NationStates Jolt Archive

The Australian government from July 1st next year will take away University students right to association by reintroducing a compulsory fee for all students to pay regardless of need or use.

While they are keeping the so called voluntary student unionism, this is but a back door way to give student unions a way to collect money off students to use for themselves regardless of the needs of the individual students.

Compulsory student unionism was abolished with the last government as a way of giving students a vital freedom of association. Which allowed them to choose wether they wanted to be a part of a union or not.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24591830-2702,00.html

While I was always aware that this government who opposes basic rights such as freedom of association was going to introduce it, I always hoped that I wouldn't have to deal with it. I do find it funny how they say that CSU was introduced because of an ideology which is true as freedom of association is a basic liberal belief, however, this entire program and the fact that they want to bring back VSU is just an ideological proposal in itself.

So, is the government doing the right thing here, or is it just a case of this government taking away the rights of the individual.

Some associations do complain how much less money they have and how their finances have gone into ruin etc. We (by that I mean my soccer club) were faced with the same problem as the union decided we would be the first to lose our funding, however, unlike other associations which still bitch and moan about it (something I have to hear every time I have to go to one of the Clubs and association meetings), we took more responsibility for our finances and organised them taking us to be the most profitable club in the entire league.

I would rather have this $250 in my pocket and spend it on goods and services that I need rather than stuff I don't need or for the council to waste the money on themselves (I don't know about other unis but my council spends a hell of a lot of money on themselves, maybe if they didn't do that, they would have more money to spend elsewhere instead of the continual bitching.)

MODEDIT: The title of this thread was changed somewhere around post 240 because it veered off onto yet another topic and I was tired of splitting threads off each time that happened. It was originally something like "Australian Government continues to take away freedoms".

Topics covered so far include: compulsory student unionism, unionism in general, the economy, Julia Gillard, the ABC child care centre collapse, the age at which children should begin formal education, the baby bonus ... MTC.

The new title is not intended to be derogatory. If my fellow citizens weren't whingeing about our government, of whatever party, I'd be worried. Dulce et Decorum Est Anti Patria Whingeri. -- Ardchoille, moderator.

Its is most certainly taking away personal freedoms. Anything that forces someone to do something is a violation of rights.

How is it taking away the right to assembly?

sounds more like a fee to use campus facilities and equiptment. but if your "debate club" wants to meet in a library or park and hold their functions, can your school stop them?

How is it taking away the right to assembly?

sounds more like a fee to use campus facilities and equiptment. but if your "debate club" wants to meet in a library or park and hold their functions, can your school stop them?

No it is taking away the right of students to associate with them by forcing them to pay for goods and services they don't need nor want wether you want to use the facilities and equipment or not.

SaintB, my sentiments exactly

No it is taking away the right of students to associate with them by forcing them to pay for goods and services they don't need nor want wether you want to use the facilities and equipment or not.

SaintB, my sentiments exactly

*shrugs* the article made it sound like the clubs are offical groups of the university. not just a 'gathering of friends'.

but the mandatory fee is what troubles me. if this was a fee rendered to offical school clubs and gatherings, then that's different, but applying it to all students reguardless... :(

*shrugs* the article made it sound like the clubs are offical groups of the university. not just a 'gathering of friends'.

but the mandatory fee is what troubles me. if this was a fee rendered to offical school clubs and gatherings, then that's different, but applying it to all students reguardless... :(

Yes the clubs our offical groups of the university, at mine they are managed through the clubs and societies association which is just a part of the council.

The mandotory fee is what I am not happy about either, and that is exactly right they making students pay the fee regardless of involvment, or the wants of the student.

I think it depends on how it is organised. This money goes to the university to pay for services that aren't directly related to the studies. Some of these will have to do with unions and political groups, most of it probably won't. And it will be the university administration which then distributes the funds - some will find that problematic, to me it makes it more likely that the money doesn't go the types of groups that run for union elections every year and annoy the shit out of me.

Basically, I used to be blissfully unaware of what student unions do. Then I became very aware during the campaign to fight VSU, at which point I decided they sucked. And then, when I had to write top-notch resumes and applications to try and get internships, I went to a union service that helped me. I would never have gotten my place in the summer without that help, which made me appreciate that the union is actually useful, even if the students trying to lead it are without exception idiots.

All that said, it will be incredibly tight for me money-wise next year, and I really don't see myself spending an extra $500 if I don't have to. So I have to admit that even though I now appreciate the union, I still wouldn't pay unless it was compulsory. Make of that what you will.

But I really don't think this is as fundamental as a freedom of association issue. Membership still isn't compulsory for example, it's just an attempt to work out a good system for funding these non-academic services.

This is annoying, but I'm still more worried about what Stephen Conroy's up to.

I think it depends on how it is organised. This money goes to the university to pay for services that aren't directly related to the studies. Some of these will have to do with unions and political groups, most of it probably won't. And it will be the university administration which then distributes the funds - some will find that problematic, to me it makes it more likely that the money doesn't go the types of groups that run for union elections every year and annoy the shit out of me.

Well yes provided it is a uni administration and not the council which spends quite a bit of money on themselves (at least at mine) then it will be better than the old system under CSU. It does seem to me to be a back door issue and I don't really see why I should have to fund people's gym membership when I can go elsewhere for cheaper or do my own workout. I would rather pay for what I need rather than pay for something I will never use.

Basically, I used to be blissfully unaware of what student unions do. Then I became very aware during the campaign to fight VSU, at which point I decided they sucked. And then, when I had to write top-notch resumes and applications to try and get internships, I went to a union service that helped me. I would never have gotten my place in the summer without that help, which made me appreciate that the union is actually useful, even if the students trying to lead it are without exception idiots.

Well, a lot of what the union does does indeed suck. As for the resumes yes they can be useful though at my uni they offer a separate program of paid professionals that is away from the uni which does all this as well as organising careers fairs, practice interviews etc. So while that may have helped you and other members at your uni, that doesn't really help me.

Here's an example of how I saved money (not entirely relevant to your post Leon but still); before VSU I was paying about $320 a year and I used hardly any of the services they offered why? Because I had no need to. I did use the gym for Indoor soccer for about 9 weeks (once a week) now that was free, though I had already paid the $320. When VSU was brought in I had that $320 in my pocket and still did the Indoor soccer season for 9 weeks. Now they had a big sign in the gym blasting the government for bringing it in and how prices had risen. Now I had to pay $7 a week to play Indoor. So 7 times 9 equals $63 compared to the $320 I would have had to pay.

All that said, it will be incredibly tight for me money-wise next year, and I really don't see myself spending an extra $500 if I don't have to. So I have to admit that even though I now appreciate the union, I still wouldn't pay unless it was compulsory. Make of that what you will.

Well, that is right I don't want to pay and will chuck it under my HECS debt saving me the $250 (as it only comes in halfway through next year) and once inflation has an impact that money will have a lesser real value. Most of what the union does isn't that great and many of the clubs and societies should really be looking at other funding anyway instead of still complaining about how they have been ruined. As I said we had to turn our club around but we have become the most profitable club in the league with a profit this year of $10000. Perhaps if this comes back in I should lobby the administration for some money.

But I really don't think this is as fundamental as a freedom of association issue. Membership still isn't compulsory for example, it's just an attempt to work out a good system for funding these non-academic services.

Well I fear it is a backdoor way of forcing people to join. It is a way of saying yes you can still chose if you want to join up or not but you still have to pay anyway. And their must be better ways of funding it rather than getting the money off people who aren't going to use the gyms or sign up to the debating club.

This is annoying, but I'm still more worried about what Stephen Conroy's up to.

Stephen Conroy has no idea what he is doing. Our Minister for broadband (despite during the election talking how the government wants to make our broadband comparable with the rest of the world) and he wants to slow our speed down, an article also cited someone as saying that websites such as facebook and Myspace could also be banned if it goes ahead.

Stephen Conroy has no idea what he is doing. Our Minister for broadband (despite during the election talking how the government wants to make our broadband comparable with the rest of the world) and he wants to slow our speed down, an article also cited someone as saying that websites such as facebook and Myspace could also be banned if it goes ahead.

what,thats bullshit

Funny.

Funny.

What's funny KoL?

what,thats bullshit

Which part? I will strongly argue the fact that our speeds would be slowed down with the filter in place.

Stephen Conroy has no idea what he is doing. Our Minister for broadband (despite during the election talking how the government wants to make our broadband comparable with the rest of the world) and he wants to slow our speed down, an article also cited someone as saying that websites such as facebook and Myspace could also be banned if it goes ahead.

Well they've been talking about blocking pro-anorexia websites despite them "being in a legal grey area".

Well they've been talking about blocking pro-anorexia websites despite them "being in a legal grey area".

Not to mention sites discussing euthansia.

Sounds like someone is whining. We have to pay mandatory student activity fees in the land of the free and the home of the brave, and quite frankly I don't care.

The internet censorship thing gets me pissed off.

This doesn't. I mean, seriously, this is no different to, say... council fees? Yeah, that'll do. Uni's struggled so much after the introduction of VSU. I'll admit to being no fan of the high level of politicisation in unions, but they provide some incredibly useful services, like accomodation assistance, childcare, food assistance, and so forth

I think this $250 is really no biggie. It's going to the UNI's, who decide where to distribute it. This is better than giving it to jumped up idiots who want to try and rule the world one student rally at a time. Hell, if you're cash strapped (as I imagine next year, when I'm at uni, I will be) you can defer it, HECS style. On top of the HECS debt, it's really not going to be all that much.

I reckon, when all things are taken into consideration, this is a better compromise than compulsory student unionism, whilst actually providing services.

Yeah, a maximum of $250 a year is going to get swallowed by my HECS debt, my second year (of a five-year program no less) is ending and I already owe $15,262.

The Oz government has made it clear today that none of the money is going to student unions, although they haven't specified how the universities will administer it.

So, this isn't compulsory student unionism. It's an amenities fee.

Having said that, there is a fundamental problem here. Students will be required to pay a fee but have absolutely no say in how it is spent. The old student union system, even if funny at best and corrupt at worst, was students deciding how their fees were spent.

Voluntary student unionism is compulsory silence.

The Oz government has made it clear today that none of the money is going to student unions, although they haven't specified how the universities will administer it.

So, this isn't compulsory student unionism. It's an amenities fee.

Having said that, there is a fundamental problem here. Students will be required to pay a fee but have absolutely no say in how it is spent. The old student union system, even if funny at best and corrupt at worst, was students deciding how their fees were spent.

Voluntary student unionism is compulsory silence.

They have said that is how it will be so far, but it is just a way of forcing people to pay for services they may never use.

And no the students did not have a say on how their money was spent the only people who had a say were the council who had a say and spent money on themselves or other things which had no benefit to the students.

Still no one has told me why I should subsidise someone else's gym membership or why I should pay so the story writing group can buy pens.

If this comes ahead, I am going to be lobbying the administration like nothing to get more money like their is no tomorrow. Yeah you guys can subsidise my club to buy new equipment and for us to drink beer after training.

KOVON RODD is scum! He betrayed my vote! I don't want to pay $250 for something I don't use, and don;t get me started on that filter bs. I say we kill the bastard.

Yeah, a maximum of $250 a year is going to get swallowed by my HECS debt, my second year (of a five-year program no less) is ending and I already owe $15,262.

Yeah I will chuck it on my HECS, but Dryks that is $250 a year for 4 years for services you may never use and may not get your money's worth.

KOVON RODD is scum! He betrayed my vote! I don't want to pay $250 for something I don't use, and don;t get me started on that filter bs. I say we kill the bastard.

Unless your trying to troll at least spell his name right.

Yeah I will chuck it on my HECS, but Dryks that is $250 a year for 4 years for services you may never use and may not get your money's worth.

Well I didn't say it's not annoying and that I don't not like it, it just won't affect me too much :p

I do hate this in principle though.

Completely agree. Anything student union related is utter bullshit. They are always run by the same group of left wing arts/law students that think that by doing student union stuff they are actually helping people. We do not want you giving money to the uni socialist alliance so that they can stand around handing out crappy propoganda. We do not want you giving money to the XYZ group, because they do just spend it on a big piss up at the end of the year. I am happy to pay for the things I use, but for $300 a year, I would actually expect something - not piles upon piles of leftwing "freedom of choice" bullshit being forced down our throat.

Well I didn't say it's not annoying and that I don't not like it, it just won't affect me too much :p

I do hate this in principle though.

I'm hoping the independents have knock it out, can't trust the Greens to do this Fielding is really the only one. Xenophon will vote for it he is way out of his depth over their and has fallen into oblivion. I know Joyce has spoken up but I think he just wants to get himself of the TV again.

Completely agree. Anything student union related is utter bullshit. They are always run by the same group of left wing arts/law students that think that by doing student union stuff they are actually helping people. We do not want you giving money to the uni socialist alliance so that they can stand around handing out crappy propoganda. We do not want you giving money to the XYZ group, because they do just spend it on a big piss up at the end of the year. I am happy to pay for the things I use, but for $300 a year, I would actually expect something - not piles upon piles of leftwing "freedom of choice" bullshit being forced down our throat.

I'm going to shove it down your throat now Lapse :)

But unlike the unions who say that and then petition the government to abolish VSU and think that people should be forced to join up I really do think you should be able to choose.

All hail Kovon Rodd!

Enough with the crocodile tears, Blouman Emp! The Howard government took away the compulsory student union fees, told everyone how much mopney they were saving students and then jacked up university fees.
Their real motivation was to try to silence those left-wing ratbag student associations.

$250 bucks is a small fee considering what services you can get with it. Those bloody Liberals have tried to privatise everything - and conned mug punters into saying how much money they were saving the taxpayer. That was bullshit. Their "User Pays" utopia just made it easier for the rich - the poor get screwed.
Look at what has happened to universities today - the governemnt has starved them of cash and opened them up for full-fee paying overseas students to make up for the losses. They crapped over universities and the universities are desperate. If Rudd doesn't support them, they will go down the gurgler. I think that all Australians should get a university education and not just the rich.

I think that all Australians should get a university education and not just the rich.

You've got to be kidding....

I kid you not - all Australians who want a tertiary education and are prepared to work towards a diploma or degree should be able to do so. I think that is a good principle. The more educated a country's population is, the better the country is.

The mandotory fee is what I am not happy about either, and that is exactly right they making students pay the fee regardless of involvment, or the wants of the student.

Isn't that how taxes work?

Enjoy the real world after graduating :p

You've got to be kidding....

How could that possibly be a bad thing?

KOVON RODD is scum! He betrayed my vote! I don't want to pay $250 for something I don't use, and don;t get me started on that filter bs. I say we kill the bastard.

Dear Pres Obama, first I'd lose the name - especially if you are not an American but also because some people might think that you are impersonating the soon-to-be- President Elect .

Also, never say "Kill the bastard" about a politician - especially not on the internet. Some people could misconstrue the utterance and think that you really mean it. That is the sort of thing you might say when you are pissed with your mates who know not to take you seriously.
:eek:

Also, never say "Kill the bastard" about a politician - especially not on the internet. Some people could misconstrue the utterance and think that you really mean it. That is the sort of thing you might say when you are pissed with your mates who know not to take you seriously.
:eek:

Yeah! We don't want NSG to end up filtered do we? :D

$250 bucks is a small fee considering what services you can get with it.
like? don't give me the "representation" crap. I know people who have tried to access it but have just wasted their time. And I am fairly sure that 95% of the people who do use it are not "hard done by battlers" but rather "lazy, drunken bogans who skip lectures"


Those bloody Liberals have tried to privatise everything - and conned mug punters into saying how much money they were saving the taxpayer. That was bullshit. Their "User Pays" utopia just made it easier for the rich - the poor get screwed.
Oh yes, the rich who work hard for their money, (both going to uni, getting to the top) then pay 50% of their income for tax, then don't get any government hand outs...
Mean while the poor who pay 15% tax, get government hand outs by the wheel barrow, did not go to uni for 4 years or put in the effort to get promoted...


Look at what has happened to universities today - the governemnt has starved them of cash and opened them up for full-fee paying overseas students to make up for the losses. They crapped over universities and the universities are desperate. If Rudd doesn't support them, they will go down the gurgler. I think that all Australians should get a university education and not just the rich.
allow me to rephrase that for you:
I think that all Australians who put in the effort should get a university education and not just the rich.
I will admit, I grew up privileged (through my parents hard work when they were younger). my parents were really good, and I know that if I was ever desperate I could call them up and I would be able to borrow money.
I moved out of home when I was 17. Over the next year I gradually became more independent.
I am now 20.
I work 20+ hours a week on top of full time uni
I get good grades
I run my own buisness
I pay for everything - rent, car, food, bills etc...

