HECS/HELP debts incurred before 2014 to suffer interest after 2020 - fair?

[Smiling Buddha]

Scotland You are one of the better posters on bigfooty and I will endeavour to put together an appropriate reply to your post within the next few days. In the interim I have to point out that this isn't simply a matter of the impost on any individual student, it is the giant stride this measure signifies towards normalising large debt in young adulthood for nothing other than the credentials to get a job.

 

[medusala]

In the interim I have to point out that this isn't simply a matter of the impost on any individual student, it is the giant stride this measure signifies towards normalising large debt in young adulthood for nothing other than the credentials to get a job.

Madness is it not? Governments put students in to debt to get a job that 30 years ago they didn't need a degree for.

Clever country? Yeah nah.

 

[Rob]

times change and with that so does policy.

I guess, I don't see why a person who didn't use the university system (for what ever reason - choice or grades) and who earns less than me should pay for my education.

I would prefer more resources be allocated to the most needy like the disabled and mental health. Do you think able bodied wealthy university graduates should have their lives subsidised and have resources allocated to them over the most needy?

Sure invest in people's education but it is exactly that........an investment. Like any investment, you expect a return which can then pay for a sustainable education system and the most needy.

It's also an investment in the country as a whole. Higher education levels result in greater productivity, greater incomes, lower crime rates, higher life expectancies and higher standards of living. It benefits everyone, even the poorly educated.

I think you could easily argue that the proposed changes are fair, but that doesn't necessarily make them right. It's like charging full economic cost for public transport. Sure it's fair, but I still wouldn't agree with it.

 

[Power Raid]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-21/student-debt-climbs-to-record-26-billion/4473386

$26B 18 months ago. Does anyone have a more up to date figure?

 

[Power Raid]

It's also an investment in the country as a whole. Higher education levels result in greater productivity, greater incomes, lower crime rates, higher life expectancies and higher standards of living. It benefits everyone, even the poorly educated.

I think you could easily argue that the proposed changes are fair, but that doesn't necessarily make them right. It's like charging full economic cost for public transport. Sure it's fair, but I still wouldn't agree with it.

so you have no problem taking resources from the disabled and mental health and giving it to smart capable people?

 

[Rob]

so you have no problem taking resources from the disabled and mental health and giving it to smart capable people?

If not for the smart capable people going to university there wouldn't be anywhere near as many resources for the disabled and mental health in the first place.

 

[Power Raid]

If not for the smart capable people going to university there wouldn't be anywhere near as many resources for the disabled and mental health in the first place.

ahh that makes sense. we will have no smart capable people going forward who are capable of looking after themselves let alone others.

we might as well all give up then.


alternatively it will galvanise our youth and we will have the most capable and smart people graduate whilst the freeloading lifestylers will give up and open up won't valuable seats in uni. sounds like a win win.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

so you have no problem taking resources from the disabled and mental health and giving it to smart capable people?

It's not an either or choice.

If not for the smart capable people going to university there wouldn't be anywhere near as many resources for the disabled and mental health in the first place.

Indeed, however, these cuts will disproportionately effect smart and capable students who may be struggling with disability or mental illness, a point power raid refuses to consider.

ahh that makes sense. we will have no smart capable people going forward who are capable of looking after themselves let alone others.

we might as well all give up then.


alternatively it will galvanise our youth and we will have the most capable and smart people graduate whilst the freeloading lifestylers will give up and open up won't valuable seats in uni. sounds like a win win.

This is absolute nonsense.

 

[Power Raid]

It's not an either or choice.

Indeed, however, these cuts will disproportionately effect smart and capable students who may be struggling with disability or mental illness, a point power raid refuses to consider.

This is absolute nonsense.

rubbish

This is a two step process.

this budget is restoring order to the commonwealth and the states. the commonwealth should not be involved in education, health, police (excluding the feds) etc. These services should be managed by one level of government being the states. The only reason why the feds got involved in these activities was to 1) not hand back the $ to the states after WW2 was over (income tax was a state tax pre WW2 and was handed over to the feds to fund the war). 2) get involved in fun things to make them relevant to voters 3) bigger budgets means bigger pork barrels

The first step is the structural reform of the feds limiting their activities to what the should have been doing.

