratic as it is over here. Oh well. Like I'll EVER be able to afford uni. The irony is that if my parents weren't working, I'd actually be able to afford it. Sillyness. Rampant pants-face-McDougal. Oh well. Hurrah for the Magic Roundabout and the Herbs anyway. Go Parsley! -------------------- I like to say quack because I can, I like to say moooo because I can, but I don't like saying ergle flmp because I can never pronounce phenomenon first try. In conclusion, quack, moooo and phenonemenonmenonnon... Oh Poo. http://s4.invisionfree.com/Ultimate_RP/index.php Try it! Posts: 1487 | Registered: Sunday, February 10 2002 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 3377
|
written Wednesday, April 21 2004 16:44
Profile
quote:Oh? Which vinyard? -------------------- From many a wondrous grot and secret cell Unnumbered and enormous polypi Winnow with giant fins the slumbering green. Posts: 356 | Registered: Saturday, August 23 2003 07:00 |
|
Bob's Big Date
Member # 3151
|
written Wednesday, April 21 2004 16:59
Profile
Homepage
FBM, if that's true, your parents should be able to afford your college anyway.  -------------------- AnamaFreak (3:59:56 AM): Shounen-ai to the MAX ...there really is nothing that can compare to hot gay sex with a mythological icon. --665 Posts: 2367 | Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 618
|
written Wednesday, April 21 2004 17:06
Profile
Homepage
Not really, only my dad works at the mo, my mum's off due to some weirdass lung problem. They don't know wtf it is, so she's not in work. Nor is likely to be for a long time at this rate. There's the mortgage at a stupid interest rate (which they point blank refuse to change to another provider) and all sorts of blooming pants-on-a-stick to sort, along with they just got my brother a new car, meaning more outlay. It tends to add up, especially when none of them has a practical bone in their body. Oh well. Dang family. -------------------- I like to say quack because I can, I like to say moooo because I can, but I don't like saying ergle flmp because I can never pronounce phenomenon first try. In conclusion, quack, moooo and phenonemenonmenonnon... Oh Poo. http://s4.invisionfree.com/Ultimate_RP/index.php Try it! Posts: 1487 | Registered: Sunday, February 10 2002 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Wednesday, April 21 2004 23:22
Profile
Homepage
If your family can afford a new car, you are far better off than most uni students. -------------------- I believe there are 15 747 724 136 275 002 577 105 653 961 181 555 468 044 717 914 527 116 709 366 231 425 076 185 631 031 296 protons in the universe, and the same number of electrons. -- Sir Arthur Eddington Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Bob's Big Date
Member # 3151
|
written Thursday, April 22 2004 04:58
Profile
Homepage
Generally, buying a house and a second car tends to indicate that it's not that they can't afford to put you through college, which is the concern of the state, but that they don't want to. Then, naturally, they go and whine about taxes. -------------------- AnamaFreak (3:59:56 AM): Shounen-ai to the MAX ...there really is nothing that can compare to hot gay sex with a mythological icon. --665 Posts: 2367 | Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 618
|
written Thursday, April 22 2004 14:06
Profile
Homepage
I never said that the car was this-year, in fact it was a second hand Suzuki, G reg. A tree fell on his last one (quite literally). Nor does a mortgage mean new house. My parents aren't that old. It's got about eight years on it. (Meaning I'd be 23 when they paid it off.) Wealth is realitve so I'll make no comment on it between me and the average uni student (who over here is about to pay £3000 a year JUST for tuition fees). I will however say this, I am too honest to be rich, too poor to be an eccentric, too stupid to be novel and am without guidance to use my life. Bleh, feh, meh. Blood and sand. All that humanity will find. -------------------- I like to say quack because I can, I like to say moooo because I can, but I don't like saying ergle flmp because I can never pronounce phenomenon first try. In conclusion, quack, moooo and phenonemenonmenonnon... Oh Poo. http://s4.invisionfree.com/Ultimate_RP/index.php Try it! Posts: 1487 | Registered: Sunday, February 10 2002 08:00 |
|
Apprentice
Member # 4162
|
written Friday, April 23 2004 02:56
Profile
Homepage
In my experience the minority are those without cars. And furthermore those with cars are at least 5000, while there are numerous expensive (30 000+) cars as well. The era of poor, financially struggling or less affluent students seem to be becoming something of the past. Only recently did I have enough to buy text books for the semester. At the same time buying a car anytime soon has been set back yet again. For the earlier comments in this thread, Im yet to see a good reason why uni graduates should not pay for their education or think a raise in fees is somehow an unfair burden. Posts: 36 | Registered: Sunday, March 28 2004 08:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Friday, April 23 2004 05:10
Profile
Homepage
Maybe you're right; it's not as if I've done any sort of comprehensive survey. Students living in residence at uni certainly don't tend to have cars (and don't really need them), but they're a minority. And I've had plenty of experience with students who cry poor and yet obviously have money to throw around when they really want to. As for paying for one's education, I have no real beef with the way HECS is set up. Being in debt isn't really a pleasant way to start a career, and the income threshold and repayment rate could probably be made fairer, but on the whole the system works. (Of course, that's easy for me to say. I'm paying the fees upfront -- or, more to the point, my parents are -- so it doesn't really affect me.) -------------------- I believe there are 15 747 724 136 275 002 577 105 653 961 181 555 468 044 717 914 527 116 709 366 231 425 076 185 631 031 296 protons in the universe, and the same number of electrons. -- Sir Arthur Eddington Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 3480