If someone wants to go to uni, there is nothing stopping them
They can get a job, they can get centrelink to help, they can defer all uni fees on HECS, textbooks can be accessed in the library, there are $2000 a semester scholarships which anyone on centrelink can get. Someone could live off $200 a week if they had to (no car, and probably not the best location). Centrelink for an independant is now $400 including rent assistance

If you think that "There is no way the poor can get ahead" then you need to smarten the fuck up. The government is doing everything it can and more than it should to help people who claim they are disadvantaged.
If you can afford alcohol, cigarettes, regular holidays, fancy gadgets, you have no excuse.

Enough with the crocodile tears, Blouman Emp! The Howard government took away the compulsory student union fees, told everyone how much mopney they were saving students and then jacked up university fees.
Their real motivation was to try to silence those left-wing ratbag student associations.

lol, you have it the wrong way around. HECS went up before they introduced VSU.

The real motivation was not only to allow students to be able to pay for only what they want rather than paying money that subsidised other peoples indulgences. As well as giving students an essential right that they all deserved. And yes it did save students money.

$250 bucks is a small fee considering what services you can get with it. Those bloody Liberals have tried to privatise everything - and conned mug punters into saying how much money they were saving the taxpayer. That was bullshit. Their "User Pays" utopia just made it easier for the rich - the poor get screwed.
Look at what has happened to universities today - the governemnt has starved them of cash and opened them up for full-fee paying overseas students to make up for the losses. They crapped over universities and the universities are desperate. If Rudd doesn't support them, they will go down the gurgler. I think that all Australians should get a university education and not just the rich.

Universities were already open to full fee paying students. Though I find it funny how the current Labor government is going to ban full fee paying Australian students but will still allow overseas students to study as a full fee paying student.

Now this proposal isn't going to see money from the government so much for Rudd supporting them he is going to make students pay for other students to be able to get subsidised gym membership amongst other things.

Now you say $250 is a small fee for what services you receive, what if you don't want or need those services? Then what you might as well burn $250 so no you aren't paying a small fee for something you are only going to get your money's worth if you use services you have no need for or join up to some club so you can have subsidised piss up at other students expense.

I disagree with Rudd on the censorship issue too - he plays prude far too much. Yeah! Ban illegal things like kiddie porn and snuff movies. But people have to realise that things stay on the internet for a long, long time so we should be careful what we say and do.

Also, there was this Prime Minister iof Israel - Yitzak Rabin. The conservative opposition held demonstrations against his peace talks with the Arabs and they tolerated groups saying "Kill the bastard" or words to that effect. Well, one unbalanced right-winger, Yigal Amir, went and did just that.
Who said, "words will never hurt me"?

I think that is a good principle. The more educated a country's population is, the better the country is.

This I cannot argue on, however, this fee isn't for education related expenses rather other services that are provided by the uni.

Now people may say aspects other than the classes contribute to a university education, which is fair enough but if someone is able to use other services that is provided by non university providers why can't they use that? And I have been fortunate only to have one semester of CSU and after that I have lead a very full and diverse university life which when comparing costs for university services such as the gym it has cost me less than $250 a year.

Lapse, you are so-o-o rude. Just as well I live in Melbourne or I'd go to your Brisbane meet and give you a good talking to...complete with much finger wagging. Don't call me names again or I'll burst into hot wet tears.

You and Blouman shouldn't swallow all that Murdoch media-crap - it will rot your brains.And all that self-made man stuff really gets on my wick. Universities are now totally dominated by private school kids from affluent backgrounds. Working class kids often settle for TAFE or go straight into the workforce. Sure some kids from a low-income background make it the hard way and work their way through. But plenty of rich kids just get there by virtue of their being rich. For them, $250 is pocket money!

like? don't give me the "representation" crap. I know people who have tried to access it but have just wasted their time. And I am fairly sure that 95% of the people who do use it are not "hard done by battlers" but rather "lazy, drunken bogans who skip lectures"


Oh yes, the rich who work hard for their money, (both going to uni, getting to the top) then pay 50% of their income for tax, then don't get any government hand outs...
Mean while the poor who pay 15% tax, get government hand outs by the wheel barrow, did not go to uni for 4 years or put in the effort to get promoted...


allow me to rephrase that for you:
I think that all Australians who put in the effort should get a university education and not just the rich.
I will admit, I grew up privileged (through my parents hard work when they were younger). my parents were really good, and I know that if I was ever desperate I could call them up and I would be able to borrow money.
I moved out of home when I was 17. Over the next year I gradually became more independent.
I am now 20.
I work 20+ hours a week on top of full time uni
I get good grades
I run my own buisness
I pay for everything - rent, car, food, bills etc...

If someone wants to go to uni, there is nothing stopping them
They can get a job, they can get centrelink to help, they can defer all uni fees on HECS, textbooks can be accessed in the library, there are $2000 a semester scholarships which anyone on centrelink can get. Someone could live off $200 a week if they had to (no car, and probably not the best location). Centrelink for an independant is now $400 including rent assistance

If you think that "There is no way the poor can get ahead" then you need to smarten the fuck up. The government is doing everything it can and more than it should to help people who claim they are disadvantaged.
If you can afford alcohol, cigarettes, regular holidays, fancy gadgets, you have no excuse.

All good points Lapse, and remember this $250 is not for stuff directly related to their degree such as textbooks and lectures etc. Hey by being forced to pay $250 a year that is less money they have for textbooks and whatnot.

But I do find it funny down at the unibar and hearing people complain about the cost of education and stay at the bar buying plenty of drinks, maybe if they went without getting drunk for a night they might be able to buy that textbook.

I remember one of the arguments against VSU was that the union would no longer be able to subsidise alcohol at uni bars. Gee yeah see that's where I want my money going to giving the barflys who hang around all day at the bar cheap drinks.

Lapse, you are so-o-o rude. Just as well I live in Melbourne or I'd go to your Brisbane meet and give you a good talking to...complete with much finger wagging. Don't call me names again or I'll burst into hot wet tears.

You and Blouman shouldn't swallow all that Murdoch media-crap - it will rot your brains.And all that self-made man stuff really gets on my wick. Universities are now totally dominated by private school kids from affluent backgrounds. Working class kids often settle for TAFE or go straight into the workforce. Sure some kids from a low-income background make it the hard way and work their way through. But plenty of rich kids just get there by virtue of their being rich. For them, $250 is pocket money!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry but I had to laugh, you talk about Murdoch media crap when it is the Murdoch media crap who was writing articles against VSU. And the exact same crap in your bottom paragraph is the exactly what I have read in Murdoch owned media articles. I would suggest that you evaluate how easy you are swallowing that Murdoch media crap.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

What's the matter Blou? Was Lapse getting even too feral for you. Yes Lapse and Governor Palin are singing from the same neo-con sheet here.

But you seem to be pushing the straight Libertarian argument. Well let's see how far it goes. Would you object to paying all your council rates because you only benefit from the lighting and the rubbish collection and not the local library which you haven't gone to? Would you refuse to pay all your federal taxes because you don't like subsidies that are given to the rich (all sorts of tax concessions to corporations etc) - tell you what, I'd love to withhold that part if I could.
Let's face it - you are going to pay for those amenity fees one way or another. Either it will be paid directly by the Federal Government and indirectly by the taxpayer or it will be straight from you as an amenity fee.
My advice? Pay up and complain about something that doesn't make you sound like a whingeing member of the middle classes - like social injustice or global warming or something. Jeez! What's happened to the uni students of today? I know! Twelve years of a Howard Government perhaps - the unis are full of privileged upper class toffs who whine about forking out for a dreaded socialist amenity fee.

Lapse, you are so-o-o rude. Just as well I live in Melbourne or I'd go to your Brisbane meet and give you a good talking to...complete with much finger wagging. Don't call me names again or I'll burst into hot wet tears.
good way to pretend you are ignoring the points there... I am waiting for you to give me reasons
a) why students unions are worth it
b) why underprivileged people are unable to attend uni

(besides, point out where I called you a name. I told you to smarten up! which is classed as advice, not name calling :P)


You and Blouman shouldn't swallow all that Murdoch media-crap - it will rot your brains.And all that self-made man stuff really gets on my wick. Universities are now totally dominated by private school kids from affluent backgrounds. Working class kids often settle for TAFE or go straight into the workforce. Sure some kids from a low-income background make it the hard way and work their way through. But plenty of rich kids just get there by virtue of their being rich. For them, $250 is pocket money!
Rich kids who get in for being rich never last. They always drop out after 1st semester unless they are motivated. Rich kids may come from an easier background (don't have to work, pocket money, etc) but that does not mean they will do better, or are better suited.

If a 'working class kid' settles for TAFE, then that's their choice. If a 'working class kid' is knocked up when she is 15, that is her choice. If a 'working class kid' decides to do nothing, that is their choice.
If a rich kid does it, that is their choice. They may just have more support than their 'working class' equals.

Sure, there is probably an element of bias there: "My parents expect me to get a uni degree(specifically a bachelor of blah)" versus "My parents are drunk bogans who couldn't give a damn what I do" (the two opposite ends of the extreme, here. I am not calling anyones parents narcissistic control freaks or drunk bogans).
Any kid (rich or 'working class') who has the motivation to do what they want, will ignore their parents requests/expectations and do it anyway.

umm.. yeah... anyway, I think I was saying something along the lines of "anyone can do it, so don't try and blame their failure on their Socio-economic status. It is your own damn choices that lead you to where you are."

What's the matter Blou? Was Lapse getting even too feral for you. Yes Lapse and Governor Palin are singing from the same neo-con sheet here.
you know we are... Palin and me, we make those sheets pretty hot ;)

all sorts of tax concessions to corporations etc
corporations that employ people, bring money to the economy, and still pay tax.

forking out for a dreaded socialist amenity fee.
My issue is where the money goes. I have heard stories (granted, this was from a mate that was in uni in the early 90s) about student unions sending tens of thousands of dollars to political parties or similar organisations (ie religion, politics...)
If the money is going into something that is going to help further my education, and enhance the teaching of my degree, I will happily pay. If it is going into subsidized alcohol, free parties and dodgy art shows, then sorry, but I object.

How could that possibly be a bad thing?

If you can't see it, we differ, politically, too much for me to explain it.

What's the matter Blou? Was Lapse getting even too feral for you. Yes Lapse and Governor Palin are singing from the same neo-con sheet here.

I see you are getting more and more desperate in your arguments, you didn't even read my post correctly where I agreed with Lapse and your funny attempt to try and bring Palin into it is even more amusing

But you seem to be pushing the straight Libertarian argument. Well let's see how far it goes. Would you object to paying all your council rates because you only benefit from the lighting and the rubbish collection and not the local library which you haven't gone to? Would you refuse to pay all your federal taxes because you don't like subsidies that are given to the rich (all sorts of tax concessions to corporations etc) - tell you what, I'd love to withhold that part if I could.

I bet you would mate, but of course a lot of those subsidies allow for more investment which helps the economy to grow thus benefitting me and you, as much as you dislike it.

Let's face it - you are going to pay for those amenity fees one way or another. Either it will be paid directly by the Federal Government and indirectly by the taxpayer or it will be straight from you as an amenity fee.

My advice? Pay up and complain about something that doesn't make you sound like a whingeing member of the middle classes - like social injustice or global warming or something. Jeez! What's happened to the uni students of today? I know! Twelve years of a Howard Government perhaps - the unis are full of privileged upper class toffs who whine about forking out for a dreaded socialist amenity fee.

HAHAHAHA

You get funnier by the moment all this crap you are writing I have to wade through the shit to find your point.

Perhaps uni students such as myself are complaining about something that matters to them instead of laying down and letting the government walk all over them.

A socialist amenity fee hey well mate you are just getting more desperate. And you know what I agree with you I will pay for it one way or another, but I want to pay for it when I need to use it I don't want to pay for someone else to be able to play ultimate frisbee.

despite all this you are yet to tell me why I should have to pay for someone else's gym membership.

My issue is where the money goes. I have heard stories (granted, this was from a mate that was in uni in the early 90s) about student unions sending tens of thousands of dollars to political parties or similar organisations (ie religion, politics...)
If the money is going into something that is going to help further my education, and enhance the teaching of my degree, I will happily pay. If it is going into subsidized alcohol, free parties and dodgy art shows, then sorry, but I object.

The last three things you mentioned is exactly where it is going, it is not going to your education, my council spends some of the money for them to hold a Christmas party not to mention other funds they waste over the years.

Way back in 1977 when I was a student at Monash Uni alomng with the likes of Kroger and Costello, the Liberal Party was already flying a kite for Voluntary Student Unions. They saw the issue had advantages in two ways the first was the Thaterite ideal of user pays (which was always a lie because the promised "small government never arrived and taxes still sucked most people - except for the rich who got arounf them with family trusts and negative gearing, etc). The second reason was to nobble those nasty student unions whpo invited radical speakers out and organised rallies etc.
I wrote this article for "Lot's Wife" the Monash paper called "Are the Liberals creating a Frankenstein?" The gist of my argument was that they might be able to nobble the student unions (which were dominated by bureaucrats anyway) but they would never nobble dissent because left wing students would still organise - and would go more off campus to do it - which is a good thing!
I support Unionism. I don't very much care if it is compulsory (which cannot be legally enforced) or voluntary. I am in the Australian Educatiion Union. Maybe half of Australia's teachers are in it. I once resigned when they weren't doing enough for their members but in my heart, I'm a unionist.
When the Howard government tried to beak the Wharfies, I was there, defending the wharfies. The High Court told Howard that his tactics were illegal and Howard had to back down.
Unions made Australia what it is today - and I mean that in a good way. Unions created the Middle Class Australia because Australian Unions fought for and won the 8 hour day, the basic wage, paid holidays, maternity leave and much more.
They made Australia a country worth living in.

Way back in 1977 when I was a student at Monash Uni alomng with the likes of Kroger and Costello, the Liberal Party was already flying a kite for Voluntary Student Unions. They saw the issue had advantages in two ways the first was the Thaterite ideal of user pays (which was always a lie because the promised "small government never arrived and taxes still sucked most people - except for the rich who got arounf them with family trusts and negative gearing, etc). The second reason was to nobble those nasty student unions whpo invited radical speakers out and organised rallies etc.
I wrote this article for "Lot's Wife" the Monash paper called "Are the Liberals creating a Frankenstein?" The gist of my argument was that they might be able to nobble the student unions (which were dominated by bureaucrats anyway) but they would never nobble dissent because left wing students would still organise - and would go more off campus to do it - which is a good thing!
I support Unionism. I don't very much care if it is compulsory (which cannot be legally enforced) or voluntary. I am in the Australian Educatiion Union. Maybe half of Australia's teachers are in it. I once resigned when they weren't doing enough for their members but in my heart, I'm a unionist.
When the Howard government tried to beak the Wharfies, I was there, defending the wharfies. The High Court told Howard that his tactics were illegal and Howard had to back down.
Unions made Australia what it is today - and I mean that in a good way. Unions created the Middle Class Australia because Australian Unions fought for and won the 8 hour day, the basic wage, paid holidays, maternity leave and much more.
They made Australia a country worth living in.

So you are still living in the past (the 70's) and what type of teacher doesn't even know how to spell Education. The rest of your post is just someone living in the past and has nothing to do with students unions.

At least they manged to win a battle in acknowledging the rights of the individual and fuck me a liberal party promoting liberal ideals and freedoms who would've have thought hey. It seems they still have a long way to go with the labor government now wanting to take away the rights of the students and force them to pay for stuff they do not need. Someone mentioned that it is like taxes, well you know what why am I surprised that a labor government is behind it, a party that loves to raise taxes. But even that has little to do with the issue at hand.

you know we are... Palin and me, we make those sheets pretty hot ;)

I don't know about Palin, but you're pretty hot, Lapsey.:wink:

I once resigned when they weren't doing enough for their members


Unions made Australia what it is today - and I mean that in a good way. Unions created the Middle Class Australia because Australian Unions fought for and won the 8 hour day, the basic wage, paid holidays, maternity leave and much more.
They made Australia a country worth living in.
That is the problem. Unions are designed to ensure workers rights. They usually however end up a big wank-fest with a bunch of people who masquerade as doing stuff for the people, whilst really just trying to screw more money out of the members.

The only thing different about student unions is that they end up a big wank-fest with a bunch of people who masquerade as doing stuff for the people, whilst really just trying to screw more money out of the members and getting a boner off their perceived power.

(yes, 'getting a boner' is a valid logical argument)

Now, bringing it back to student unions in particular, what have they done to make it easier for the general uni-attending population?

If you can't see it, we differ, politically, too much for me to explain it.

Please, do try. Chances are at one time or another my politics have been quite similar to yours. I haven't always been a raging lefty, you know.