The second step is about funding, if we stop wasting money on middle class welfare and perfectly capable young smart able bodied people we will have the resources to look after the most needy. The feds should hand a bigger amount of their revenue back to the states and of course allow the states to increase GST.

Remember we have seen governments value a cash hand out to buy televisions, pink bats and set top boxes over our mental health. Once we clear the structural problems and the debt, we can provide the states with the funds to look after our most needy. Or would you prefer another set top box?


This is actually good for australia and good for labor.

 

[Rob]

ahh that makes sense. we will have no smart capable people going forward who are capable of looking after themselves let alone others.

we might as well all give up then.


alternatively it will galvanise our youth and we will have the most capable and smart people graduate whilst the freeloading lifestylers will give up and open up won't valuable seats in uni. sounds like a win win.

It's not about that, it's about ensuring that those that want an education have as few barriers in the way to doing so, because the country as a whole benefits. Education is the solution to escaping the poverty trap, and the greater the financial disincentive to study the more that's going to effect the lower classes.

I accept the reasoning behind it though - people doing gender studies and other equally useless degrees subsidised by the commonwealth doesn't really benefit either the student or the country, and the idea is that people will hesitate to do those sorts of courses if it means a larger debt at the end of the day. But I reckon in the main that those sorts of courses are in the tiny minority.

 

[Scotland]

Power Raid, this is a pie chart showing federal govt spending:

In the total scheme of the federal budget, higher education is very small bikkies.

There are definite opportunities for improvement, but it's far from a giant black hole sucking away needed funds.

 

[Power Raid]

Power Raid, this is a pie chart showing federal govt spending:

In the total scheme of the federal budget, higher education is very small bikkies.

There are definite opportunities for improvement, but it's far from a giant black hole sucking away needed funds.

we should be able to cut 70% of that budget from the feds and hand it back to the states who should be running those programs

 

[Power Raid]

It's not about that, it's about ensuring that those that want an education have as few barriers in the way to doing so, because the country as a whole benefits. Education is the solution to escaping the poverty trap, and the greater the financial disincentive to study the more that's going to effect the lower classes.

I accept the reasoning behind it though - people doing gender studies and other equally useless degrees subsidised by the commonwealth doesn't really benefit either the student or the country, and the idea is that people will hesitate to do those sorts of courses if it means a larger debt at the end of the day. But I reckon in the main that those sorts of courses are in the tiny minority.

I spent the morning talking to some libs and labs and we discussed huge possibilities with the "carrot and stick".

The stick is obviously the repayment of fees and this forces the student to consider the economic benefits when committing to the investment of a course. It also helps motivate the student to study as they know the job market is competitive and the best way to mitigate the risk of not getting a job is get good grades. Essentially motivating the student to get the most from a degree.

The carrot is the opportunity to study and only pay back the fees when they are financially benefiting from the education. Further, it was discussed fees could be waived if they worked in the country or other need. This is the perfect way to get doctors and other much needed skills into the bush. This has the opportunity to be nation building rather than pork barreling our cities.

 

[The Speaker]

alternatively it will galvanise our youth and we will have the most capable and smart people graduate whilst the freeloading lifestylers will give up and open up won't valuable seats in uni. sounds like a win win.

What an incredibly myopic view of our youth.

 

[HPKS]

I have no intention of going to uni but have started saving for my son and am wondering will we get the situation where it is cheaper to go to another country with cheaper fees than here in Australia? Just like we have foreign students coming here. I have no confidence in any government whether its lab, lib, Nat or green to do the right thing by ALL of Australia.

 

[HPKS]

Education is only for the rich. The Liberals have always believed that.

We have changed the TAFE fee structure so much now that it is so high that most do not go to TAFE and choose uni instead. Basically the higher education system is almost privatised by the back door.