|
written Friday, April 23 2004 15:42
Profile
Homepage
Yay I have $20.05 NZ to my name, which I found on the ground yesturday  Now I just got to hope I find more so I can buy BOA. Luckily for me, Im still in high school which means its "free" as in I oly have to pay $500 for option fees etc. Unfortunatly as I am to young to get a job and only get $1 pocket money a week, I have to count on rich people dropping their money to buy games.  -------------------- What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. Posts: 169 | Registered: Wednesday, September 24 2003 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 2628
|
written Friday, April 23 2004 17:38
Profile
Homepage
I'm a mature age student on welfare and I know several other mature-age students who are also either on welfare or relying on part time work. My son is also a uni student on welfare, without a wealthy parent to pay upfront fees. Students are not all well-off. What is wrong with HECS? A couple of things. * affluent students can pay fees beforehand and save 25%. This means that the more affluent students study cheaper than the less affluent - it's like a tax on poorer students. * there is a perception that HECS is a burden and does deter people from study. When I advised people I was going to study, the first question from most of them wasn't 'what course?' it was 'what about the HECS bill?' * recent studies have shown that graduates are deferring starting families. This has quite serious implications for future population levels, especially given Australia's aging population. * graduates with HECS bills are reluctant to take on further debt, such as loans for a new car or home purchase. This has serious implications for the economy. One of our major manufacturing industries is vehicle manufacture, and a strong building sector creates a lot of jobs. If interest rates rise (and they will) at the same time that graduates are deferring major purchases due to HECs burden, this will lead to a jump in unemployment in the construction sector and the vehicle industry, leading to flow on effects in other sectors of the economy. * it could be argued that graduates are good for the economy. Over their working lives they will pay more taxes, consume more goods and services, etc than non-graduates. This all benefits the economy. These extra benefits to the economy far outweigh the cost to the state of a degree. [ Friday, April 23, 2004 17:42: Message edited by: Kyna ] -------------------- We meet and part now over all the world; we, the lost company, take hands together in the night, forget the night in our brief happiness, silently. -- Judith Wright My website Posts: 512 | Registered: Wednesday, February 12 2003 08:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 3377
|
written Friday, April 23 2004 18:07
Profile
Alright. Let's suppose we must pay for our tertiary education. At the moment we do that through either HECS or upfront fees. If you abolish HECS, what other system would you suggest? -------------------- From many a wondrous grot and secret cell Unnumbered and enormous polypi Winnow with giant fins the slumbering green. Posts: 356 | Registered: Saturday, August 23 2003 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 2628
|
written Friday, April 23 2004 22:59
Profile
Homepage
quote:I don't agree with the supposition. Graduates benefit the economy - the extra goods and services they buy mean more jobs, which means more people paying taxes and savings in welfare payments. Graduates also pay higher taxes than non-graduates (whether direct tax or indirect tax such as GST). This net benefit to the government more than pays for the cost of their education. This isn't even taking into account the social value of doctors, teachers, researchers, etc. I think university entry should be based on ability, not on ability to pay. We want the best and brightest to be our future doctors, teachers, researchers, etc. Any fee-based system, whether it be partial deferred fees such as HECS or full up-front fees, deters people from lower socio-economic backgrounds. My local high school has a significantly lower percentage of students going on to university education now when compared with the free universities of 25 years ago. We may be losing the best and brightest (but poor) students because of the perceived burden of HECS. Also, HECS does have long term negative impacts on the economy (as outlined in my previous post). Explain to me your supposition - that we as individuals MUST pay for our tertiary education. -------------------- We meet and part now over all the world; we, the lost company, take hands together in the night, forget the night in our brief happiness, silently. -- Judith Wright My website Posts: 512 | Registered: Wednesday, February 12 2003 08:00 |
|
This Side Towards Enemy
Member # 3098
|
written Saturday, April 24 2004 11:52
Profile
FBM, if you're that poorly off then you should stop whining immediately because you won't pay fees. It's not until your parent(s) earn at least £32000 that you have to pay the full fee. -------------------- "I particularly like the part where he claims not to know what self-aggrandisement means, then demands more wing-wongs up his virgin ass" Posts: 961 | Registered: Thursday, June 12 2003 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 3377
