-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AusGAF 2.0 - Twice the price, a year late but still moving forward
- Thread starter VOOK
- Start date
- Status
time to open a social can of worms.
Should a 55 year old person be allowed to go to university and get hecs
in my opinion, no.
I am all for people following their dreams and all but if they are 55 there is a number of factors here
1. They probably wont' ever repay the hecs as they won't be in the career long enough to do so
2. They are costing a young person a spot who could contribute to teh economy for 30+ years
3. The point of university is to gain a good start in your career and have good job prospects really. If you are on the verge of retirement should you be there. Well yes, no issue with you being there but the point of hecs is to let people get university education young without having such a massive bill like the US. By improving the education of young people you are improving the intelligence of the community and hopefully over time the economy and economic prospects of the country. Therefore, tax payers money well spent. By funding someone on the verge of retirement age, well....
it also tends to be these 55 yos that are annoying in lectures etc.....
Should a 55 year old person be allowed to go to university and get hecs
in my opinion, no.
I am all for people following their dreams and all but if they are 55 there is a number of factors here
1. They probably wont' ever repay the hecs as they won't be in the career long enough to do so
2. They are costing a young person a spot who could contribute to teh economy for 30+ years
3. The point of university is to gain a good start in your career and have good job prospects really. If you are on the verge of retirement should you be there. Well yes, no issue with you being there but the point of hecs is to let people get university education young without having such a massive bill like the US. By improving the education of young people you are improving the intelligence of the community and hopefully over time the economy and economic prospects of the country. Therefore, tax payers money well spent. By funding someone on the verge of retirement age, well....
it also tends to be these 55 yos that are annoying in lectures etc.....
Speaking as a tutor and lecturer... Questions are good. Please ask them. It not only shows you are listening to the material, but it lets us know what has been misunderstood, so that we can improve future presentations of the same information. However, I will add that while trivial (e.g., on the pronunciation of 'wav'), long or only peripherally related questions should still be asked, wait until after the lecture as you do like a real prat to the rest of the class if you get a reputation for asking these.
And yes, it is unfortunate when we get a little side-tracked with strange stories, but that is mainly an attempt to provide a little variety to keep people from falling asleep, one of the biggest fears you have when you are presenting potentially boring information.
And yes, it is unfortunate when we get a little side-tracked with strange stories, but that is mainly an attempt to provide a little variety to keep people from falling asleep, one of the biggest fears you have when you are presenting potentially boring information.
jambo said:
yes
but is the Australian Government getting value for money by funding very mature age students.
I guess it comes down to the idealogy that they employ. Is university something to further the learning of the person and improve their life and who cares if they don't pay it back
or
improve the economy, we expect the money back, and you better bloody get a good job
i'd say the latter is the way the GVT views it....
Some Uni students, even the ones straight out of high school will never pay the money back because they won't earn over whatever the limit is today, $35-40k or something.
Every person has the opportunity and I'd wager that someone who's 55 has a better chance to actually complete a degree than someone out of high school that still isn't 100% sure their degree is what they want to do.
Edit: I'm not generalising that all young people drop out, just saying someone older has a better idea of what they want to do than some of the younger people.
Every person has the opportunity and I'd wager that someone who's 55 has a better chance to actually complete a degree than someone out of high school that still isn't 100% sure their degree is what they want to do.
Edit: I'm not generalising that all young people drop out, just saying someone older has a better idea of what they want to do than some of the younger people.
Fredescu said:
don't disagree this but when the government is whinging (last year) that not many people are paying back hecs then they need to look in their own backyard and how they administer shit before they go all nutbars about it
frawd its a good point that a 55yo is more than likely to complete than an 18 yo.
Planet_JASE
Member
Touche!jambo said:
Maybe it needs to not be thought in terms of money but in terms of bettering the nation. It's probably better for a nation to have a government that supports the expansion and improvement of knowledge/skills regardless of age.Choc said:
It's that sort of support that empowers a country to continually grow and change for the better.
We don't ask the poor to pay back their POOR Debt like HECS? If you just give the poor money how will they learn?jambo said:
The farmer still sleeps.Choc said:
Down by the stables, silence prevails. The horses standing in slumber gently sway within their fenced home, a light dew settling upon their hide. A drove of pigs lay wallowing in the mud, filthy yet happy and content. But a single calf is awake, and simply chews the cud. Along the hedges, a solitary cat prowls through the undergrowth and looks to the horizon for where she knows the sun will soon rise.
The silence is pierced.
Down by the chicken coop, panic and confusion reigns. The noise is shrill and undulating - not necessarily loud, but bombastic and unending. The unnatural cry seems to seep into every cranny about the plains, filling the world with noise. A rapturous cacophony of arrhythmic shrieks rolls across the valley as a flock of ducks abandon their home by the lake to seek refuge, flying into the morning sky naught to be seen again. At the farmhouse, a light suddenly fills the window.
