Printable View
Guys, we're nitpicking now. The economy is changing, as are jobs. More and more education and training is necessary and we are having to pay more and more for that. Education is an investment in the entire economy, it's not unreasonable for taxpayers to foot the bill.
The value of education....
Australia's car industry v Germany's car industry.
Germany faces many of the same challenges in production as Australia. Rather than trying to pay workers less and squeeze value it decided to prioritise innovation and technology. Result - Germany's car industry is pretty much the gold standard and provides jobs, revenue and prestige. On the other hand, Australia's dumbed down version is unsustainable.
I did state that it was my own opinion, and based on my definition of success. Sure, DH and I could do trades or lower our goals to suit a lower projected income (because jobs that require tertiary degrees generally pay higher than those that don't) but that doesn't meet my personal definition of success. Not trying to degrade anyone at all.:
Clearly I wasn't being eloquent enough for you to understand my point and you only quoted part of my post which has taken it out of context. Do you really believe that I think that way? That I would think you're not worthy or valid of further education or career prospects? I'm trying to think of possible issues and discussion points that are going to make it harder and things that the Govt may perceive as problem areas that need *fixing*:
When I said this
I refer to the issue of HECS/Commonwealth supported places as a whole. The Govt isn't sitting back and looking at individuals and what they are studying and why. They are sitting there looking at their bottom line and where they can cut spending. If they perceive that the amount of funds being used by HECS/CSPs is too high, then they are going to do what they can to cut it back. What if they decide that each uni can only have a set number of HECs/CSPs for any given degree? who determines who gets the CSP and who has to pay full-fee? How do they determine who gets the place? Does the 20 year old doing a degree for their profession get the place or does the person studying for self-interest get the place? Is it on campus or off-campus students? This is where we are at. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with either view and I certainly don't think it's fair no matter which way you look at it, but it's looking pretty likely that we will get to the point where there are a finite number of places where people can access HECS or get a CSP. And that's where it's going to be likely that they will look at who is doing a degree for their career and who is doing it for self-interest.:
I'm all for learning for the love of learning and furthering education, but it's those 'just for fun' degrees that are only done for self-interest as opposed to being career driven that complicate the situation by using up available funds.
Cass, but funds I don't mean direct uni funds, but govt funds available for HECs and CSPs.
Just butting in here with a bit of a side question. Sooo.. isn't it a little counter productive to say university fees can be set by uni (which inevitably means they will increase) and yet be all about debt reduction? Wouldn't that mean future HECS/help debts will be more due to cost of fees going up?
Also, I do have a degree and don't get paid for the equivalent. Maybe that makes me stupid and unsuccessful? LOL.
My biggest issue with the budget is to do with the health factor and the impact it is going to grossly impact on our already crowded hospitals...
In perspective (I go to a bulk billing GP) if it was the $7 in the last two weeks I would have paid $63... That's not including my medication which I'd I actually brought all of it would be well ove the $100 mark...
For my patients who already struggle to pay for their medications an extra $5 per medication is huge - especially when they are on 12 different types of meds!!! That's an extra 60 a month!
I'll predict what will happen - people will not buy their medications or skip them to make then
M last longer, they wont go to the doctor because of the cost involved - and will end up in hospital, so instead of going to the doctor now and getting antibiotics for a chest infection, they will leave it it will turn to pneumonia and they will end up in hospital for. A week or two and cost the country thousands...
This budget choice us going to cost us HUGE!!!!
Is that the fault of the Govt or the car companies? Why should our Govt prop up multi-nationals who can't get their act together?:
The private sector isn't always the best place to drive research and innovation. They are concerned primarily with the bottom line, whereas research and innovation in the long-term interests of the nation might not bring obvious financial benefit for some time. In the corporate world, 12 months is long term. For a government, we need to look ahead into the decades.
There were some efforts at innovation in the car industry in Australia, but with funding pulled it all fell to bits. It is a bit different, being transplants rather than home-grown industries, but still. I'm not sure whether we lead anywhere, do we? You'd think we'd have a great opportunity to lead in things like alternate energy, for instance, but the Abbott government seems intent on destroying it. And with cuts to things like the CSIRO it's hard not to see an anti-innovation agenda.
HELP is already capped::
'For 2014, the FEE‑HELP limit is $120,002 for students undertaking medicine, dentistry and veterinary science courses (as defined in the Higher Education Support Act 2003), and $96,000 for all other students.'
and
'The FEE-HELP limit is a lifetime limit and is not reset or ‘topped up’ by any repayments that you make.'
studyassist.gov.au/sites/studyassist/helppayingmyfees/fee-help/pages/fee-help-#HowMuchCanIBorrow
I don't agree with companies effectively holding the Govt to ransom though by saying if they don't get supported by the Govt then they will just take operations out of the country. That achieves nothing. I get what you're saying though.
Without getting too conspiracy theorist, is it entirely the Govts fault that we aren't leading the way in alternate energy? Or is it the dinosaurs of the industry keeping it down?
I'm not suggesting that the government should prop up multi-nationals or subsidise car companies. My point is that a culture of education, creativity and innovation created a brilliant car industry successful whereas the car industry that failed to encourage education and innovation failed.:
The budget is a statement about values and culture as well as an economic document. This budget and previous ones demonstrates that education and creativity is not valued by our government. If it isn't valued by our government or culture it is not available to our corporations.
FWIW, the ute/pick-up truck was invented by an Australian ;)
yes but that info is the pre-budget info - this is on the studyassist budget info page:
:
Removal of the FEE-HELP limit
The FEE-HELP limit will be removed and there will be no limit on the amount of FEE-HELP and VET FEE‑HELP assistance that a student can access. This change will apply for all students from 1 January 2016.
Come on, they're hand in hand in this....
And what Zazou said.
Does anyone know when all the proposed things are being reviewed? When do we find out what things have gone through? Is there a timeline?
Parliament is currently sitting, they are debating it now. They usually sit for 2 weeks, I don't know what will happen if they can't agree. Anyone else know?
I asked Professor this, and he said there's the possibility of a double dissolution and new election, but only if the current government decides that's the best way to end the stalemate. Otherwise they hafta negotiate to get it through. Personally I doubt the current government would be dumb enough to send Australia to the polls again ;)
I expect min June, that is just going by the communications going out from the ATO with regards to the tax table changes.
This is driving me nuts. TA is still waltzing around telling everyone his budget is going to be passed. Really? Does he really think that of he acts like its business as usual that the cross benchers will roll over? Apparently a couple o weeks back he was doing a bit of double dissolution talk (? thinking it will put the wind up the independents, who presumably stand less of a chance of being reelected, but I'm not sure how strongly they really want to be there - I can't imagine Mr Motor Enthusiast has got a high level of life enjoyment right now...). But that talk has stopped now. The budget is so overwhelmingly, behemothly bad on every front, does he really think a pinch and a tuck here and there & a few sweet deals will get it through? Will it get through? Those deals would have to be pretty awesome to offset the amount everyone will be hating on you for voting with the government!! Think: GST - Australian democrats - that was pretty much the beginning of the end, right there.