|
written Sunday, April 25 2004 18:48
Profile
quote:I simply mean that, the current government being what it is, I see very little probability that we will again be granted the free education Whitlam gave us. (And how long did that last?) Therefore we will be required to pay for it ourselves. And I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. We are the most direct beneficiaries of our education, which, if all goes well, provides us with the job opportunities that mean we will be able to pay for our own education. Entry into university should be based on ability, I agree. What HECS is supposed to do is allow those who can't pay the upfront fees to pay later, when they have their new skilled job. Perhaps HECS is seen as a deterrent to the poorer of the poor - I don't know, coming from a fairly well-off middle class family. I certainly never saw it as a deterrent, and nor do any of my friends, university or otherwise. The "but what about HECS?" question never came up when entering uni, and, IMO, never should. The short-term disadvantages of financing a tertiary education is outweighed by the long-term advantages. From my (unresearched) viewpoint, I don't see that it is considered as that much of a deterrent now. In the last few years alone there has been a significant increase in the numbers of high school leavers entering university. Of course, the attitude towards HECS will doubtless change with the recent fee increases. That is not to say that I wouldn't jump at the opportunity for free education if it ever came. I just don't believe it will in our near future. Which is why I ask, if you dislike HECS so much, and if we continue to have a fee-based system, what system you would suggest in its place. Posts: 356 | Registered: Saturday, August 23 2003 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 18
|
written Sunday, April 25 2004 20:48
Profile
Homepage
Free tertiary education is by far one of the most radical social changes imparted by any government of Australia - I just wish the follow-on Liberal government could've had the foresight to realise the solid benefits it offers. I agree with Kyna wholeheartedly on the subject. Dammit, I've spent hours arguing with economics students *both* sides of the topic, just to try and work out the fiscal feasibility of it. You have to realise prem, that the "other scheme" of paying for our education is *not* paying for it. What Kyna is suggesting (and what Whitlam KNEW, back in '73) is that by allowing a larger number of students access to a better education by removing the financial burden is by far and away more beneficial to the country than scamming a few dollars out of poor students in the short term. That's one of the big problems with centre-right governments, they only think in the short term. How happy was John Howard when he was able to announce a budget surplus? How long until there's no more Telstras left to sell? Young people need incentives in Australia to get educated, and dammit, making it free is a good enough one for me. The ALP's Knowledge Nation proposal was probably one of the most ingenious bits of policy ever, and although it was defeated at Conference, the "Earning or Learning" ideology is a continuation of it, of sorts. I damn well hope Latham gets up in the next election, cause I don't think I've ever met a man with more stable ideological views than him. That, and he's crazy. Md. Oh yeah, and the wine was a Brookland Valley Merlot and a Vasse Felix Shiraz. I really wanted a Twin Rivers 94 Malbec, but I guess I'll leave that till next time. EDIT: Spelling mistakes [ Sunday, April 25, 2004 20:52: Message edited by: Majordomo ] Posts: 304 | Registered: Monday, October 1 2001 07:00 |
|
Apprentice
Member # 4162
|
written Sunday, April 25 2004 21:28
Profile
Homepage
quote:It is the same for those who can not afford shinier cars, bigger houses etc Our society allows personal wealth; freedom creates distinction, inequality even. Yet this same society accommodates other values in the form of providing access to all (or most, in theory) the possibility of improved standards. Of course between theory and practice nothing is perfect, yet hecs is designed to help rather than hinder anyone. It does benefit -all- more than detract from any, the bigger losers are the government and thus the less educated majority who collectively pay the most for our education. quote:Since the 70's Australia has faced an overall fertility decline, unsure about current marriage patterns. Anyhow hecs is not necessarily the specific cause, I suspect it is the greater economic potential for personal investment keeping graduates (especially female graduates) away from past trends in child rearing. Social norms are being revised, increasingly more of the once average are becoming the 'jet setter'(loosely intended) type. They dont settle down and have children a little over 20 anymore. Personally I have no intention to have children until late 30s. quote:The minimum eligibility income is 25k, at which stage a graduate pays under 1000 per year. If they earn approx 40k it's roughly 2000 one way or the other depending. These types of obligations (especially with the average income for tertiary educated qualifications) cannot realistically be claimed as responsible for how a graduate chooses to not spend their money. A degree including the cost of hecs ensures that a person will earn more than they otherwise could. Substantially more. Hecs facilitated education does not hamstring the economy. quote:Yes, but.. quote:this