From where was this unearthly noise born?
-
The chick closes his beak, and Mother Hen enjoys a brief moment of sanity as silence reclaims the coop. Casting his gaze too and fro, the chick seeks some sign of acknowledgment from his feathered brethren. His mind asks - Were these not the sounds I should be making?. Brother chicks heart beats like a drum, the fear having claimed him. With their pecking of scraps having been so rudely and abruptly interrupted, the older hens gaze discriminately upon this bold, would-be rooster.
Among the coop, the many siblings' eyes are upon the chick - how could they not be after such an unexpected and shocking display? The chick remains perplexed - Certainly they must have heard me?. Oblivious to the penetrating arrogance of his cry, the chick calls out yet again, louder and more obnoxious than before.
Noise and chaos returns to the farm.
Again and again, the sound shakes the hillsides-
Choc a doodle do!
Choc a doodle do!
The other chicks are confused - how to respond to this? Many try to shield their ears with their benign wings and return to their pecking, but the noise remains. The newer of the kin are uncertain if this is the norm and attempt to join in and respond in this strange new language, but their voices are drowned. Some abandon the coop seeking reprieve, yet others remain and stare without understanding at the rooster chick, listless and perturbed. This is their home now, and their home is noise.
Choc a doodle do!
Choc a doodle do!
Choc a doodle do!
Jeez, take a joke.
Was just typing up something similar, couldn't have put it better myself.
I don't want to live in a society where the government dictates which citizens are allowed access to things like education.
I know, I was simply talking about value for money and how it's not the only thing driving govt programs.
Planet_JASE said:
Was just typing up something similar, couldn't have put it better myself.
I don't want to live in a society where the government dictates which citizens are allowed access to things like education.
Planet_JASE said:
I know, I was simply talking about value for money and how it's not the only thing driving govt programs.
time to open a social can of worms.
Should a person under 30 years old be allowed to claim rebates on health care back from Medicare?
in my opinion, no.
I am all for people following living a healthy life and all but if they are under 30 there is a number of factors here
1. They probably wont' ever pay taxes because they don't earn enough money to do so yet
2. They are costing an elderly person their GP appointment that they need for life-saving treatment
3. The point of modern medicine is to extend the life expectancy of the country's population and if you're young do you're already getting the maximum life expectancy. Well yes, no issue with you being there but the point of Medicare is to make sure people can afford health care for expensive treatments without a massive bill like the US. By improving the health of the elderly you are improving the quality of life for the young people who would otherwise have to pay for their care and treatment themselves. Therefore, tax payers money well spent. By funding someone who is young and healthy enough to not need it, well....
it also tends to be these 25 yos that are annoying in waiting rooms with their mobile phones etc.....
Should a person under 30 years old be allowed to claim rebates on health care back from Medicare?
in my opinion, no.
I am all for people following living a healthy life and all but if they are under 30 there is a number of factors here
1. They probably wont' ever pay taxes because they don't earn enough money to do so yet
2. They are costing an elderly person their GP appointment that they need for life-saving treatment
3. The point of modern medicine is to extend the life expectancy of the country's population and if you're young do you're already getting the maximum life expectancy. Well yes, no issue with you being there but the point of Medicare is to make sure people can afford health care for expensive treatments without a massive bill like the US. By improving the health of the elderly you are improving the quality of life for the young people who would otherwise have to pay for their care and treatment themselves. Therefore, tax payers money well spent. By funding someone who is young and healthy enough to not need it, well....
it also tends to be these 25 yos that are annoying in waiting rooms with their mobile phones etc.....
DualShadow
Member
Bernbaum said:
*slow clap*
Planet_JASE
Member
I like the thought that a government says "You want to learn XYZ? Fuck yeah, go for it!" rather than "Hmmmmmm... You're going to stop working soon so you're no use to us. DENIED!!!jambo said:
No, I was agreeing with you. My attempt at a sarcastic supportive remark was many fail.jambo said:
Agyar said:
this is going to go on a while isn't it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
you guys are great at straw mans.
Perhaps a better question is if only one person out of the following two could be funded by the government with your tax payer dollars who would you pick
18 year old high achiever, 90+ UAI dux of the school etc etc
or
55 year old, coming to end of a successful career, wanting to learn some things and go to Uni.
so you would give a spot to a 55 year old over an 18 year old? I reckon 90% of you would give it to the 18 year old.
If all things are equal sure fund the 55 year old but if there is a decision to be made, somethings gotta give. There is only a certain number of HECS funded spots per year.
ahhahahaha fred
i totally agree they need to be taxed for digging our shit up
ok lets drop the topic, you guys made your feelings clear. I get that education should be free for everyone, complete but if governments have to make decisions then tough ones need to be made
bah without me ausgaf would be boring and you know that
i totally agree they need to be taxed for digging our shit up
ok lets drop the topic, you guys made your feelings clear. I get that education should be free for everyone, complete but if governments have to make decisions then tough ones need to be made
bah without me ausgaf would be boring and you know that
Its so terrible how scared governments can be of doing the right thing... cause of the votes.