 

[HPKS]

why is it unreasonable that someone pays back their education costs that society paid for them (only when they find their feet)? surely contributing back, so the next generation can benefit from the same scheme is reasonable and sustainable.

I partly agree just not at high rate. If the baby boomers had a system like this and had to pay back their higher education fees we may actually have had a better higher education system. But alas just like most things the entitlement generation got it all for free & think everyone else should pay.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

rubbish

This is a two step process.

this budget is restoring order to the commonwealth and the states. the commonwealth should not be involved in education, health, police (excluding the feds) etc. These services should be managed by one level of government being the states. The only reason why the feds got involved in these activities was to 1) not hand back the $ to the states after WW2 was over (income tax was a state tax pre WW2 and was handed over to the feds to fund the war). 2) get involved in fun things to make them relevant to voters 3) bigger budgets means bigger pork barrels

The first step is the structural reform of the feds limiting their activities to what the should have been doing.

The second step is about funding, if we stop wasting money on middle class welfare and perfectly capable young smart able bodied people we will have the resources to look after the most needy. The feds should hand a bigger amount of their revenue back to the states and of course allow the states to increase GST.

Remember we have seen governments value a cash hand out to buy televisions, pink bats and set top boxes over our mental health. Once we clear the structural problems and the debt, we can provide the states with the funds to look after our most needy. Or would you prefer another set top box?


This is actually good for australia and good for labor.

This is bordering on incomprehensible jibberish.

There isn't even a consistent line of logic to your position, let alone any supporting evidence for such an argument, not a shred. It's like vomit in post form, if you aren't trolling, you have to be drinking.

 

[Scotland]

we should be able to cut 70% of that budget from the feds and hand it back to the states who should be running those programs

And how does that affect the overall revenue vs expenditure vs debt relationship?

 

[Power Raid]

And how does that affect the overall revenue vs expenditure vs debt relationship?

it doesn't by itself but it restores order to how the commonwealth should work without the creep of the feds.

once done it open up the debate about revenue and expenditure.

1) there is little doubt that there is too much waste by governments but rather than cut expenditure we need to ween middle class off welfare and give it to those most in need
2) the debate about revenue would be fixed by replacing a transaction tax on property and replacing it with a strategic annual rent and revisiting GST

 

[Power Raid]

I partly agree just not at high rate. If the baby boomers had a system like this and had to pay back their higher education fees we may actually have had a better higher education system. But alas just like most things the entitlement generation got it all for free & think everyone else should pay.

your right the entitlement generation was the baby boomers. The question is do we fix it or do we just go down with the ship?

 

[Power Raid]

What an incredibly myopic view of our youth.

why do you say that?

 

[Power Raid]

This is bordering on incomprehensible jibberish.

There isn't even a consistent line of logic to your position, let alone any supporting evidence for such an argument, not a shred. It's like vomit in post form, if you aren't trolling, you have to be drinking.

lol

why are you so scared of a smaller federal government and larger state governments?

did you not learn anything from the GFC?

 

[HPKS]

your right the entitlement generation was the baby boomers. The question is do we fix it or do we just go down with the ship?

Whether we like it or not we need or come up with a system that is fair across the board that benefits our country & our citizens. Not one that benefits a parties voters. We need the best & the brightest to go onto higher education not just the wealthiest. Its a tough balance but we need to come up with something, what always worries me is when parties come up with a working party to fix the problem & come up with solutions they just drop a heap of mates in the group & a few old party hacks.

 

[Power Raid]

Whether we like it or not we need or come up with a system that is fair across the board that benefits our country & our citizens. Not one that benefits a parties voters. We need the best & the brightest to go onto higher education not just the wealthiest. Its a tough balance but we need to come up with something, what always worries me is when parties come up with a working party to fix the problem & come up with solutions they just drop a heap of mates in the group & a few old party hacks.

you do know HECS is designed so that poor people never pay it back right?