perception is wrong, hecs benefits -everyone- (besides the uneducated lower income earners majority who collectively pay the most), the student is provided with an education which ensures a higher than average income. Furthermore it is true that graduates who earn and spend more money than non graduates benefit the economy. Nonetheless graduates who spend more money and pay back less than 1/4 of their education directly benefit the greater public while still facilitating the economy. There seems to be this wide spread misconception about what hecs really is. Admittedly I was not to sure exactly what the hecs requirements were, after looking they are better (for the student) than I previously assumed. Students do not pay up front, they pay once their education is earning at roughly the very least 20x the amount required to be paid annually. For the average student and individual in our economic climate, there is nothing wrong with this. There may be individual circumstance which complicate an otherwise over-simplistic picture, for those Im not disagreeing. But the blanket censure of hecs is something I do not understand. It seems to me, to be almost a smoke screen "we're struggling students" etc Well that I can perfectly sympathize with, one would think this to be the more tenable and present issue. Poorer individuals find everything in society more complicated. It is difficult to balance everything (finances, family work and/or study etc) out and transcend the cycle which creates these distinctions. It is really these social factors that show the over generalisation of theory into practice. Actually you've probably heard some dont believe centrelink is paying enough to eligible full time students, because of the work load. I certainly hope that was (someone in government) their point and not the opposite. I think about how friends from high school did not go on to uni. A number of those in the top 10 for instance. Compared to the group of socialites, who's enduring contributing to everyone else was to make our high school years miserable. Once high school finished their daddies stopped buying them ponies and sent them to uni. Good for them, I want the same for my children but there are instances were a lack of monetary backing complicates life for the poorer ones. Indeed this example seems to me at least to be something of an anomaly. Poverty usually inhibits better grades and overall possibilities well before tertiary education. To me, the aforesaid issue are a real problem when people whether getting exceptional grades or otherwise, are by default stunted and/or less able to continue education. Yet hecs is entirely the other way around, these 'oppressed' graduates come out with greatly enhanced economic potential, they become the above average income earners. It does not prevent potential students or can be seen as having any adverse affect on graduates. Instead it requires once they graduate they pack back a little of where their good fortune came from. Hecs is only unfair in the sense of there being inequality between persons of a society which promotes personal wealth, but that applies to everything. Hecs is not intrinsically unfair in -any sense- of handicapping anyone from getting an education. That matter is a distinct problem which should be addressed. Such issues constitute a significantly different concern which I should think for the less wealthy who have seen this reality most clearly, ought not be confused for the sake of rallying against hecs. Posts: 36 | Registered: Sunday, March 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Bob's Big Date
Member # 3151
|
written Monday, April 26 2004 04:47
Profile
Homepage
Md, I would challenge any left-wing Australian thus: why, if Howard is an incompetent, caterpillar-eyebrowed midget, does he get re-elected? A comfortable majority of people in any country are idiots. Idiots vote not because they really particularly believe in something, but because it's the right thing to do. Which means they're likely enough to vote for the incumbent unless there's some huge incentive not to. It also means that the right-wingers win a lot more than they lose, because they, in political terms, can be said to REPRESENT the comfortable majority of idiots. They think in the short-term, they act in the short-term, and long-term consequences are obviously someone else's fault. There's no political repercussions to killing free education if you can just look at the drop in efficiency and overall quality of education later and shout "Boat people!", or whatever your politicians are in the habit of shouting. (With us, it's "Terrorists!"; thats a much better catch-all, if I do say so myself.) Even if that doesn't make a lick of sense to thinking people, who cares? The idiots believe it, and the media machine is usually behind them 100%. -------------------- AnamaFreak (3:59:56 AM): Shounen-ai to the MAX ...there really is nothing that can compare to hot gay sex with a mythological icon. --665 Posts: 2367 | Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 18
|
written Monday, April 26 2004 05:49
Profile
Homepage
Simple! Most Australians are stupid. A very, very sad fact. Md. Posts: 304 | Registered: Monday, October 1 2001 07:00 |
|
Shock Trooper
Member # 3377
|
written Monday, April 26 2004 06:35
Profile
Actually, I prefer "Boat people!". It's nicer when the problem is people wanting to come into the country, rather than trying to blow it up. -------------------- From many a wondrous grot and secret cell Unnumbered and enormous polypi Winnow with giant fins the slumbering green. Posts: 356 | Registered: Saturday, August 23 2003 07:00 |
Pages
- 1
- 2