Every government knows, every economist knows, everyone knows negative gearing is BS. Yet nothing is done, the moment it is raised, hell breaks loose and it is quickly dropped down the memory hole >.<
How does something like 'mean testing' become a dirty word or thought? The idea that government should help those that need it has become passe, now its one in all in, everyone wants 'their share'...
In fact the only place where mean testing is celebrated is in gaining the piddly benefits/pensions >.> but try to mean test the health care rebate, and your engaging in class warfare.
Every government knows, every economist knows, everyone knows negative gearing is BS. Yet nothing is done, the moment it is raised, hell breaks loose and it is quickly dropped down the memory hole >.<
How does something like 'mean testing' become a dirty word or thought? The idea that government should help those that need it has become passe, now its one in all in, everyone wants 'their share'...
In fact the only place where mean testing is celebrated is in gaining the piddly benefits/pensions >.> but try to mean test the health care rebate, and your engaging in class warfare.
Fredescu said:
Unfortunately yes, and no government in this current day and age will risk it. I know it's naive (and it's certainly not something I believe in), but I was brought up on the notion that the government was something for the people's greater good, not their own.
markot said:
The Democrats were openly against it, fat lot of good it did them. It's a sad state of affairs when for people to be considered in a good position to buy a house you need 2 above average incomes and a good deposit. I believe affordable house prices are meant to be around 2.5-3 times the average wage, in this country because of negative gearing (and yes, other factors) we are looking at house prices that are over 7 times the average wage.
Just look at the mining tax thingy, that was one industry, yet it was able to wage a huge campaign against it. With negative gearing you go up against real estate, property developers, construction, and the upper/middle classes who can partake in negative gearing.
Its political suicide, yet Australia is one of the few countries that actually has this stupid system.
A party should fight over this, reason with the public and give it a chance. The GST came through (Barely), Howard believed in and fought for it. Now governments of all stripes, including the Howard government later on, is concerned with one thing, and one thing only. Focus groups, polls, and winning.
How great would it be to see a party stand for something? I mean look at the 'carbon tax' instead of fighting for it, believing in it, we get 'oh those greens made us do it' >_>....
And the democrats imploded themselves, sad that it happened, and the GST actually had abit to do with >.>, although much more to do with the terrible leadership and infighting.
Its political suicide, yet Australia is one of the few countries that actually has this stupid system.
A party should fight over this, reason with the public and give it a chance. The GST came through (Barely), Howard believed in and fought for it. Now governments of all stripes, including the Howard government later on, is concerned with one thing, and one thing only. Focus groups, polls, and winning.
How great would it be to see a party stand for something? I mean look at the 'carbon tax' instead of fighting for it, believing in it, we get 'oh those greens made us do it' >_>....
And the democrats imploded themselves, sad that it happened, and the GST actually had abit to do with >.>, although much more to do with the terrible leadership and infighting.
BanShunsaku
Member
I know I'm about an hour lttp, but holy shit Bern. :lol
Choc will tell you it's not negative gearing/CGT concessions inflating the housing market but foreign investors buying all the houses, because that's what the newspapers say when they bother to write something that isn't straight off a press release from Real Estate investors groups.
It is pick on choc day, right?
Did they just thaw you out? What happened was, someone suggested it, and the multi billion dollar industry spent millions on ads aimed at scaring the shit out of Joe Public, and it worked. They managed to convince people that the multi billion dollars worth of profits they're making on a limited resource should not contribute towards improving the country. That's some scary shit.Ventron said:
no negative gearing is having a significant effect on house prices and it is a load of shit.
Every economist says it is bad....
problem is if you get rid of it, the rental market will implode and all investors will sell out
in EU, interest paid on owner occupier housing is tax deductible
so negative gearing but for home owners not investors. Its a much better solution and helps people get into houses
Every economist says it is bad....
problem is if you get rid of it, the rental market will implode and all investors will sell out
in EU, interest paid on owner occupier housing is tax deductible
so negative gearing but for home owners not investors. Its a much better solution and helps people get into houses
Fredescu said:
There were also members in the ALP cabinet who hated the mining tax as announced but kept quiet for obvious reasons.
And you're assuming that those profits don't go towards improving the country. Mining companies have done a hell of a lot for rural communities where they've set up, a lot of towns completely rely on nearby mines. States get huge royalties already, it's just that they piss it up the wall (at least here in QLD they do).
Planet_JASE
Member
I loved the argument that if we taxed their profits they would no longer find it profitable to continue mining here. Hang on, so we only take part of your profits but that no longer makes it worth your while?Fredescu said:
What's even scarier is that people thought that they would leave and never come back. I don't think I'm unreasonable thinking that companies would rather take reduced profits over vacating a country and letting and someone else come in and exploit our land.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked