- Banned
- #351
It is 13k on avg across degrees, however significantly cheaper for local students.
Christopher Pyne!!!
- Thread starter Maggie5
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Banned
- #352
Because they will pay a larger proportion of tax and the net economic benefit of an educated population is worth the public subsidy.
This is the German and Northern European approach.
- Banned
- #353
Qsaint if you want our universities to match MIT, would you support the dramatic funding increase required to bring them in line with top American universities. Given we also lack the same private, charitable and alumni allotments, the taxpayer funded increase would be even more stupendous.
- Apr 3, 2006
- 33,500
- 11,909
- AFL Club
- Geelong
With interest charged and a debt through the roof - you're kidding yourself if that won't turn people away.
Why not? They can go too if their ability allows it.
Of course they do.
- Banned
- #355
Turning people away is not such a bad thing, will mean only those dedicated students with some direction will go to uni. So many unemployed graduates at the moment because kiddies study worthless degrees, don't get any experience and end up being 24 and on the dole then blame everyone else for their situation. It is a complete myth that you need to go to uni to make it in life.
- Banned
- #356
They won't be turning people away. And the limiting factor will be wealth not competence.
The reason for high youth unemployment is a lack of jobs, heck we have some of the smartest young minds in the country leaving due to lack of research funding
- Banned
- #357
Should of said turning people off, my mistake. I don't get why wealth has anything to do with it....you get a HECS debt, which you pay off once you starting each 53k, your parents wealth does not come into play unless you expect mommy and daddy to pay for everything.
So who is going to pay for more research funding? The students themselves? Sounds like a good place to start.
So who is going to pay for more research funding? The students themselves? Sounds like a good place to start.
- Jul 20, 2014
- 760
- 1,392
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- North Melbourne
- Banned
- #358
This needs to be enforced heavily for high school students, I cruised through high school and paid a price for awhile.
Either get educated or you are working at Coles if you're not doing a trade.
- Banned
- #360
Why should the students pay for research funding? Also why would you want to turn people off.
There were proposed changes for the indexation of debt as well as the threshold for repayment. Regardless you are creating a rediculous debt burden where we already face some of the highest rates of private debt in the world. With constantly rising prices, that sounds like a great way to kill future innovation, create skills shortages, lose IP overseas and in fact turn HECS debt into a huge burden for the state as fewer repay and those with the skills leave.
Likewise if you are right and it does turn people away then wealth and not competence will be the limiting factor. So not the best and the brightest, instead the most financially privaleged.
- Apr 4, 2013
- 13,670
- 16,890
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
They all have psycho outbursts.
- Oct 20, 2014
- 18,390
- 19,525
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
I knew I saw you putting your hand up in favour of the $5 or $7.50 copayment fee to go towards medical research?
- Banned
- #365
WutI knew I saw you putting your hand up in favour of the $5 or $7.50 copayment fee to go towards medical research?
- Banned
- #366
What exorbitant welfare?
There is ample money for Australia to invest in its future via research and public education..
and the test case they selected was found to be bullshit
enjoy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Generations#Cubillo_and_Gunner
NTRabbit
Brownlow Medallist
HECS has a cap, once you hit it the government will no longer allow you to use it until you work to pay some back. The sandstones in particular would simply price many of their degrees beyond the ability for them to be entirely funded up front by HECS, meaning only those wealthy enough to pay a significant portion up front could afford them.
- Sep 21, 2009
- 16,736
- 14,940
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Isn't the next step to privatise HECS debt?
Would be a pretty good plan to help the rich get richer.
- Aug 16, 2006
- 5,094
- 6,695
- AFL Club
- Geelong
He's a fixer. He fixes things.
- Banned
- #371
Students should pay a fair price for their education. Currently there are TOO MANY graduates, something needs to be done to ensure only the best and brightest go to uni and the others follow different employment opportunities (which there are many).
The current threshold is 53k which is a lot of money. If you are not wasteful with your money then making the yearly repayments should be a breeze. It is hardly a ridiculous debt burden if you aren't WASTEFUL. With people willing to spend thousands of new laptops, phones, holidays each year then they have ample ability to pay for their education. Why does everyone not want to pay? I don't get it. Simple make everyone repay their loans no matter where they live so running off overseas to ripoff your country is no longer an option. There is currently an OVERSUPPLY of graduates, if graduates could be linked to industry that would be perfect.
Wealth has NOTHING to do with it. Unless you are assuming mummy and daddy are paying for little Johnnny.
- Banned
- #372
Nice rant.
Students already pay far too much back in HECS.
They were also looking at lowering the threshold to 35k.
Honestly the system needs a huge cash injection. Further subsidies and larger research allotments.
If Australia wants to compete that is the only way.
- Banned
- #373
Currently we pay less than 50% of our education?
I repay a HECS debt and no it is not too much if you go in study your degree and leave, if you rack up multiple degrees or keep changing your mind then it might be different.
Why can't this cash injection come from people once they have left and are earning money?
I repay a HECS debt and no it is not too much if you go in study your degree and leave, if you rack up multiple degrees or keep changing your mind then it might be different.
Why can't this cash injection come from people once they have left and are earning money?
- Banned
- #374
Because the debt burden would become extreme if we have increased fees, a lower threshold for repayment and a change to the indexation of interest.
We are already one of the most indebted nations in the world, high youth unemployment, increased casualisation and rising prices mean many cant afford things like a home or car, and those that do are less able to consume. That means a slowdown for the service sector and lower tax take.
If we keep turning public debt into private debt, things are going to go pear shaped.
Universities need large increases in funding from the government if we hope to compete with other developed countries, otherwise the brain drain will be substantial and innovation which is already an issue will plummet. We are already a country that lacks new growth areas and economic diversity..
- Banned
- #375
Its funny people rant about the massive burden when most kiddies managed to survive off Centrelink when they were studying, I am sure they will survive. Hell it might even inspire them to earn more faster to get rid of it.
If we got rid of the green slime
Farming
Live Stock
Fishing
Forestry
Mining
International Education
Tourism
Should be driving Australia forward.
Throwing money at 'research' that is just sold for peanuts is not a great idea.
If we got rid of the green slime
Farming
Live Stock
Fishing
Forestry
Mining
International Education
Tourism
Should be driving Australia forward.
Throwing money at 'research' that is just sold for peanuts is not a great idea.