Blouman, sorry about the spelling mistake. I hope you don't think that all teachers, sorry teechurs, are as illiterate as me. But I'm glad you felt better about spotting my errot. I promise I'll write it out ten times in red.
I do notice that you are VERY selcetive in what you respond to. You balk addressing the broad sweep of my arguments and nibble away at the sides. Well, Mr "Win at all costs", you won't concede the simple point that Right Wing parties make a big deal about something small like an amenity fee/union fee but they don't mind all sorts of COMPULSION for things that suit them. Where shall I start? The conscription debate where the Liberal Party sent off kids your age to defeat the Communist menace. Well I was a draft resister then, willing to fight COMPULSORY military service. I also paid a university union fee and got a great deal out of it. Everybody paid and everbody got a great deal out of it.
By the way, Lapse, your friend's recollections abpout Union fees going to political parties? It didn't happen.The Universities who oversaw the student unions finances would rule that sort of expendidture "Ultra Vires" (i.e. beyong the Union's Power. Student unions hasd to go by a constitution and they were vetted by University Council.

That is the problem. Unions are designed to ensure workers rights. They usually however end up a big wank-fest with a bunch of people who masquerade as doing stuff for the people, whilst really just trying to screw more money out of the members.

The only thing different about student unions is that they end up a big wank-fest with a bunch of people who masquerade as doing stuff for the people, whilst really just trying to screw more money out of the members and getting a boner off their perceived power.

(yes, 'getting a boner' is a valid logical argument)

Now, bringing it back to student unions in particular, what have they done to make it easier for the general uni-attending population?

You make some good intelligent points here Lapse. (i.e I agree with some of them ;)). I'm an anarchist and I was a particularly angry young anarchist in the 70's . Student Union bureaucrats often filled me with despair. Peter Costello was one, for instance. Big heads, big egos, immature, dodgy, dishonest. Come to think of it, a lot of the bureaucrats ended up in Canberra. Maybe you will someday??
What did they do? Hmmm! They assisted some interesting developments - at monash there is still a vegitarian restaurant co-op and a book co-op set up by students (including me) in the seventies. They helped mobilise students in the anti- apartheid struggle, anti-war struggles etc. They helped get interesting speakers and bands onto campus. They did their bit to educate people about condoms and gave out freebies at open days. They made the campus a friendlier place with different events and sausage sizzles. They organised camps, cultural events, theatrical events.
Essentially, they gave students an alternative education rather than just the lectures and tutes. They provided a means for students to learn how to organise and how to relate to each other.:)

I do notice that you are VERY selcetive in what you respond to. You balk addressing the broad sweep of my arguments and nibble away at the sides.
So, please answer the questions I posed earlier if you do respond to our argument.
1. What does the student union actually do for the students? EDIT: answered above this post
2. Why are disadvantaged people unable to attend uni (you have given alot of crap about rich kids having no trouble, but no reason why disadvantaged kids should)


By the way, Lapse, your friend's recollections abpout Union fees going to political parties? It didn't happen.The Universities who oversaw the student unions finances would rule that sort of expendidture "Ultra Vires" (i.e. beyong the Union's Power. Student unions hasd to go by a constitution and they were vetted by University Council.
I am unsure of what exactly happened, so I am not going to debate about what occurred. My guess is however, that it probably did happen, just in a more subtle way: ie:
The Australian communist party owns this hall. We might hire it out at a higher price than what would be expected!
(so legally, in both their books it looks like a legitimate expense/revenue. That is, assuming the Australian communist party hired Halls out... but you get my gist)
However, unsure what happened, so I will not push the fact.

=============
Collectivity. You went to uni in the 70s. my guess is alot has changed since then. The world has become mono-polar, the technology revolution etc. You now get people hating America just because it's the cool thing to do. (you ask them about why and they just say "like... uhhmm.. like... Bush is gay...."). But more relevantly, it is a new generation of people who have grown up with workplace regulations such as the 8 hour days. They have never had to fight for it, and now, the only thing they do fight for is free booze. They are not unions like you describe them, but rather corrupted socialist alliances who want to push their opinion of which group of left wing nutters deserve my money the most!

Unionism is important. This however, is a bastardised half arsed attempt at unionism that ends up as a corrupted bureaucratic mess

Blouman, sorry about the spelling mistake. I hope you don't think that all teachers, sorry teechurs, are as illiterate as me. But I'm glad you felt better about spotting my errot. I promise I'll write it out ten times in red.

Nice, I knew it was a poor attack but fight fire with fire hey?

I do notice that you are VERY selcetive in what you respond to. You balk addressing the broad sweep of my arguments and nibble away at the sides. Well, Mr "Win at all costs", you won't concede the simple point that Right Wing parties make a big deal about something small like an amenity fee/union fee but they don't mind all sorts of COMPULSION for things that suit them.


You have no argument apart from you are for CSU and this fee because the liberal party is against it. You have yet to counter my arguments at all and never told me why I should pay for somebody else's gym membership. Why it is a good thing, but if I discredit one of your premises and it is essential for your argument then your argument fails. And you may think freedoms such as association amongst others isn't important but it is important for a lot of people. The fact of the matter that student associations by and all haven't crashed and died those that just continued to bitch about it and not bother about trying to do something about it have gone down those such as my club who did something have continued and in some cases prospered. Now perhaps if the council stopped spending money on themselves then they might be able to fund other things, and oh dear the alcohol is no longer half price all the time stupid of course students should be subsidising other students drinking habits.

Where shall I start? The conscription debate where the Liberal Party sent off kids your age to defeat the Communist menace. Well I was a draft resister then, willing to fight COMPULSORY military service. I also paid a university union fee and got a great deal out of it. Everybody paid and everbody got a great deal out of it.

As I said living in the past shame that isn't apart of the current platform otherwise you might have a point there. Perhaps I should argue about how bad the Labor part is because of the White Australia policy the had or perhaps talk about how past labor governments had national service and also introduced conscription as well. But since they aren't apart of the current platform of the labor party there is no point arguing about it

The Australian government from July 1st next year will take away University students right to association by reintroducing a compulsory fee for all students to pay regardless of need or use.

While they are keeping the so called voluntary student unionism, this is but a back door way to give student unions a way to collect money off students to use for themselves regardless of the needs of the individual students.

Compulsory student unionism was abolished with the last government as a way of giving students a vital freedom of association. Which allowed them to choose wether they wanted to be a part of a union or not.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24591830-2702,00.html

While I was always aware that this government who opposes basic rights such as freedom of association was going to introduce it, I always hoped that I wouldn't have to deal with it. I do find it funny how they say that CSU was introduced because of an ideology which is true as freedom of association is a basic liberal belief, however, this entire program and the fact that they want to bring back VSU is just an ideological proposal in itself.

So, is the government doing the right thing here, or is it just a case of this government taking away the rights of the individual.

Some associations do complain how much less money they have and how their finances have gone into ruin etc. We (by that I mean my soccer club) were faced with the same problem as the union decided we would be the first to lose our funding, however, unlike other associations which still bitch and moan about it (something I have to hear every time I have to go to one of the Clubs and association meetings), we took more responsibility for our finances and organised them taking us to be the most profitable club in the entire league.

I would rather have this $250 in my pocket and spend it on goods and services that I need rather than stuff I don't need or for the council to waste the money on themselves (I don't know about other unis but my council spends a hell of a lot of money on themselves, maybe if they didn't do that, they would have more money to spend elsewhere instead of the continual bitching.)

I don't belong to any clubs or groups at my university. So if my school or government said I had to pay a fee to groups I didn't even go around with. Boy that really sucks. Sounds to me the schools or the groups have been griping about a lack to funds.

What did they do? Hmmm! They assisted some interesting developments - at monash there is still a vegitarian restaurant co-op and a book co-op set up by students (including me) in the seventies.
That is an entity that is going to be making money (self funding). I don't feel that student money should be going into creating a business that on the whole is not going to be giving that much of the money back to the students.

I am aware that the govt gives tax breaks to corporations in a similar manner, but as I said earlier, coporations still pay tax, they support the economy and they employ people.

As far as book coops go, they are good, but once again they can be self funding.

They helped mobilise students in the anti- apartheid struggle, anti-war struggles etc.
so, some bloke stood up with a loudspeaker? that is worth $300 a year...

They helped get interesting speakers and bands onto campus. They made the campus a friendlier place with different events and sausage sizzles. They organised camps, cultural events, theatrical events.
These events should be user pays. the 1% of uni students who use these activites should not be sponsored by everyone else.

Essentially, they gave students an alternative education rather than just the lectures and tutes. They provided a means for students to learn how to organise and how to relate to each other.:)
Which is great! but why should it take $300 a year from everyone. Sausage sizzles make money, as do any other events they hold. I am a social person, and I goto events, but I don't want to feel like I am bludging off other peoples money. (especially because it is usually the same core group of people who go to these events)


They did their bit to educate people about condoms and gave out freebies at open days.
Yay! freebies! just where I want my money going!
As for the condoms, I will agree they are doing very good work with that, but once again, $300 a year?

I don't belong to any clubs or groups at my university. So if my school or government said I had to pay a fee to groups I didn't even go around with. Boy that really sucks. Sounds to me the schools or the groups have been griping about a lack to funds.

Well that is right, instead of doing something about it like getting sponsorship or government grants they are still bitching about it two years later. Those that did something about it have prospered and in my soccer clubs case swimming in money ($10,000 profit this year) while those that have faltered have just sat and complained about it. Something I have to listen to every time I go to the Club and associations meeting.

so, some bloke stood up with a loudspeaker? that is worth $300 a year...

Not to mention issues that had nothing to do with student life on campus or was there an apartheid policy at Monash in the 70's?

Which is great! but why should it take $300 a year from everyone. Sausage sizzles make money, as do any other events they hold. I am a social person, and I goto events, but I don't want to feel like I am bludging off other peoples money. (especially because it is usually the same core group of people who go to these events)

Considering sausage sizzles can be away of raising money.

Yay! freebies! just where I want my money going!
As for the condoms, I will agree they are doing very good work with that, but once again, $300 a year?

Now Lapse you know as well as anyone thaty uni students are horny bastards :p

Actually, I fully support a union building that provides free or subsidised services for members and makes "conscientious objectors" pay the full rate.
Is that an elegant free market compromise for you?
Actually the anarchists had a similar set up in Spain during the Civil War (1936-1939) they had collectives (My name again!) where farmers combined to sell their produce. Those who didn't want to join, didn't. These collectives were so successful that many or the earlier refusers eventually joined because it made good economic sense (economy of scale). However these collectives were attacked by both the Communist and Fascist forces. (Read "Homage to Catalonia" by George Orwell. A great eye-witness account of the Communist betrayal of the Spanish Revolution).

You assumed that I don't like voluntary organisations. I always saw it as the Liberal Party imposing the ban on student activity. If the students themselves had pushed for a VSU I would have gone with it. The Liberal VSU bill was not welcomed by students or universities. The UNis saw it as an ideologically-driven political attack on university autonomy - and the Libs NEVER made up for the loss of revenue. It was just Howard bastardry as far as they were concerned.

Aso boys, I take your point about union fees going on booze ups (which is why the Engineering students didn't complain I guess). But booze ups were only part of the budget. It did provide some of the bureaucrats including Costello, with some budgetting experience.

Gerard Henderson, made an interesting point about the Liberal Party's attacks on student unions - that many able Liberal politicians had to first prove themselves in these student unions - that they were excellent traing grounds for future political leaders.

I always saw it as the Liberal Party imposing the ban on student activity. If the students themselves had pushed for a VSU I would have gone with it. The Liberal VSU bill was not welcomed by students or universities. The UNis saw it as an ideologically-driven political attack on university autonomy - and the Libs NEVER made up for the loss of revenue. It was just Howard bastardry as far as they were concerned.

And yet you saw wrong because it wasn't banning student activity it was banning unions from forcing people to give them money for services and products they neither wanted or needed. Why did the government have to make up for it? (shame labor who was saying they should didn't decide to do something about it, hardly surprising) and yes it was ideologically driven about granting the individual more freedoms and more rights not an attack on unis or to ban student activity as you and other some how see it.

Gerard Henderson, made an interesting point about the Liberal Party's attacks on student unions - that many able Liberal politicians had to first prove themselves in these student unions - that they were excellent traing grounds for future political leaders.

And yet the student unions weren't banned as you have some how got into your mind it is just banned the unions from forcing people to join up and give them money.

Your vision of what a union is is quite distorted Blouman. You and lapse have made some points about student bureaucrats spending money on this and that and onjecting to these dreadful unions. The unions and SRCs that sprang up on campusses in the 1960s (or earlier) often arose out of individual students wanting some control over what they could do on campus (some control over their lives!). Universities made students wear suits and ties and they were pretty repressive places. Students are often a questioning and rebellious lot so they asked for and nagged for student unions. The university administrations eventually gave in to pressure and so these SRCs started to become significant entities. Universities charged amenity fees and the SRC was given a small part of that money. Amenity fees were always compulsory and collected by the universities. Some of these SRCs began to call themselves student unions in the mid 60s (at Oxford it was much earlier the 20s or 30s) and began to demand a greater voice in how the amanity fee/student fee was divided. It wasn't much of an issue then.
It became an issue when many student unions became heavily politicised as a result of Vietnam and Apartheid in Southern Africa. Student Unions moved significantly to the left because my generation was moved by these pressing world issues. We didn't want to be sent overseas to kill Vietnamese. We couldn't bear the idea that only whites could play in the Springbok Rugby team and so we organised. Our SRCs and student unions helped with that organisation.
Did we make a difference. Well, Nelson Mandela was in jail on Robin Island when I attended the Springbok demo at Olympic Park, Melbourne in 1971. Australian troops were still fighting the Viet Cong in 1971. Then Whitlam was elected. Guess what? He abolished University fees.
That meant that working class kids could afford to go to university.
Yes there was a voter backlash (the Whitlam sacking, etc) but the irony is that the only fees we had to pay were the Compulsory Union fee. Well you can see why the conservatives hated that.
Now you poor suckers have to pay off your HECS debts of thousands of dollars. For the rich its easier of course. At Melbourne Uni, if your rich daddy pays up-front fees you can get into Law or Medicine on a full-fee paying place.
Why don't you guys object to them bananas eh?
One rule for the rich........... I was that bloke with the megaphone and I'm proud of it!

Your vision of what a union is is quite distorted Blouman. You and lapse have made some points about student bureaucrats spending money on this and that and onjecting to these dreadful unions. The unions and SRCs that sprang up on campusses in the 1960s (or earlier) often arose out of individual students wanting some control over what they could do on campus (some control over their lives!). Universities made students wear suits and ties and they were pretty repressive places. Students are often a questioning and rebellious lot so they asked for and nagged for student unions. The university administrations eventually gave in to pressure and so these SRCs started to become significant entities. Universities charged amenity fees and the SRC was given a small part of that money. Amenity fees were always compulsory and collected by the universities. Some of these SRCs began to call themselves student unions in the mid 60s (at Oxford it was much earlier the 20s or 30s) and began to demand a greater voice in how the amanity fee/student fee was divided. It wasn't much of an issue then.
It became an issue when many student unions became heavily politicised as a result of Vietnam and Apartheid in Southern Africa. Student Unions moved significantly to the left because my generation was moved by these pressing world issues. We didn't want to be sent overseas to kill Vietnamese. We couldn't bear the idea that only whites could play in the Springbok Rugby team and so we organised. Our SRCs and student unions helped with that organisation.
Did we make a difference. Well, Nelson Mandela was in jail on Robin Island when I attended the Springbok demo at Olympic Park, Melbourne in 1971. Australian troops were still fighting the Viet Cong in 1971. Then Whitlam was elected. Guess what? He abolished University fees.
That meant that working class kids could afford to go to university.
Yes there was a voter backlash (the Whitlam sacking, etc) but the irony is that the only fees we had to pay were the Compulsory Union fee. Well you can see why the conservatives hated that.

You seem to still have this idea of what a union does nowadays as opposed to what they may have done back then. You talk about how they sprang up to give students control over their life all very well and good, (though forcing people to join is hardly giving them control over their lives). Though I fail to see how organising rallies and getting people in to talk on South African policy has to do with what students can do on campus. The unions have changed since your day, and I see what they do and they aren't doing much at all.

Now you poor suckers have to pay off your HECS debts of thousands of dollars. For the rich its easier of course. At Melbourne Uni, if your rich daddy pays up-front fees you can get into Law or Medicine on a full-fee paying place.
Why don't you guys object to them bananas eh?
One rule for the rich........... I was that bloke with the megaphone and I'm proud of it!

But that is not the case anymore the government banned full fee paying spots for Australian students but not to overseas students, which take away places from Australian students. Do you object to those bananas? I never saw a big problem with full fee paying students considering that the HECS spots were offered first and then those left over were then offered to full fee paying Australians, but hey you have this little battle against the so called rich.

Oh and you know what else do you know who introduced HECS? Bob Hawke that's right the darling of the Labor party he abolished free tertiary education and brought in HECS so much for the working class party hey?

Governments will do that - Labor or Liberal. They'll do anything they can get away with.

If people agitate against the CSU, they'll back down on that to.
But I won't be bothered going to that demo.

I'll save my megaphoning for the things that will really make a difference.

But hey! It's nearly 3 a.m. I'm going to bed now. Who do you think will win the Melbourne Cup (do you Brisbanians get the holiday?). I might have a flutter on Honolulu for a place (Obama has links with Honolulu and he'll win in a canter!)

Governments will do that - Labor or Liberal. They'll do anything they can get away with.

If people agitate against the CSU, they'll back down on that to.
But I won't be bothered going to that demo.

I'll save my megaphoning for the things that will really make a difference.

But hey! It's nearly 3 a.m. I'm going to bed now. Who do you think will win the Melbourne Cup (do you Brisbanians get the holiday?). I might have a flutter on Honolulu for a place (Obama has links with Honolulu and he'll win in a canter!)

No they don't only Melbourne, and guess what mate something else to make you feel even more resentful I'm a New South Welshman.

I hope that people do get resentful over CSU but it is nice to know that you seem to think that governments infringing on the rights and freedoms of their citizens as not important.

I have no idea who will win I am off to Morphettville tomorrow so I will look on the guide and have a flutter on a few races but don't know yet.

Obama's grandmum died in Hawaii - Iwonder if "Honolulu" will get a place in the Melbourne Cup? I put $50 on it to place before I knew of his granny's death. I know I should be mourning the granny - but what the Hell? She was 98! Obama may well be sorrowing but he will be President-elect tomorrow and Honolulu will have helped get him there.

Oh and by the way, this is from a letter in today's Melbourne Age:
Union-bashing Libs
AGAIN Liberals are warning us of the possibility of student unions re-forming to help university students access facilities while studying.
Damn those evil unions wrecking the country and the economy.

Not like those nice, kind free-market CEOs who have given us the wonderful sharemarket news recently.

Doug Steley, Maroochydore, Qld

Please, do try. Chances are at one time or another my politics have been quite similar to yours. I haven't always been a raging lefty, you know.

CM is a firm believer of "help the rich, fuck everyone else", also called "Libertarianism"

...I hope that people do get resentful over CSU but it is nice to know that you seem to think that governments infringing on the rights and freedoms of their citizens as not important...

This has nothing to do with "rights". Please stop using discredited rightwing propaganda terms to muddy a straightforward issue.

You chose to go to university. Therefore you pay the amenities fee.

Let me provide an analogy. I chose to own a unit in a block of flats. Therefore I pay what is now called an Owners Corporation Fee. I tell you I get far less for my $600 a year than you get for $250.

The difference is I get some say in how my "amenities fee" is spent. You want to deprive students of a similar right.

Collectivity is right. Some knowledge of the past and the strategies of political parties is a good thing. The Liberals and the ALP are always trying to find ways to nobble the relationships between their opponents and their power bases. In the 80s and 90s it was clear to the Liberals that student unions were a fertile base for future ALP politicians - our deputy Prime Minister is perfect example - so their motivation was to break that link. So-called "voluntary student unionism" is simply cant to hide the real agenda.

Sometimes they grow out of it when they get older, have kids and learn to think of people other than themselves. The myth of the individual being self-made and owing nothing to the society that created him/her is pretty nasty and can equate with the worst excess of Capitalist greed. Enron and Lehman Brothers had plenty of those guys.

Hey Errinundra I like your ideas - and your model ships. Boy what dedication!

There are only a few movies that make me want to cry - "Midway" when those torpedo bombers go the their certain deaths in a search and destroy of the Japanese invasion fleet is one of them.

...Someone mentioned that it is like taxes, well you know what why am I surprised that a labor government is behind it, a party that loves to raise taxes...

More right wing agitprop.

I seem to recall that after the last federal election I got a tax cut, as promised by Rudd during the campaign. There are more on the way.

Oh dear, never let the facts get in the way of good propaganda. Oh, and we musn't forget - the last new tax introduced was the GST. I wonder which party brought that in? Wait, wait. It was the Liberals, wasn't it?

AGAIN Liberals are warning us of the possibility of student unions re-forming to help university students access facilities while studying.
Damn those evil unions wrecking the country and the economy.

Not like those nice, kind free-market CEOs who have given us the wonderful sharemarket news recently.

Doug Steley, Maroochydore, Qld
Actually, Australian CEOs didn't do much wrong. Australian unions do.

CM is a firm believer of "help the rich, fuck everyone else", also called "Libertarianism"
Nice. You do realise that this is akin to calling Obama a communist, right? Is that really the level you want to be seen to be at?

Hey Errinundra I like your ideas - and your model ships. Boy what dedication!...


Thanks. It's an odd obsession for an avowed pacifist.

hmm... seems I didn't miss too much... I actually fail to see any new arguments you are pushing, except
"The liberals don't like people" followed by a paranoid conspiracy theory about them trying to take away our rights
(while of course, Labor is constructing an internet filter to get rid of anything they don't like.)


The difference is I get some say in how my "amenities fee" is spent. You want to deprive students of a similar right.

Yeah, our money goes into alcohol, left wing political clubs and people who protest anything.
it's like a louder, more obnoxious version of The Courier Mail.

Then Whitlam was elected. Guess what? He abolished University fees.
That meant that working class kids could afford to go to university.
Yes there was a voter backlash (the Whitlam sacking, etc) but the irony is that the only fees we had to pay were the Compulsory Union fee. Well you can see why the conservatives hated that.
Now you poor suckers have to pay off your HECS debts of thousands of dollars. For the rich its easier of course. At Melbourne Uni, if your rich daddy pays up-front fees you can get into Law or Medicine on a full-fee paying place.
Why don't you guys object to them bananas eh?

I think it is probably the best university system in the world. nothing to pay up front.
The people that have the motivation to go to uni can - knowing that they are going to have a $30,000 debt at the end of it.
The people who only go to uni to screw around, know that they will reach the end of their degree (or get kicked out), have nothing to show for it except a huge debt.
It means people can go to uni if they want, but if they go for the wrong reasons, they will have to pay.

One rule for the rich........... I was that bloke with the megaphone and I'm proud of it!
Then allow me to abrupt:
Get off your high horse, stop yelling into the megaphone disrupting the people who don't agree with you and stop manipulating the idiots of the world who are too stupid to think for themselves.

You chose to go to university. Therefore you pay the amenities fee.

I choose to get a degree. Not to pay for other peoples acitivies. There is a big difference

Let me provide an analogy. I chose to own a unit in a block of flats. Therefore I pay what is now called an Owners Corporation Fee. I tell you I get far less for my $600 a year than you get for $250.

You could always move to a different flat or building where the fee was less. This will be forced for all unis where the student bodies are far from representative of the people. In the last student union vote only 0.6% of the members did. Luckily for me I have never been a member

The difference is I get some say in how my "amenities fee" is spent. You want to deprive students of a similar right.

If you want something you can pay for it directly. All this does it takes away money from some to pay for others in a way that a very small percentage of the students actually want

Collectivity is right. Some knowledge of the past and the strategies of political parties is a good thing. The Liberals and the ALP are always trying to find ways to nobble the relationships between their opponents and their power bases. In the 80s and 90s it was clear to the Liberals that student unions were a fertile base for future ALP politicians - our deputy Prime Minister is perfect example - so their motivation was to break that link. So-called "voluntary student unionism" is simply cant to hide the real agenda.

Agreed but why should I pay for the ALP to get new members. Im not a member of the ALP nor do I want to be forced to support them

All this does is say to some "I dont care about your opinions, you will pay for what they want" If everyone payed for their own sevices that they desired it would be much fairer.

For example I dont want the food to be subsidized as it currently is because I think the food is of poor quality and I can pack my own lunch for a cheaper price. Why should I be forced to pay for other peoples meals?

Hey self-sacrifice, why don't you live up to your name and think of others besides yourself. I get sick of the right-wing chous of "Sob! Sob! Boo hoo these nasty socialists are taking away my freedom!"
Look around you! Governments are encroaching on your freedom all the time - socialist one, capitalist ones...that is what governments do.
Today millions of Americans go to the polls to vote on "Spread the wealth". Now Joe the plumber doesn't like that idea. But the guy that he will vote for is quite happy to spread the wealth to bail out Wall St. He just doesn't want to spread the wealth to improve health, education or the lives of the poor.

$250 bucks! Get over it. You probably spent that on the Melbourne Cup.

Hey and Lapse - you are a really rude abusive person. Go stand in the corner and hang your head in shame. (Said loudly through a megaphone!)

Hey and Lapse - you are a really rude abusive person. Go stand in the corner and hang your head in shame. (Said loudly through a megaphone!)

What can I say, I am going for the NS trophy for most abrupt/offensive/vulgar/(any other adjective you would choose) debater. :P


You are once again avoiding the point however.


Give me a reason why I should have to pay for someone to get up and yell out propaganda I do not agree with!

You don't have to pay me to yell my opinions - ever heard of "free speech"?

There are two issues here.

1. Should universty students pay an amenities fee?

2. If they do have to pay, should they have a say in how the money is spent?

My answers.
1. Universities will provide amenities regardless of people's ideological beliefs. The reality is, the administrations will feel a moral obligation to provide amenities. When VSU was introduced in Victoria the universities did just that, at considerable expense. It has been the conservative university administrations as much as the left wing students who have been fighting for the re-introduction of amenities fees.

The question is - who should pay? Clearly, under a user pays scenario the students should. The question then becomes how. On a per use basis or on a flat rate for everyone. To me the obvious answer is a flat rate. It is far easier and cheaper to administer and encourages students to fully participate in university life.

2. If students are required to pay an amenities fee they should have a say in how it is spent. Simple really.


...Yeah, our money goes into alcohol, left wing political clubs and people who protest anything. it's like a louder, more obnoxious version of The Courier Mail...

That's no-one's fault except your own. Get active and make sure the money is spent wisely. In any case, it would not be difficult for universities to prevent amenities fees being spent on alcohol or political activities.

...stop yelling into the megaphone disrupting the people who don't agree with you and stop manipulating the idiots of the world who are too stupid to think for themselves...

The double standards here are self-evident.

I choose to get a degree. Not to pay for other peoples acitivies. There is a big difference...

No, you do more than that. You choose to go to university. It is a community that you have agreed to join. This is the greatest time of your life and the greatest opportunity in your life. Embrace it fully.

...You could always move to a different flat or building where the fee was less.

And you can choose to go to a university that charges a lower amenities fee.

This will be forced for all unis where the student bodies are far from representative of the people. In the last student union vote only 0.6% of the members did. Luckily for me I have never been a member...

Again, no-one's fault but your own. Get in and get active.

If you want something you can pay for it directly. All this does it takes away money from some to pay for others in a way that a very small percentage of the students actually want

Unversity is a community. Join in.

...why should I pay for the ALP to get new members. Im not a member of the ALP nor do I want to be forced to support them

Start a "Self sacrifice Party" and take part in university politics.

[quote]All this does is say to some

You don't have to pay me to yell my opinions - ever heard of "free speech"?

So, under CSU, why does my money go to people who hold radical views that differ to mine? I obviously don't support them politically, why should I be forced to support them financially?

Why is freedom of speech so much more important that economic freedom?
I choose not to pay to support these groups. Why won't you accept that freedom is a two way steet?

I will not go up and abuse someone because their views differ to mine. (I will happily engage in a debate/argument over who is right)
However, if they are shouting it through a megaphone, disrupting my day and taking my money for the honour, that does piss me off.

Stop whipping poor Lapse with logic, Errinundra! (Cruel and degrading punishment!) All I did was to make him stand in the corner.

Lapse, several techniques of yours are very annoying:
1. Reductio ad absurdum - taking on a whole complex argument plucking out a couple of your own examples (such as paying for someone to yell at you with a megaphone) and then trying to prove that your opponent's argument is invalid. Slippery tactic but it won't work.
2. Getting abusive in tone when you feel that you are facing strong opposition
3. Saying "you still haven't answered my question" when you didn't ask one. What you did was repeat variations on the same tub-thumping whine. And you want a specific response for that? Ask nicely and be specific next time and your opponent might.
4. Using sweeping generalisations - one was about the type of students from working class backgrounds - and what was that "bogan" crack all about

That's no-one's fault except your own. Get active and make sure the money is spent wisely. In any case, it would not be difficult for universities to prevent amenities fees being spent on alcohol or political activities.

Then I would actually have to deal with these people :eek:

And Collectivity has come out with yet another post completely ignoring the topic, and instead focusing on ruining my argument by going for my credibility! (If I could be bothered, I'd look up the fancy latin name for it)


Lapse, several techniques of yours are very annoying:
1. Reductio ad absurdum - taking on a whole complex argument plucking out a couple of your own examples (such as paying for someone to yell at you with a megaphone) and then trying to prove that your opponent's argument is invalid. Slippery tactic but it won't work.
it's called an example to explain what I mean easier: I should not be forced to pay for people to have their freedom of speech! I should not be forced to pay for people to have cheap gym memberships! etc etc...
(for the record, I still believe in freedom of speech, and if there is an issue I am more than happy to stand up and put in my 2 cents - I just don't think that the people that don't agree with me should be forced to pay for it)

2. Getting abusive in tone when you feel that you are facing strong opposition
Sorry.. I'll smilie spam instead :sniper::mp5::gas::soap::headbang::hail::upyours::mp::gundge:

3. Saying "you still haven't answered my question" when you didn't ask one. What you did was repeat variations on the same tub-thumping whine. And you want a specific response for that? Ask nicely and be specific next time and your opponent might.
How about we start off with:
1. Why is freedom of speech so much more important that economic freedom?
2. I choose not to pay to support these groups. Why won't you accept that freedom is a two way steet?
3. Why are 'working class' people unable to attend uni

4. Using sweeping generalisations - one was about the type of students from working class backgrounds - and what was that "bogan" crack all about
You should note that after that comment I mentioned that they were the extremes - the narcissistic parents and the bogan trashy parents. I did not say that everyone who's family had total assets valuing under a certain amount was a trashy bogan. Just as I didn't say everyone above that amount was a rich kid living off their parents (oh, but wait, you seem to have that idea!)

Sorry.. I'll smilie spam instead :sniper::mp5::gas::soap::headbang::hail::upyours::mp::gundge:

Thanks for the giggle.

Why are 'working class' people unable to attend uni

Bloody good question. It deserves it own thread.

Lapse: Why are 'working class' people unable to attend uni

Errinundra: Bloody good question. It deserves it own thread.

You're darn right it is a good Q - and a much more important one than a $250 fee (but I acknowlegdge that Lapse is arguing more about a principle rather than the actual money)
Earlier on, I suggested a compromise for those who weren't happy with paying an amenity fee. Union members don't get charged or are charged less for all student amenities (gym membership, access to megaphones, sausage sizzles)
Non union members pay the full rate or go sit outside the union building and eat thesandwiches they bought from home while reading about Ebeneezer Scrooge saying "Bah! Humbug" in A Christmas Carol.

As for the Q re working class kids being unable to go to university. Some can - but not enough. If your parents had the money to send you to the (Federal Governmnet subsidized Private School) then you have a much better chance of getting into a Uni course of your choice.
A bright working class kid is disadvantaged all the way down the line. There is not a level playing field in Australian education. I know because I'm a teacher who has taught in private schools, state schools and at three Monash Universitry campusses.
Even though there are many more unis around today, it was fairer in the 70s when I went from a state school to Monash.

You're darn right it is a good Q - and a much more important one than a $250 fee (but I acknowlegdge that Lapse is arguing more about a principle rather than the actual money)
pretty much. I have no problem paying the $250 for something I will use, but (blah blah same thing I have said half a dozen times already)

Earlier on, I suggested a compromise for those who weren't happy with paying an amenity fee. Union members don't get charged or are charged less for all student amenities (gym membership, access to megaphones, sausage sizzles)
Non union members pay the full rate or go sit outside the union building and eat thesandwiches they bought from home while reading about Ebeneezer Scrooge saying "Bah! Humbug" in A Christmas Carol.
Happily. As I understand this is the idea of VSU.
There is a woolies just down the road which is cheaper for food anyway (oh dear, I have to walk 500m each way). I pay full fee to use any sporting facilities (I use the pool regularly. it costs 50c more for a non-member. I don't go to the pool 500 times a year, so it is cheaper for me to pay the extra 50c)

As for the Q re working class kids being unable to go to university. Some can - but not enough. If your parents had the money to send you to the (Federal Governmnet subsidized Private School) then you have a much better chance of getting into a Uni course of your choice.
I will acknowledge this can be a problem. But a student who puts in effort in a state school can still get into anything.
I think the problem is that the environment at a state school means that people who want to learn aren't supported. the minority(but growing) of kids who have bogan trashy parents. What it comes down to is that state schools need more power to punish the kids that do screw around.
I went to a public school for primary school, but was bullied and pretty much exiled from the group because I put in effort. My parents decided that it would be better for me to go to an independent school.

A bright working class kid is disadvantaged all the way down the line. There is not a level playing field in Australian education. I know because I'm a teacher who has taught in private schools, state schools and at three Monash Universitry campusses.
I agree that they are disadvantaged, but it is still possible for them to go to uni and do anything they want. The key is that they have to have the motivation and put in the effort (It will make them much stronger people in the long run compared to the people who didn't have to make the effort)
People can get a job at 14, which allows for spending money whilst in high school - I know it is a very tough prospect, but if a kid is smart, motivated, and is thinking of the long term, they will invest that in their own education. (whether it be in stationary, non-compulsory learning things, tutoring)
They may come out of High school with a lower than required tertiary entrance score. This can be easily upgraded by simply doing an arts degree or similar for a year and going well. If they plan it they may only be at uni for an extra 6 months.
Not only that but the government does throw money around. Anyone eligible for youth allowance is eligible for an extra $2500 a semester through commonwealth bursaries. Plus, they get an upgrade of 3 OP points (QLD Tertiary entrance score scale).

At UNI:
So, without lifting a finger (other than filling in a couple of forms)
Youth allowance(independant) + rent assistance: $400/fortnight * 26 = $10400/year
Bursaries: $5000/year
Total: $15000! even more if from a rural area.
Throw in a part time job one day a week (8 hours) - 8*15= $120 = $6240 per year

If you can't live of $21000, there is a problem.
Room in share house: $240 pf.
Food: $100 pf.
phone/elec/net: $30-40 pf.
Public transport: $20 pf.
Total: ~$400/fortnight (without a car)
which does of course leave $10,000 for you to spend how you wish through the year (ie, eat out, go out, get a car, gadgets, savings)

Good one Lapse. I like the way you are arguing here - about real issues and real problems and using real examples from your own experience.

No, you do more than that. You choose to go to university. It is a community that you have agreed to join. This is the greatest time of your life and the greatest opportunity in your life. Embrace it fully.


difference of opinion. I am paying for my education. Thats what I want. There is nothing else I want from uni that I cant get somewhere else. And I should not be forced to pay for one uni sport team that cant get its act together when I am a member of a different one out of uni that is ogranized.

And you can choose to go to a university that charges a lower amenities fee.

Well considering that I have half a year left it wouldnt be wise. This is a new change forced upon me that I do not want. I never signed up to it. It is forced

Again, no-one's fault but your own. Get in and get active.

Why should I pay for a group of political protests. i didnt join the union because is was a failure. I dont want to be forced to pay for political motives when i dont support most of them.

Unversity is a community. Join in.

Yeah when I consider sport, charity, part time work, friends and full time study I actually dont have time to join a community that 0.6% vote in and less are actually involved in. I choose to do other more meaningful things and I should not pay for other peoples likestyles.

If there was a fee for for libaries and computers that are directly relevant to study I would support it as I pay to study. This is not about study it is about paying for other peoples life styles and other peoples political beliefs. Unless there are VERY strict terms about its use it is just another name for compulsary student unionism. What ever happened to the idea of freedom of association?

"Compulsory Student Unionism" and "Voluntary Student Unionism" both sound pretty foul.

It was a long long time ago, but I remember the $130 (I think) being a pain when I was a freshman at Sydney Uni.

However, I ate Union lunches, attended Union recreation events, attended or even joined many Union-funded clubs ... I got my money back for sure.

Dammit, I was the ONLY audience member for a minute or so in a Union gig. Nick Cave and the Birthday Party performed ... for ME. You can't buy that.

"Compulsory Student Unionism" and "Voluntary Student Unionism" both sound pretty foul.

It was a long long time ago, but I remember the $130 (I think) being a pain when I was a freshman at Sydney Uni.

However, I ate Union lunches, attended Union recreation events, attended or even joined many Union-funded clubs ... I got my money back for sure.

Dammit, I was the ONLY audience member for a minute or so in a Union gig. Nick Cave and the Birthday Party performed ... for ME. You can't buy that.
That's exactly the point! 99% of people do not attend their events!

agreed. Something poorly organized/not wanted by most of the union members. So what it does it takes away the money from many to pay for a few. I could accept it if it was welfare. But a 1 person music concert is far from welfare

You know, in a way you guys have answered your own question of "Do we need a student union?" when you say "I couldn't be bothered dealing with these guys....etc"
It's very like the question "Do we need a government?"
Now I'm an anarchist and you would expect my reaction to be "No!" but nature abhors a vacuum. If there is nothing to relpace it - you'd get gang warfare (the anarchy in the negative sense).
In fact, I would argue that areas controlled by gangs have a "Gang Government". To create a society that runs efficiently, we need organisation. That means you need a group of people delegated to make decisions.
In feudal times it was kings but then democracy took over and people have been arguing for greater and greater democracy. However, there is a stong demand for freedom that works against collective endeavours.
Some people despise the West bacause they see most people in the west as spoilt, rich individualists. However, they aren't seeing our society in all its complexity.
We are constantly battling the competing demands of economic viabilty, efficiency, fairness, social responsibility and individual freedom.
Those issues are just as much in the presidential debate as in the VSU debate.
So the question I put to you is, if you don't have a student union, who is going to make all the decisions on behaldf of the students?
The university administration? Small groups of unrepresentative students? The governmnet? Nobody?
If you have a student body, who pays for it.

Okay! Now you are in the position of making the decisions. True, the Rudd goverrnment is making the $250 amenity fee decision,(just like the Howard Government mad ethe decision to abolish it and the decisions to underfund the universities so that they had to apply more and more strategies that made masses of Australians getting a decent tertiary education more diffficult.)

YOU MAKE THE DECISIONS! You chart the course of your lives. By all means decide the fate of student unions. Apathy and abstaining from decision-making is not an option.

So the question I put to you is, if you don't have a student union, who is going to make all the decisions on behaldf of the students?
What decisions? I've been at university for five years, and on the issues that actually impacted students heavily, such as changes to HECS fees, the union didn't get a say. The only other thing I've only ever heard the elected union leadership do was to say they had to close the campus cinema because of VSU, which then turned out to be bullshit because it could pay for itself.

Other than that, there are just various functions and parties. So either the elected student leadership is doing a spectacularly bad job at explaining just what it does to the people it supposedly serves, or there is no reason for it other than to improve the resumes of these self-important jokers who want to get into politics.

YOU MAKE THE DECISIONS! You chart the course of your lives. By all means decide the fate of student unions. Apathy and abstaining from decision-making is not an option.
Surprisingly enough, it is.

The reason is that the umbrella "union" now encompasses two different things - the non-academic services for getting careers started, lunch cafeteria, childcare and so on, and the representation of the student body in the decision-making circles of the university. The former is important and worth paying for, the latter is a waste of time. But this is not a view that I can express without having to go through this decision-making system. Divide the two functions of the union, and these wannabe-politicians are out of a job immediately, which they won't stand for.

So where does that leave me? I don't want to participate in their little game, and so the only other option is apathy and trying to avoid having to pay to finance it. And so you can also see that this new system has the potential to form a solution because it isn't the union leadership that decides where the money goes, but the people who actually care about allowing us to have a good time, namely the people concerned with attracting students to the university.

All that being said, I still don't have room in my finances next year for extra outlays.

You guys have so much energy and intelligence - why devote so much of it to playing Nation states when you could be out there making significant change?

I could ask myself the same question. Well I'd better go to work and make a difference!

What decisions? I've been at university for five years, and on the issues that actually impacted students heavily, such as changes to HECS fees, the union didn't get a say. The only other thing I've only ever heard the elected union leadership do was to say they had to close the campus cinema because of VSU, which then turned out to be bullshit because it could pay for itself.

Other than that, there are just various functions and parties. So either the elected student leadership is doing a spectacularly bad job at explaining just what it does to the people it supposedly serves, or there is no reason for it other than to improve the resumes of these self-important jokers who want to get into politics.


Surprisingly enough, it is.

The reason is that the umbrella "union" now encompasses two different things - the non-academic services for getting careers started, lunch cafeteria, childcare and so on, and the representation of the student body in the decision-making circles of the university. The former is important and worth paying for, the latter is a waste of time. But this is not a view that I can express without having to go through this decision-making system. Divide the two functions of the union, and these wannabe-politicians are out of a job immediately, which they won't stand for.

So where does that leave me? I don't want to participate in their little game, and so the only other option is apathy and trying to avoid having to pay to finance it. And so you can also see that this new system has the potential to form a solution because it isn't the union leadership that decides where the money goes, but the people who actually care about allowing us to have a good time, namely the people concerned with attracting students to the university.

All that being said, I still don't have room in my finances next year for extra outlays.

You know, when I was young and stupid and growing up in a vaccuum, I got angry about VSU.

Now that I'm young and stupid but no longer in a vaccuum, I've seen the self important pretentious wankers that are involved in student union leadership and whatnot. I have to say, I ain't impressed.

This seems like a good compromise by the Rudd government, which is surprising given how they've managed to screw up everything else that young 'uns care about. Lunches, childcare, help with starting careers... these are things that people going to uni actually care about (apart from the degree itself, most of the time). This puts the money in the hands of the university itself, which is much better than in the union's hands and/or going to booze (as it inevitably would).

I'd just like some sort of survey to accompany the payment, so that students can tell the uni people what their priorities are. Might help a little.

It is tempting to let student union leaders put you off student unions, or union leaders put you off unions butdon't get distracted by self-impoortant, ego-inflated types.
There is more at stake here....like creating your own political environment by being active.
Remember that bureaucrats about when there is apathy.
And apathetic students get screwed by governments. You can defend your interests better in unions than as individuals who can be easily dismissed as no threat.

Super Kevin Rudd; greatest PM ever.

yeah krudd is so great. In one year we are looking at a budget deficit, the alcopop tax hasn’t really worked, the banks broke away from the reserve bank from interest rates, the treasurer took minutes to find the answer of what the RBA rate is yesterday, the cost of fixing ABC is unknown but going ahead regardless, nothing was done when all states were ALP short of a billion dollar bribe for Victoria and the unlimited grantee was not thought through and a limit had to be pushed by the media.

The economy is being handled awfully. At least I agree with the social policies tho

The Australian government from July 1st next year will take away University students right to association by reintroducing a compulsory fee for all students to pay regardless of need or use.

While they are keeping the so called voluntary student unionism, this is but a back door way to give student unions a way to collect money off students to use for themselves regardless of the needs of the individual students.

Compulsory student unionism was abolished with the last government as a way of giving students a vital freedom of association. Which allowed them to choose wether they wanted to be a part of a union or not.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24591830-2702,00.html

While I was always aware that this government who opposes basic rights such as freedom of association was going to introduce it, I always hoped that I wouldn't have to deal with it. I do find it funny how they say that CSU was introduced because of an ideology which is true as freedom of association is a basic liberal belief, however, this entire program and the fact that they want to bring back VSU is just an ideological proposal in itself.

So, is the government doing the right thing here, or is it just a case of this government taking away the rights of the individual.

Some associations do complain how much less money they have and how their finances have gone into ruin etc. We (by that I mean my soccer club) were faced with the same problem as the union decided we would be the first to lose our funding, however, unlike other associations which still bitch and moan about it (something I have to hear every time I have to go to one of the Clubs and association meetings), we took more responsibility for our finances and organised them taking us to be the most profitable club in the entire league.

I would rather have this $250 in my pocket and spend it on goods and services that I need rather than stuff I don't need or for the council to waste the money on themselves (I don't know about other unis but my council spends a hell of a lot of money on themselves, maybe if they didn't do that, they would have more money to spend elsewhere instead of the continual bitching.)

What is this "Freedom" of which you speak? If you recieve government money, you're in the Government's debt, and you have to expect that they're going to exert a price on you. IIRC, University is heavily funded by said government, and the current government is in favour of you belonging to the Student Union-or at least, paying tithes to it, regardless of your stance.

Government that is strong enough to give you what you want, is strong enough to take what you have. This is a good lesson about how 'entitlements' REALLY work.

But there is difference between paying for education (which is 3/4 payed for by the governments) and paying a union to do what they see fit. If this was a an aim of truely providing better equipment for study the fees per course would be raised to go towards the university.

The unis already have to have disables access everywhere, praying areas, english lessons for thoes who cant speak it, basic computer skill courses and so on. Then it is topped off by government intervention by saving what courses are actually going to be assisted and by how much. There is plenty of room there to give money to the uni for better facilities. There is no reason to give money to the unions when people will join freely if they see a benefit for themselves.

Except that you get FREELOADERS. You get them everywhere. If you didn't have to ask people for their union card every time there is an exchange of goods and services in a union building, then that would be a good thing, right. If the person giving out the goodies could assume that the person receiving them is a union member and just hand over the freebies or the subsidised things, that would be great. But if only 60% of the student union members had paid up, then the hander-out of the goodies would be OBLIGED to ask for proof of union membership.
Now that might not be a big deal for some people but I'd rather not have to make them do that. But if they didn't do that, some cheapskates would queue up without having paid their union dues. Everyone loves a freebie but there is no such thing as a free lunch. The union members would end up subsidising the .....non-unionists? (The traditional word for it is "SCABS").
What are scabs? They are people who won't join unions or go on strike but who expect the wage increases won for them by unionists who do go on strike.
They are people who squesal 'conscientious objection' about union membership but who sign on the dotted line and pay up for anything else that is compulsory.
They are people who disappear when it's their shout. They are people with short arms and deep pockets. They are people who like to be ordered around by governments and paramilitary bodies but who hate the term "solidarity".
I am happy to USE the term 'scab' because my generation can still remember the damage that SCABS can do.
If you are on strike and a nun-unionised SCAB takes your job, that scab is saying, "I don't give a toss about you and your family, I'm happy to see your union go down and for me to keep working while you stand outside the workplace. The whole system of government will rally around to protect the civil rights of the scab but there is only one body that will protect the rights of the unionist - and that is the union.

So if a government imposes a union fee or an amenity fee, I'll pay it just like i pay my taxes because I believe in doing the right thing. iF ANY OF YOU GUYS ARE SO UPSET BY IT, I SUGGEST YOU UNIONISE TO DEFEAT THE LAW.
But you might just need to join a union to do that.

oh yeah, scabs....

as opposed to under CSU where everybody pays, and then the committee has a huge student-funded piss up at the end of the year or they spend alot of money on a service which only a small percentage of people will use (discounted gym). Aren't they scabbing off us?.

The problem with CSU is that it basically forces us to pay for all the irrelevant and useless crap that goes on - whether we support it or not. Under VSU we are given the option, that if we don't agree with how the union spends its' money, we don't give them any. As it stands, I do not agree with the unions money spending habits.

What is so hard about asking people to show membership cards? people in the union aren't going to argue - it's to protect their 'investment'. People not in the union have no right to complain.

You guys have so much energy and intelligence - why devote so much of it to playing Nation states when you could be out there making significant change?We all make bumperstickers too. Part of the original sign-in clause for use of NationStates involved something referred to as "intellectual property".
<.<
>.>

I could ask myself the same question. Well I'd better go to work and make a difference!
Yeah, those friggin' fries won't deep-fry themselves!
Well, they mostly do ... those patties won't flip themselves!
Those tables won't wipe down themselves!
Those files won't organize themselves!
Those phones won't call themselves (well, without that machine they won't)!
Those ** won't ** themselves!
Those ....

oh yeah, scabs....

as opposed to under CSU where everybody pays, and then the committee has a huge student-funded piss up at the end of the year or they spend alot of money on a service which only a small percentage of people will use (discounted gym). Aren't they scabbing off us?.

The problem with CSU is that it basically forces us to pay for all the irrelevant and useless crap that goes on - whether we support it or not. Under VSU we are given the option, that if we don't agree with how the union spends its' money, we don't give them any. As it stands, I do not agree with the unions money spending habits.

What is so hard about asking people to show membership cards? people in the union aren't going to argue - it's to protect their 'investment'. People not in the union have no right to complain.
Noone is saying that some union bureaucrats aren't shockers. That's why people with brains, guts and consciences should be active in their unions to ensure that corrupt bureaucrats don't get entrenched into positions of power (Elia Kazan's movie "On the Waterfront" had a young Marlon Brando taking on corrupt union bosses. Great movie from which the immortal line "I coulda been a contender" came. Unfortunately, Elia Kazan dobbed his film-making colleagues into the House Un-American activies Commission making him something of a scab - but that's another story)
I will continue to argue that an active democratic union is one of the best safeguards of a democracy. What are the most democratic countries? Ones where there are active democratic unions. Strong unions can stop Governments abusing their power - that's why governments try to crush them through legislation and force.
See the Liberals push for the VSU in that context. Their reasoning is that if they legislate to deny universities the power to collect union fees/amenity fees, and make them "voluntary" then few students will pay union fees because they will save money.Furthermore, private companies will take over the services provided for by the universities and student unions. Hence the Howard Government imposed a "user pays" system on students. No student was given a choice. The motives of the neo-cons were so transparent. The VSU legislation was designed to deny students the power to organise (while not specifically denying them the right to organise).
Now if you are cool with that, fine....but I see the VSU in the context of the Howard Government's shady and illegal collusion with union-busting organisations (Patricks and the Waterfront lock-out), the IRC legislation that was so decisively rejected by the voters in 2007 and a whole raft of other legislation that includes the jailing of unionists for "seconday boycotts etc.)
The fact that Labor governments have often been up to the same tricks as conservative governments with regars to nobbling unions makes it even more imperative for people to join unions and to be active in them to maintain democracy. Be suspicious of the motives of all politicians - including many student bureaucrats. The onesa who squeal "law and order" the most are generally the dodgiest. And be very aware of governments who legislate for freedom of the individual.
Legislating for "freedom" is often like "fighting for peace" or "fucking for chastity".
"Young Nazis for freedom? Isn't thatan oxymoron? But in your case I'll drop the oxy." (The John La Roquette show).

We all make bumperstickers too. Part of the original sign-in clause for use of NationStates involved something referred to as "intellectual property".
<.<
>.>

Yeah, those friggin' fries won't deep-fry themselves!
Well, they mostly do ... those patties won't flip themselves!
Those tables won't wipe down themselves!
Those files won't organize themselves!
Those phones won't call themselves (well, without that machine they won't)!
Those ** won't ** themselves!
Those ....

I love your humour Brevious :p

Noone is saying that some union bureaucrats aren't shockers. That's why people with brains, guts and consciences should be active in their unions to ensure that corrupt bureaucrats don't get entrenched into positions of power (Elia Kazan's movie "On the Waterfront" had a young Marlon Brando taking on corrupt union bosses. Great movie from which the immortal line "I coulda been a contender" came. Unfortunately, Elia Kazan dobbed his film-making colleagues into the House Un-American activies Commission making him something of a scab - but that's another story)
I will continue to argue that an active democratic union is one of the best safeguards of a democracy. What are the most democratic countries? Ones where there are active democratic unions. Strong unions can stop Governments abusing their power - that's why governments try to crush them through legislation and force.
See the Liberals push for the VSU in that context. Their reasoning is that if they legislate to deny universities the power to collect union fees/amenity fees, and make them "voluntary" then few students will pay union fees because they will save money.Furthermore, private companies will take over the services provided for by the universities and student unions. Hence the Howard Government imposed a "user pays" system on students. No student was given a choice. The motives of the neo-cons were so transparent. The VSU legislation was designed to deny students the power to organise (while not specifically denying them the right to organise).
Now if you are cool with that, fine....but I see the VSU in the context of the Howard Government's shady and illegal collusion with union-busting organisations (Patricks and the Waterfront lock-out), the IRC legislation that was so decisively rejected by the voters in 2007 and a whole raft of other legislation that includes the jailing of unionists for "seconday boycotts etc.)
The fact that Labor governments have often been up to the same tricks as conservative governments with regars to nobbling unions makes it even more imperative for people to join unions and to be active in them to maintain democracy. Be suspicious of the motives of all politicians - including many student bureaucrats. The onesa who squeal "law and order" the most are generally the dodgiest. And be very aware of governments who legislate for freedom of the individual.
Legislating for "freedom" is often like "fighting for peace" or "fucking for chastity".
"Young Nazis for freedom? Isn't thatan oxymoron? But in your case I'll drop the oxy." (The John La Roquette show).

Even if that was the motive of the liberals it gives people a choice. if the union did enough to support the students and make it worth while people would join. If services can be picked up elsewhere for a cheaper price or better service the union should reconsider what it is doing wrong.

But the Labour side forces a business to be supported with no real relevance to its success or failings on any issue. Despite whatever alternatives may exist or how much better they may be you will be forced to support a chain of dysfuctional services that are mostly unwanted by yourself.

And this dosnt touch on the fact of building a political base which is where most of the money goes. If I want to support a political party i will vote for them and/or campaign for them and/or give them money directly

You make some valid and thoughtful points self-sac but you are just one individual and so your opinions count for bugger all to a corporation or government that doesn't like what you're saying.
And if YOU want to set up your own group to make a change, you'll find plenty of obstacles to block you - bureaucratic legislation and student apathy being the main ones.

You'd be much more likely to get a footy club up and running than some sort of group that wants to make a social or political change.

"And so they took Ned Kelly and hanged him in the jail,
For he fought singlehanded although in iron mail.
And no man singlehanded can hope to break the bars;
It's a thousand like Ned Kelly who will hoist the flag of stars."
by John Manifold - written when aged 14!!!

"And so they took Ned Kelly and hanged him in the jail,
For he fought singlehanded although in iron mail.
And no man singlehanded can hope to break the bars;
It's a thousand like Ned Kelly who will hoist the flag of stars."
by John Manifold - written when aged 14!!!

What better way to turn a convicted murderer, robber, cattle rustler and general bad guy into a hero.
Sorry, but it really pisses me off when people try to act as if Kelly was a colonial Robin Hood. He was nothing more than a mongrel kid. People try to use his story as a motivational "The Aussie Spirit" sort of thing, when in reality it is as unAustralian as you can get... Stealing from friends & neighbors, murder... yeah.. real hero...

There was nothing even closely related to political change in his message. Some people claim that they were unfairly harrassed by the police as youths. Some people counter-claim that the harrasement was fair, and the only reason that half the accusations were dropped was because the Kellys' intimidated the witnesses. Even if they didn't, 9 guilty verdicts against members of his immediate family says there was something wrong there.

Actually, ned Kelly wrote the "Jerilderie letter" - part of which did advocate social change and he did kill police who were chasing him and wanted to kill him. You have to remember that the police were almosst as bad as the criminals they were supposed to catch. They were armed thugs - som eof them - and hated by many people in Northern Victoria. Ned Kelly had a small group around him - just imagine if he'd had "a thousand like Ned Kelly"?
But he didn't. The Eureka Miners had a few hundred defending Bakery Hill in Ballarat a generation before Ned Kelly and they had a union of sorts - even a pledge:
"We swear by the Southern Cross...."

But my point wasn't that Ned was bad or good - even though it's an interesting debate, my point is that by acting collectively, we can generally achieve more than by being individuals.
Society has become individualist consumers - and that's the way Capitalists like it. That way they can brainwash us with their ads and divide and rule us.
Unions exist (theooretically) to stop that happening. When we have organisations that are superior to unions to protect us, then unions will finally disappear - but that is still a while off.

-Snip, irrelevant drivel-

So if a government imposes a union fee or an amenity fee, I'll pay it just like i pay my taxes because I believe in doing the right thing. iF ANY OF YOU GUYS ARE SO UPSET BY IT, I SUGGEST YOU UNIONISE TO DEFEAT THE LAW.
But you might just need to join a union to do that.

This just goes to show that you are not getting the point of anything here.

This is NOT unlike what you believe about shutting down unions or stopping them from joining. What this IS about is giving people the right to decide whether they would like to join a union or not.

Yes we may need to unionise and their is nothing wrong with that, what would be wrong is if we started forcing people to join our union.

$250 bucks! Get over it. You probably spent that on the Melbourne Cup

Even if that were true, the point is he got to choose how he spent his money and where he spent it and what he spent it on. Unlike this way where you hand $250 over and it gets spent on crap that you will never need nor want.

Oh and you picked a bad horse, Honolulu came in last.

This has nothing to do with "rights". Please stop using discredited rightwing propaganda terms to muddy a straightforward issue.[/QUOTE[

Ah yes it does, it has everything to do with us being able to chose to join a union or not. What this will do is you still get to chose you just have to pay regardless, that is even worse and a sly backdoor trick that is hardly surprising from this government.

[QUOTE]In the 80s and 90s it was clear to the Liberals that student unions were a fertile base for future ALP politicians - our deputy Prime Minister is perfect example - so their motivation was to break that link. So-called "voluntary student unionism" is simply cant to hide the real agenda.

Yeah except, this argument fails because there are plenty of liberal MP's who also rose through the student unions.

More right wing agitprop.
I seem to recall that after the last federal election I got a tax cut, as promised by Rudd during the campaign. There are more on the way.
Oh dear, never let the facts get in the way of good propaganda. Oh, and we musn't forget - the last new tax introduced was the GST. I wonder which party brought that in? Wait, wait. It was the Liberals, wasn't it?

Oh yeah but let's not forget all the other taxes Rudd has raised already. Oh and while we are on the GST do you know what tax they did get rid of? The sales tax with the introduction of the GST actually saw the overall tax rates of goods and services fall. But let's not get in the way of left wing griping and misinformation.

Dear Blouman,
I thought I'd reply to you because I noticed that the last three posts were yours and we might have a dying patient here. Of course you have a perfect right to oppose a compulsory fee - but you won't get anywhere because you are an individual. I made a point that by organising you might get somewhere. Organisation takes time, commitment and money and not everyone has these three things. That's why, historically, groups like unions sprang up - to act as advocates for people's interests.
You and others have pointed out that we seem to be talking at cross purposes here. You are probably right. You guys have never really seen effective student unions in action - except for the occasional demo. In th e1070s they made history and had a fair bit to do with ending apartheid in South Africa and making Australian campusses a lot more libertarian and social.
There were attacks on student unions from without (The Liberal Party notably) but the real damage was done from within.
The Middle East issue blew student unions apart. Jewish students were often very active on social change. Then some of the anti-Zionists pushed through some motions on Israel/Palestine and the whole of the Australian Union of Students (AUS) began to implode.
The Liberals moved in when th edamage had been done and student unionism was pretty much finished until now.

Then HECs came in - once University tution was free. Because students lost their lobby group (AUS) both Liberal and Labor governments made students pay a lot more for their education than the almost symbolic union fee.

Now probably this "ancient history" bores the socks off you. I'd just like to point out that I know about stupid meddling unionists who can lose the plot (and I'll never forgive the Maoists for their idiotic role in all this). However, my generation had free uni tuition and saved thousands of dollars. Your generation has had to keep paying for it for years after graduation. What was the difference. My generation had more political clout until individualism courtesy of Generation X lost this for us.
Now there are a lot of separate arguments here. Is HECS a good or a bad thing? Should governments pay for uni tuition? Who did more to hurt student interests - Labor or Liberal.
I don't want to get into any of those arguments.

I just want to point out to you that unions can, at times, defend their members' interests. Those who have never been a member of an effective union will never understand. It's like talking about sex to a virgin...
But thing about unions and other associations that do have clout today - eg the AMWSU, the AMA (yes, a doctors' "Union" of sorts) etc and you realise that ulimately the only unions that have any real clout are ones that enjoy active and committed memnbership.
And no, they don't have to be compulsory and I would only argue for 'closed shop' unionism where there was a history of scabbing (e.g.the miners' union etc)

You argue that society has moved on from those times. I don't believe it. The Patrick's dispute under the Howard Government demonstrates the need for unions to keep governments accountable..... unions will remain while governments remain - there has to be something to defend our rights and single individuals like yourself don't matter much to governments.

Dear Blouman,
I thought I'd reply to you because I noticed that the last three posts were yours and we might have a dying patient here. Of course you have a perfect right to oppose a compulsory fee - but you won't get anywhere because you are an individual. I made a point that by organising you might get somewhere. Organisation takes time, commitment and money and not everyone has these three things. That's why, historically, groups like unions sprang up - to act as advocates for people's interests.
You and others have pointed out that we seem to be talking at cross purposes here. You are probably right. You guys have never really seen effective student unions in action - except for the occasional demo. In th e1070s they made history and had a fair bit to do with ending apartheid in South Africa and making Australian campusses a lot more libertarian and social.
There were attacks on student unions from without (The Liberal Party notably) but the real damage was done from within.
The Middle East issue blew student unions apart. Jewish students were often very active on social change. Then some of the anti-Zionists pushed through some motions on Israel/Palestine and the whole of the Australian Union of Students (AUS) began to implode.
The Liberals moved in when th edamage had been done and student unionism was pretty much finished until now.

Do you really think the student unions were the ones to stop Apartheid in South Africa? Just because you got together along with plenty of other people around the world doesn't mean the unions were the ones to stop it. Also this is another problem with student unions going on and wasting money on issues not to do with the university (unless Apartheid was happening in Monash). Unions should be trying to make student life on campus better, but they don't.

How does paying this fee give me a better education? That's another thing people haven't answered.

Then HECs came in - once University tution was free. Because students lost their lobby group (AUS) both Liberal and Labor governments made students pay a lot more for their education than the almost symbolic union fee.

So if we are paying 1/4 of our fee already why should we have to pay a union money that does nothing towards getting my degree. And only offer services which I do not need and can usually get cheaper and sometimes better elsewhere.

Now probably this "ancient history" bores the socks off you. I'd just like to point out that I know about stupid meddling unionists who can lose the plot (and I'll never forgive the Maoists for their idiotic role in all this). However, my generation had free uni tuition and saved thousands of dollars. Your generation has had to keep paying for it for years after graduation. What was the difference. My generation had more political clout until individualism courtesy of Generation X lost this for us.

Well the fact is that this is irrelevant because free education was chucked back in 1989 so if what you say is correct that from that you lost political clout when that was brought in then VSU has little to do with that. The unions provide services which are not wanted or needed by students so why should those that don't want or need these services pay for other people to use the gym? Or for the writers society to buy pens or for the football team to buy new balls? When students aren't apart of this.

That is one question you have never answered.

Now there are a lot of separate arguments here. Is HECS a good or a bad thing? Should governments pay for uni tuition? Who did more to hurt student interests - Labor or Liberal.
I don't want to get into any of those arguments.

Labor isn't entirely free on this issue (as much as you would like to think so) abolition of free education, continuation of full fee paying foreign students while continuing a misguided and misinformed petty class warfare against Australians.

I just want to point out to you that unions can, at times, defend their members' interests. Those who have never been a member of an effective union will never understand. It's like talking about sex to a virgin...
But thing about unions and other associations that do have clout today - eg the AMWSU, the AMA (yes, a doctors' "Union" of sorts) etc and you realise that ulimately the only unions that have any real clout are ones that enjoy active and committed memnbership.
And no, they don't have to be compulsory and I would only argue for 'closed shop' unionism where there was a history of scabbing (e.g.the miners' union etc)

Now I am aware that unions can be do good, though the student union (when I was forced to join against my will) did jack all, and the workers union screwed over their members because they believed their own propaganda and lies and now some of their members are worse off financally thanks to the union. You should be aware that my gripe isn't against unions what it is about is the people's right of freedom of association and not be forced to pay money for services they do not want nor need.

You argue that society has moved on from those times. I don't believe it. The Patrick's dispute under the Howard Government demonstrates the need for unions to keep governments accountable..... unions will remain while governments remain - there has to be something to defend our rights and single individuals like yourself don't matter much to governments.

I am not arguing this at all, in fact labor would love nothing better than to go back to the old times where people were forced to join unions against their will. We as a nation should move on and give people the freedom to live their own lives and the freedom to organise and join unions if they so wish.

So, you don't want to pay a measly $250 fee?
Bitch, please. :p

Amazing that it took so long for someone to put it so eloquently.

Amazing that it took so long for someone to put it so eloquently.Damn, it got quoted. :D
But, seriously.

Both the Labor Party and the Liberal Party force things on people. About the only thing they disagree on is the things that they force on people. What's the difference between government and unions. Well governments are a lot bigger and they have a great deal more agents of coercion (the Tax Office, prisons, police, standing armies.)
You are not really allowed to opt out of the government (unless you hide yourself in the bush I guess) but you can opt out of unions and many Australians do.
You can't withhold your taxes because you don't like how they are being spent (and anyway, if you purchase any goods and service you are paying a tax).
People do opt out of unions when they are voluntary. If you want to end compulsory unions you must campaign against them and defeat them. If you can't be bothered doing that, your choices are few. .... explore them! If you want to continue going to the campus you go to, and you are forced to pay fees, you could get active in the student union and insist on having a say in how they are spent.
I am sure that someone with your talent (and stubbornness) could make an impact if you could be bothered.
Good luck.

Both the Labor Party and the Liberal Party force things on people. About the only thing they disagree on is the things that they force on people. What's the difference between government and unions. Well governments are a lot bigger and they have a great deal more agents of coercion (the Tax Office, prisons, police, standing armies.)
You are not really allowed to opt out of the government (unless you hide yourself in the bush I guess) but you can opt out of unions and many Australians do.
You can't withhold your taxes because you don't like how they are being spent (and anyway, if you purchase any goods and service you are paying a tax).
People do opt out of unions when they are voluntary. If you want to end compulsory unions you must campaign against them and defeat them. If you can't be bothered doing that, your choices are few. .... explore them! If you want to continue going to the campus you go to, and you are forced to pay fees, you could get active in the student union and insist on having a say in how they are spent.
I am sure that someone with your talent (and stubbornness) could make an impact if you could be bothered.
Good luck.So, in other words, you're just telling him to stop being lazy and go out and do something about it? :p

And I'm sure a smart man like yourself could actually answer the questions that have been asked instead of posting meaningless crap that only side steps the issue. I know you have a thing for unions and seem to think VSU was an attack on unions, when in reality it was about giving students the right to not join if they choose to.

And FYI I already have written a letter to an independent Senator trying to persuade him to vote against this measure, hopefully he decides to do what he said he was going to do rather than sit around and agreeing just vote with the government everytime.

Damn, it got quoted. :D
But, seriously.

GF, the amount of money is irrelevant. Instead of paying the $250 I should flush it down the toilet because it would result in the same outcome for me. Better yet I should give it to charity then not so much would be wasted.

What's the difference between government and unions.

Hmm. You also somehow forgot to add that unions do not serve a 4 year term after being elected in by the people...

Hmm. You also somehow forgot to add that unions do not serve a 4 year term after being elected in by the people...

*cough*uptothreeyearsatafederallevelhere*cough*

GF, the amount of money is irrelevant. Instead of paying the $250 I should flush it down the toilet because it would result in the same outcome for me. Better yet I should give it to charity then not so much would be wasted.You would protest with equal fervor if the amount was $2.50, then?
Or you would protest just the same if the amount was $2,500?

You would protest with equal fervor if the amount was $2.50, then?
On principle yes
practically however, it would take more time and effort than it was worth.

You would protest with equal fervor if the amount was $2.50, then?
Or you would protest just the same if the amount was $2,500?

Yes I would still be opposed to it even if it was 25 cents. While that might seem petty the point is that we are being forced to join an organisation we don't want to be apart of and forced to pay for a select group of morons to have a piss up.

And I'm sure a smart man like yourself could actually answer the questions that have been asked instead of posting meaningless crap that only side steps the issue. I know you have a thing for unions and seem to think VSU was an attack on unions, when in reality it was about giving students the right to not join if they choose to.

And FYI I already have written a letter to an independent Senator trying to persuade him to vote against this measure, hopefully he decides to do what he said he was going to do rather than sit around and agreeing just vote with the government everytime.

I think that the question you were BEGGING (:hail: ) to ask is how is a student union (compulsory or voluntary) going to benefit your education?

Well, you have writing talent - yes or no? You could write for the student newspaper. A friend of mine did that and now she lives in London and Berlin writing film reviews for the Melbourne Age.
You could be Treasurer of some club on campus and use that in your C.V. when you apply for a job. If you work for the public service, the interview panels look very favourably on your extra-curricular activities.
You could be active in an Environmental group on campus and end up as Bob Brown (or working for the CSIRO):p
You could get into the numerous sporting clubs or acting/musical clubs and further your interests.
I'm so glad you nagged me to answer this question because I spent many hours learning things about the world sitting around the cafeteria than I did in lectures. Did it help with my world knowledge? Yes. Did it help me get good grades? Well I'm not sure about that one. Maybe the students who swotted in the Library did better than me on that one.

But are you getting my point? There are numerous ways to get your $250 worth if you involve yourself. You could set up a punters club if none exists on campus and become a bloody SP bookie for God's sake! If this is going to be an inevitable tax next year, make sure you get your money's worth.

And good on you for writing to the Independent Senator (That would be Nick Xenephon from South Australia. FYI, Nick Xenephon and Senator Fielding (family First) have both voted against the Rudd government already - so keep writing, keep perservering.
As we used to say on campus:
Better active today than radioactive tomorrow (that was an anti-uranium group that this little tre-hugging hippie was involved in).:D

I think that the question you were BEGGING (:hail: ) to ask is how is a student union (compulsory or voluntary) going to benefit your education?

Well, you have writing talent - yes or no? You could write for the student newspaper. A friend of mine did that and now she lives in London and Berlin writing film reviews for the Melbourne Age.
You could be Treasurer of some club on campus and use that in your C.V. when you apply for a job. If you work for the public service, the interview panels look very favourably on your extra-curricular activities.
You could be active in an Environmental group on campus and end up as Bob Brown (or working for the CSIRO):p
You could get into the numerous sporting clubs or acting/musical clubs and further your interests.
I'm so glad you nagged me to answer this question because I spent many hours learning things about the world sitting around the cafeteria than I did in lectures. Did it help with my world knowledge? Yes. Did it help me get good grades? Well I'm not sure about that one. Maybe the students who swotted in the Library did better than me on that one.

I already am the secretary of the University soccer club and sit on the committee of the faculty's consultative committee (which does more for me than the student union ever has). Now yes they can help with my education and you know what I am doing these without needing to pay a useless $250 and without the need for CSU. But you know what I could join a soccer club or other acting/musical clubs that have nothing to do with the uni and still place these on my resume and get the same experience. So what does a union do to help with education?

But are you getting my point? There are numerous ways to get your $250 worth if you involve yourself. You could set up a punters club if none exists on campus and become a bloody SP bookie for God's sake! If this is going to be an inevitable tax next year, make sure you get your money's worth.

And yes I do know I could get the $250 to get my moneys worth the point is I shouldn't have to pay for it if I don't want it and I should not be forced to pay the money or join some union. Campus life has continued since VSU was introduced sure some people might not get cheap beer anymore and sure people might have to pay a little extra at the gym (though others are cheaper) but campus life has continued and the societies and associations have continued, and yes I can and do sit at the cafe/restaurant/tavern and talk about world issues and people from other backgrounds and learn something new and debate on issues without the need for to pay $250. Of course to get my money's worth does that mean I should join up with associations or attend events I have no interest in and do not want at all simply to get my $250 worth?

And good on you for writing to the Independent Senator (That would be Nick Xenephon from South Australia. FYI, Nick Xenephon and Senator Fielding (family First) have both voted against the Rudd government already - so keep writing, keep perservering.
As we used to say on campus:
Better active today than radioactive tomorrow (that was an anti-uranium group that this little tre-hugging hippie was involved in).:D

Yes it was Nick Xenophon, good pick.
Was that anti-uranium group getting funding from the union?

Well, you have writing talent - yes or no? You could write for the student newspaper. A friend of mine did that and now she lives in London and Berlin writing film reviews for the Melbourne Age.
good for her. Cetainly not where I want to go. Surely they could have written even if the newspaper wasn't there? Of course, some people won't do anything unless they are forced to.

You could be Treasurer of some club on campus and use that in your C.V. when you apply for a job. If you work for the public service, the interview panels look very favourably on your extra-curricular activities.
Last time I checked, there are plenty of extracurricular activities outside of student union. Most of which do not involve dealing with powertripping socialist idiots.

You could be active in an Environmental group on campus and end up as Bob Brown (or working for the CSIRO):p
And how the hell does that justify taking $250 of my money?
You could get into the numerous sporting clubs or acting/musical clubs and further your interests.
Which brings us back to the point of "this should be user pays"

I'm so glad you nagged me to answer this question because I spent many hours learning things about the world sitting around the cafeteria than I did in lectures. Did it help with my world knowledge? Yes. Did it help me get good grades? Well I'm not sure about that one. Maybe the students who swotted in the Library did better than me on that one.
Well, you would have found that if you did something with your youth other than playing union, such as getting a job, or doing real community service, my guess is that you would have learnt more. I know I have learnt far more by helping people first hand than I would have sitting around a table saying "yeah, GLBT rights are good"
But are you getting my point? There are numerous ways to get your $250 worth if you involve yourself.
I would rather keep my $250 and spend it on luxuries for myself. I hear eating is nice.

As we used to say on campus:
Better active today than radioactive tomorrow (that was an anti-uranium group that this little tre-hugging hippie was involved in).:D
Uneducated morons giving the most efficient, environmental and sustainable energy source we currently have a bad name?

I already am the secretary of the University soccer club and sit on the committee of the faculty's consultative committee (which does more for me than the student union ever has). Now yes they can help with my education and you know what I am doing these without needing to pay a useless $250 and without the need for CSU. But you know what I could join a soccer club or other acting/musical clubs that have nothing to do with the uni and still place these on my resume and get the same experience. So what does a union do to help with education?



And yes I do know I could get the $250 to get my moneys worth the point is I shouldn't have to pay for it if I don't want it and I should not be forced to pay the money or join some union. Campus life has continued since VSU was introduced sure some people might not get cheap beer anymore and sure people might have to pay a little extra at the gym (though others are cheaper) but campus life has continued and the societies and associations have continued, and yes I can and do sit at the cafe/restaurant/tavern and talk about world issues and people from other backgrounds and learn something new and debate on issues without the need for to pay $250. Of course to get my money's worth does that mean I should join up with associations or attend events I have no interest in and do not want at all simply to get my $250 worth?



Yes it was Nick Xenophon, good pick.
Was that anti-uranium group getting funding from the union?

The student union got a room set up for environmentalists and other sorts of activists called CRAC (community resource action centre). They did things with a small amount of student union money. Each club on campus got $25 to publish broadsheets. I used to be the Publicity Officer for the Monash Labor Club but the Maoists controlled it, and ironically wouldn't let me publish any articles that I had written. I wouldn't take that crap so I left and set up the Monash Anarchists Society and invited people to publish broadsheets until th e$25 ran out. The student union did the printing for free but wee had to pay for the reams of paper.

That's great that your university has an active soccer club etc. What happened when the amentity fees were removed from campusses was that a lot of the clubs suffered - even though the universities shouldered the costs to some extent. The rooms that were being used by clubs were often occupied by businesses and student unions began to look like shopping malls. I heled to set up a book co-op and a veggie restaurant co-op at monash and they provide work experience and employment for students but there have been no more student-run co-operative enterprises since we set these up in 1976 (alas):( We had to fight to set these up - the university didn't like to lose their monopoly on the sale of student textbooks so we had to compromise to sell only stationery and second-hand books.
After all my demonstrations and sit ins etc, the only tangible legacy of my time on campus were those two co-ops. That's the lesson I learnt. Forget political executive power, building grassroots economic structures is a better way to improve the world.
Ex-Treasurer Peter Costello was at Monash with me. Unfortunately he didn't learn the lessons that I did. He certainly benefitted politically from his experience in being a student union bureaucrat, however.
So the student union was good for Costello's education too.

Hey Lapse, thanks for labelling me and all my fellow environmentalists "uneducated morons" - I love you too!

Maybe if you weren't so dogmatic, people might respect you a little more.
And you know, dismisive insults won't shut people like me up. So you should not LAPSE into them.

The student union got a room set up for environmentalists and other sorts of activists called CRAC (community resource action centre). They did things with a small amount of student union money. Each club on campus got $25 to publish broadsheets. I used to be the Publicity Officer for the Monash Labor Club but the Maoists controlled it, and ironically wouldn't let me publish any articles that I had written. I wouldn't take that crap so I left and set up the Monash Anarchists Society and invited people to publish broadsheets until th e$25 ran out. The student union did the printing for free but wee had to pay for the reams of paper.

That's great that your university has an active soccer club etc. What happened when the amentity fees were removed from campusses was that a lot of the clubs suffered - even though the universities shouldered the costs to some extent. The rooms that were being used by clubs were often occupied by businesses and student unions began to look like shopping malls. I heled to set up a book co-op and a veggie restaurant co-op at monash and they provide work experience and employment for students but there have been no more student-run co-operative enterprises since we set these up in 1976 (alas):( We had to fight to set these up - the university didn't like to lose their monopoly on the sale of student textbooks so we had to compromise to sell only stationery and second-hand books.
After all my demonstrations and sit ins etc, the only tangible legacy of my time on campus were those two co-ops. That's the lesson I learnt. Forget political executive power, building grassroots economic structures is a better way to improve the world.
Ex-Treasurer Peter Costello was at Monash with me. Unfortunately he didn't learn the lessons that I did. He certainly benefitted politically from his experience in being a student union bureaucrat, however.
So the student union was good for Costello's education too.

So basically, the union gives some money for various groups to promote their own ploitical agenda? Hmm yes and if I disgaree with them why should I be paying to support groups I don't believe in? And you don't see anything wrong with that?

The clubs that suffered are the ones that continue to complain about VSU and don't do anything about it. Unlike our soccer club which was the first to lose funding from the union, however, unlike these clubs which just sat around moaning we did something about it and we are now the most profitable amatuer league team (that is not affiliated with a professional State league team) in Adelaide, we took our end of year profits which was running negative towards the end of CSU and this year recorded a profit of $10,000.

Of course why should people who don't play soccer or worse play for an opposition team have to pay for us to be able to pay?

Now I'm sure Peter Costello did benefit from his time at Monash (which shoots down the whole Libs want to stop it because only Labor politicians come through) but why should I pay for him to experience it? Why should I pay for other people to get something that isn't related to my degree?

Hey Lapse, thanks for labelling me and all my fellow environmentalists "uneducated morons" - I love you too!
I find the fact that you label yourself environmentalists yet fight against the most plausible source of environmentally power rather funny at best, and completely hypocritical and self serving at worse.

Uneducated: means you haven't been told about potential energy sources or investigated them for yourselves
Moron: Intelligence level of an 11-12 year old. basically, before you start thinking logically - making decisions for yourself.

So, you can see where I am going from there...


Maybe if you weren't so dogmatic, people might respect you a little more.
And you know, dismisive insults won't shut people like me up. So you should not LAPSE into them.
oh, but they make me feel better.

When I read up on the ways you abused your power and your fellow students money by partaking in irrelevant union run protests, I wonder how you could feel that what you were doing was fair. As some form of union leader, you were basically taking their money, and using it for your own gain. Well, congratulations, you now have an extra line on your resume. I hope it helps get you a job with a slightly more comfortable desk and chair.

EDIT:
congratulations by the way. You have mastered the debating technique of ignoring an entire post of relevant deal-clinching arguments by spending your entire post arguing about 2 words of mine, and then going on to tell me that I will never succeed. good effort!

You don't and won't get it LAPSE. You think you have a right to judge others. One day you'll grow up and realise that there are many sides to an issue. Keep belittling people if you like but that will only make them dislike you and not listen to your arguments.

And I was never a union "leader". The Monash anarchist society never had a president and I wasn't even the secretary.

I was elected to the student "Public Affairs Committee" first as an "Orwellian or Socialist Cynic" (read George Orwell - he'll do you good) and then in 1973 as an "Opportunist" but half-way through the term I gave up my seat and concentrated on activism.

There was no way that I "abused my power" because the only power I had from that time was the power of my personality.

But feel free to make as many assumptions about me as you like - based on entirely no evidence. Hey, maybe you could write for the Murdoch media because that's what they do.
Oh and tell the people of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island and Sellafield how safe uranium is!

But feel free to make as many assumptions about me as you like - based on entirely no evidence. Hey, maybe you could write for the Murdoch media because that's what they do.
Oh and tell the people of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island and Sellafield how safe uranium is!

Hmm yes let us live in the past and compare the nuclear power stations of a communist regime with today's. And I remember reading a Murdoch owned newspaper that was talking about how bad a low-level nuclear waste dump was and how bad a nuclear power plant would be. Oh I see your point they were spreading crap based on no evidence.

You don't and won't get it LAPSE. You think you have a right to judge others. One day you'll grow up and realise that there are many sides to an issue. Keep belittling people if you like but that will only make them dislike you and not listen to your arguments.
oh, going to take away my freedom of speech now are we?
Taking away my freedom to even think!

I realise that there are sides to the issues. I also think that all arguments from either side must be looked at. For example, if you mention say, 'student representation' I would come in and say "why yes, it is important, but here is why it is irrelevant/wrong/otherwise negated". Just as you would do the same... of wait... you haven't so far - you just focus on the points that suit you. Nevermind...

To be honest, I threw the uneducated moron bit in there cause I was bored ;) However, an argument for another day the nuclear one.

concentrated on activism.
This is one of the parts of the union I disagree on. They pay for people to go and have their say. The problem is, that the public then assumes that they are speaking for the union, which is (supposedly) speaking for the entire student body. I'm sorry, but I don't want to be lumped together under some of the protests that the unions run.
Yes, I will respect peoples right to protest (in a manner that doesn't disturb my day), but when they take the endorsement of the union, and put it behind one of the radical groups, it just goes messy.

Oh and tell the people of Chernobyl and Three Mile Island and Sellafield how safe uranium is!
Let's hypothesise.
Nuclear has been a viable power source for some 30 years now (conservative guess? - just a guess, feel free to quote me a different figure) It has not been implemented however, because there are these objections. Of course, there are no other viable energy sources to go to so they have just kept using coal. lets say that it has extended our dependance on coal power for another 15 years.
How has this affected our environment? rates of asthma? paediatric deaths related to asthma?

but once again, argument for another day. Without a clear quantitative analysis it would be next to impossible to follow that argument through to a winner (hey, not that I'm not game.. I just have better things to do 13 hours before an exam :P)

======================
back to the topic

Who wants to guess how much the QUT union is spending on sports scholarships next year (that's just where I want my money going) $140,000. Just so that they can get some people that can run/swim fast or lift heavy things... That really helps my education there... Plus elite athlete school leavers get an OP upgrade (really fair there. Glad the union is for equality)
Regrettably, the uni also does this, which as I see it is a waste of our tuition. Why isn't the union saying anything about this issue I wonder?

Collectivity: How can you justify them spending this much money this way?

oh, going to take away my freedom of speech now are we?
Taking away my freedom to even think!

I realise that there are sides to the issues. I also think that all arguments from either side must be looked at. For example, if you mention say, 'student representation' I would come in and say "why yes, it is important, but here is why it is irrelevant/wrong/otherwise negated". Just as you would do the same... of wait... you haven't so far - you just focus on the points that suit you. Nevermind...

To be honest, I threw the uneducated moron bit in there cause I was bored ;) However, an argument for another day the nuclear one.


This is one of the parts of the union I disagree on. They pay for people to go and have their say. The problem is, that the public then assumes that they are speaking for the union, which is (supposedly) speaking for the entire student body. I'm sorry, but I don't want to be lumped together under some of the protests that the unions run.
Yes, I will respect peoples right to protest (in a manner that doesn't disturb my day), but when they take the endorsement of the union, and put it behind one of the radical groups, it just goes messy.

Let's hypothesise.
Nuclear has been a viable power source for some 30 years now (conservative guess? - just a guess, feel free to quote me a different figure) It has not been implemented however, because there are these objections. Of course, there are no other viable energy sources to go to so they have just kept using coal. lets say that it has extended our dependance on coal power for another 15 years.
How has this affected our environment? rates of asthma? paediatric deaths related to asthma?

but once again, argument for another day. Without a clear quantitative analysis it would be next to impossible to follow that argument through to a winner (hey, not that I'm not game.. I just have better things to do 13 hours before an exam :P)

======================
back to the topic

Who wants to guess how much the QUT union is spending on sports scholarships next year (that's just where I want my money going) $140,000. Just so that they can get some people that can run/swim fast or lift heavy things... That really helps my education there... Plus elite athlete school leavers get an OP upgrade (really fair there. Glad the union is for equality)
Regrettably, the uni also does this, which as I see it is a waste of our tuition. Why isn't the union saying anything about this issue I wonder?

Collectivity: How can you justify them spending this much money this way?

That's better Lapse, just keep the abuse down from now on okay! I was pretty nettled there. I am personally staggered that a student union is spending money on sprots scholarships - as opposed to a university. I would find out more about this if I were you. If indeed,it is the student body authorising this (and not some university bureaucrat trying to syphon student funds away for university purposes) I would try to get a student meeting to protest it (perhaps after your exams)!
I would definitely demand to see the budget - and keep asking questions until you get some answers. Don't go off half-cocked though Lapse. Get the facts first and find out just who is behind it. There have been serious cases of corruption at Melbourne University for instance and student money was syphoned off. A right wing ALP machine-man by th ename of Andrew Landeryou was involved and the police were called in. Sports scholarships sounds pretty dodgy to me - a lawyer would argue that this expenditure was "ultra vires" (i.e. beyond the power of a student union to do). This is a lot different from money for a camp or a band or a ream of paper.

That's better Lapse, just keep the abuse down from now on okay! I was pretty nettled there.Well, It wouldn't be nearly as much fun if you weren't :p
I am personally staggered that a student union is spending money on sprots scholarships - as opposed to a university. I would find out more about this if I were you. If indeed,it is the student body authorising this (and not some university bureaucrat trying to syphon student funds away for university purposes) I would try to get a student meeting to protest it (perhaps after your exams)!
Reading further into it, it seems that the $140k is the uni and the union one combined. The union provides 28*:
Sports Scholarship
• $1000 cash paid in two installments:
• $500 presented at the Scholarship Launch
• $500 sent at the commencement of Semester 2 (on completion of
Mid –Year Sport Scholarship Report; including academic results)
• Expenses covered for 2009 Australian University Games/Championships
• Flexible study options that work around competition and training
• QUT Academic support and mentoring
• Career networking
• QUT Student Guild Fitness Centre and Aquatic Centre 12mth pass for
pool, weights, cardio and classes


I would definitely demand to see the budget - and keep asking questions until you get some answers. Don't go off half-cocked though Lapse. Get the facts first and find out just who is behind it. There have been serious cases of corruption at Melbourne University for instance and student money was syphoned off. A right wing ALP machine-man by th ename of Andrew Landeryou was involved and the police were called in. Sports scholarships sounds pretty dodgy to me - a lawyer would argue that this expenditure was "ultra vires" (i.e. beyond the power of a student union to do). This is a lot different from money for a camp or a band or a ream of paper.
Just this year, the same union, decided to make dodgy high-risk investments and invested half of the savings($5.5m) into Diverseport. Which of course, collapsed.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/articles/2008/10/08/1223145441418.html
and of course, In October, this is what happens => http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24513109-3102,00.html

So, we pay them to screw up and now the parents who try to go to uni have to pay double? What were they doing putting so much of our money into a large unsecured investment? All the eggs in one basket?

$5.5 million.

So why were they bitching about having no money when the government granted students a necessary freedom?

$5.5 million.

So why were they bitching about having no money when the government granted students a necessary freedom?

Collectivity wouldn't approve of the way I would like to answer this post :P

And that's just the half they had tied up in that dodgy investment company.

Well it just goes to show how much crap the unions were talking about. And the stuff they have closed down didn't need to be closed down (Leon gave an example) just to promote their own political agenda.

Well it just goes to show how much crap the unions were talking about. And the stuff they have closed down didn't need to be closed down (Leon gave an example) just to promote their own political agenda.

Hey wait Blouman - don't generalise now. There are some unions that may be corrupt or incompetent or make unwise/high risk investments (just like there are some capitalist institutions). That certainly doesn't mean all do that. Avoid sloppy generalisations or you'll end up sounding like the Daily Telegraph.

All you need to say is, "Be vigilant!" (with whatever your money is in) Certain CEOs who vote themselves million dollar bonusses spring to mind. Mothing iorritates a left-winger more than to hear someone on the right bleat about union corruption while remaining deathly silent on the big piggies whose noses are permanently in the trough.:mad:

So basically, the union gives some money for various groups to promote their own ploitical agenda? Hmm yes and if I disgaree with them why should I be paying to support groups I don't believe in? And you don't see anything wrong with that?

The clubs that suffered are the ones that continue to complain about VSU and don't do anything about it. Unlike our soccer club which was the first to lose funding from the union, however, unlike these clubs which just sat around moaning we did something about it and we are now the most profitable amatuer league team (that is not affiliated with a professional State league team) in Adelaide, we took our end of year profits which was running negative towards the end of CSU and this year recorded a profit of $10,000.

Of course why should people who don't play soccer or worse play for an opposition team have to pay for us to be able to pay?

Now I'm sure Peter Costello did benefit from his time at Monash (which shoots down the whole Libs want to stop it because only Labor politicians come through) but why should I pay for him to experience it? Why should I pay for other people to get something that isn't related to my degree?

Christ on a bright pink pgo stick Blou... didn't you read what is actually happening? NOBODY is forcing you to join the union. I'll say it again, nice and easy for everyone to see: Nobody is forcing you to join the union. Nobody is forcing you to fund the unions either.

No, what the government is doing is forcing you to fund the universitys. The unis, in turn, will fund whatever the hell they like. If unions are part of that, then that's the uni's choice. But this means everyone has to make a submission for funding, and allows thos services which are widely enjoyed to be subsidised whilst those services which the uni deems not worthy, get zilch.

You are not paying to support the unions. You are paying to support the uni's, who are then paying to support the students in whatever way they feel is best.

(Now, personally I would have some sort of preferencing process when the money is paid, so that you can help the money go where you want it, but that's a different debate).

Christ on a bright pink pgo stick Blou... didn't you read what is actually happening? NOBODY is forcing you to join the union. I'll say it again, nice and easy for everyone to see: Nobody is forcing you to join the union. Nobody is forcing you to fund the unions either.

No, what the government is doing is forcing you to fund the universitys. The unis, in turn, will fund whatever the hell they like. If unions are part of that, then that's the uni's choice. But this means everyone has to make a submission for funding, and allows thos services which are widely enjoyed to be subsidised whilst those services which the uni deems not worthy, get zilch.

You are not paying to support the unions. You are paying to support the uni's, who are then paying to support the students in whatever way they feel is best.

(Now, personally I would have some sort of preferencing process when the money is paid, so that you can help the money go where you want it, but that's a different debate).

Well the thread had turned into a VSU vs CSU debate.

Also the government is forcing you to give other people subsidised gym membership why the government can't do this who knows considering they need to increase their spending at the moment. What this is that you have a choice of joining the union but you still have to pay, as I said earlier it is a way for the government to tackle VSU in a backdoor manner.

Thanks for making that clear Svalbardania. Now class: homework for today is to find out what the Rudd Govt is introducing, exactly. That includes me.

can't we just argue the same (probably irrelevant) points over an over again? You aren't meant to be informed when arguing on the internet!

As an Aussie uni student, this annoys the hell out of me and is a drain on my booze money :(

Edit: Yet another fine example of why electing Kevin Rudd was one of the worst decisions this country has ever made.

As an Aussie uni student, this annoys the hell out of me and is a drain on my booze money :(

Edit: Yet another fine example of why electing Kevin Rudd was one of the worst decisions this country has ever made.

I've been telling them that!


ooh, another Brisbanian!

Well then why are you all bagging Kev 07 the Brisbane electorates went ape-shit over him.

Remember? "My name's Kevin; I'm from Queensland and I'm here to help"

I've been bagging Krudd since he first got up and did his arrogant smirk.

Everytime I drive past his office I feel like going in there, and taking a dump on his desk.

that'ds how him...

I've been telling them that!

So have I

ooh, another Brisbanian!

Oh bloody hell not another one. :p

EDIT: Nah you guys are alright. Well most Brisbanites.

Well then why are you all bagging Kev 07 the Brisbane electorates went ape-shit over him.

Remember? "My name's Kevin; I'm from Queensland and I'm here to help"

Alas, it seems the voting populace is generally full of idiots.

I sure as hell hoped he wouldn't win. Maybe if we're lucky the Governor-General will dismiss him...

Quentin Bryce is part of his Brisbane mafia - and they are fond of each other.

My advice - lie back and enjoy it for the next 3 years.
I think he's not all bad/not all good but I'm an anarchist and I don't expect much from politicians - not even Obama.

I like been able to say "I told you so" to all the people that were going around spouting Labour anti-Howard propaganda :)

I like been able to say "I told you so" to all the people that were going around spouting Labour anti-Howard propaganda :)

As much as I enjoy doing that the fact that we have to live through makes me feel sad.

Can't you Aussies stage a coup d'etat? Overthrow the newly elected government or something? I mean, is that possible in Australia?

Wed don't do things like that down here. We are one of the few countries to have formed without a bloody battle and it was very peaceful. While I respect the government's right to exist as they won the most number of seats in parliament does not mean I will agree with everything they do.

We just need to lobby the government and Independent senators to dismiss this piece of legislation. The bad thing is that even though this legislation may not have passed by July 1st next year we would still have to pay, just like the taxes we have had to pay despite it not being approved by the Senate.

Aye, there's something wrong with the system here.

I always found it amusing when I came across students lobbying against VSU. They're normally the bleeding heart hippy types that are all about freedom to choose and all that and yet they want to force students to be part of the union.

Aye, there's something wrong with the system here.

I always found it amusing when I came across students lobbying against VSU. They're normally the bleeding heart hippy types that are all about freedom to choose and all that and yet they want to force students to be part of the union.

Hypocrisy at its finest. These would be the same people complaining about the increase in HECS fees and then when I complain about this fee and CSU they say well if you go to uni you have to pay them. And I bet these would be the same people who would be the first to protest about a National Service scheme.

Can't you Aussies stage a coup d'etat? Overthrow the newly elected government or something? I mean, is that possible in Australia?

:p Nanatsu is calling your bluff boys. Going from whingeing about the proposed fee - to arguing for a "change " in government. ......
It's true that you guys do sound like Alexander Downer on a bad day.
My advice? Get your hands off it boys!:D

:p Nanatsu is calling your bluff boys. Going from whingeing about the proposed fee - to arguing for a "change " in government. ......
It's true that you guys do sound like Alexander Downer on a bad day.
My advice? Get your hands off it boys!:D

I mean, if it's such a bad government, one that's taking away "freedoms", instead of waiting for elections, overthrow it. Take the bull by the horns, or the balls and make a change. I don't know, it seems fitting. *shrugs*

I mean, if it's such a bad government, one that's taking away "freedoms", instead of waiting for elections, overthrow it. Take the bull by the horns, or the balls and make a change. I don't know, it seems fitting. *shrugs*

Well unfortunately, they Australian government isn't ACTUALLY taking away our freedoms. Not with this, anyway. That's just a bunch of hyperbole from angry right-wing yobbos who hate the fact that living in our society means looking out for other people aswell as oneself, and who feel that everything in this world should be user-pays, not subsidised in any way.

Plus, there has never been a bloody or violent history in Australia. The worst we got was typical colonial violence against the natives, or a bunch of gold miners going on strike and getting shot at. So overthrowing the government just ain't happening, especially when the government faces a hostile Senate like they do now.

Of course, what most of you arguing against this fail to realise is that so much more can be done by the universities if we give them this small amount of money, instead of if everyone had to pay for what they used. As Howard fans, I thought you would appreciate the idea of economies of scale.

And in regards to the $250 "eating into your booze money", you can actually defer the payment, and add it onto your HECS. Yes, I realise how big your HECS debt already is, and you don't want to make it bigger. But $250 a year is nothing on top of that, really. If you must buy more liquor, you can just defer the payment till you're earning the squillions a university degree theoretically gets you, where you'll be able to afford both booze and the fee. Why is this such a big deal? Are we back to the principle of "I don't want to pay for stuff I don't use?" Coz you KNOW that's a dead argument...

-snip-

Of course the one question no one has answered here is why should I be giving someone subsidised gym membership? And why should people give me money to play sport?

Of course why can't the government give some funding if they think we need to be able to get subsidised gym membership? Considering the government needs to increase the amount of spending to combat this recession (which that $1000 for some people isn't enough) it would be a good thing to do, and they could kill two birds with one stone. But no they would prefer students to fork out money despite the rising cost of living.

Well unfortunately, they Australian government isn't ACTUALLY taking away our freedoms. Not with this, anyway. That's just a bunch of hyperbole from angry right-wing yobbos who hate the fact that living in our society means looking out for other people aswell as oneself, and who feel that everything in this world should be user-pays, not subsidised in any way.

There is a difference between subsidising essentials and subsidising some jocks gym membership.

I work for my money so that I can spend it how I choose. Why should people who are perfectly capable of doing the same just get it given to them? The system is user-earns, as such it should be user pays.

If people can't afford to go to the gym, then they should go and get a job so that they can! Centrelink will pay for essential services, and most of the people on Youth Allowance are through the course of their life, are going to more than pay back the government in taxes. But I wouldn't class gym membership/art shows/ultimate frisbee as essential.

I must admit there is a lot of pleasure to be had taking money from bleating right wingers.

I must admit there is a lot of pleasure to be had taking money from bleating right wingers.

Yeah except you're taking it away from people who voted for you form the lower classes who according to people like you claim that they can't afford to go to university. So hay because they can't afford to go to university we are going to increase the price.

Yeah except you're taking it away from people who voted for you form the lower classes who according to people like you claim that they can't afford to go to university. So hay because they can't afford to go to university we are going to increase the price.

Free university education would be ideal, imo. (Except the compulsory amenities fees!)

What pisses me off about the thread is that, as the thread title suggests and your OP makes clear, it's purpose is right wing anti-Labor propaganda. If you were primarily concerned about the welfare of students the title would be something along the lines of "Students being slugged again".

Free university education would be ideal, imo. (Except the compulsory amenities fees!)

What pisses me off about the thread is that, as the thread title suggests and your OP makes clear, it's purpose is right wing anti-Labor propaganda. If you were primarily concerned about the welfare of students the title would be something along the lines of "Students being slugged again".

But then people wouldn't read it. Who gives a shit about students? Certainly not the government. And I have made clear my objections to this thing and what it is about in later posts. All those people who are for this fee have yet to give me answers as to why ten people should give somebody else $2 each so that he can buy a frisbee or why I should be funding piss ups for a group of people or why I should give people subsidised gym membership, or why I should give an opposition team money or why people who have no interest in soccer give me money to buy a ball.

I would recomend you all read this: www.dest.gov.au/sectors/higher_education/policy_issues_reviews/key_issues/VSU/documents/Ford_N_pdf.htm
It sums up our argument fairly well and clearly.

Question: I very rarely get involved in this sort of thing, Who should I be writing to? My Senator or federal member?

I would recomend you all read this: www.dest.gov.au/sectors/higher_education/policy_issues_reviews/key_issues/VSU/documents/Ford_N_pdf.htm
It sums up our argument fairly well and clearly.

Question: I very rarely get involved in this sort of thing, Who should I be writing to? My Senator or federal member?

If your federal member is Labor you can try, but party rules dictate that you vote as your told to vote so unless your member carries some weight than their isn't much point.

If it is Liberal than you can but he is already on your side.

If other than do that might get some sympathy.

But the best way to knock this down is through the Senate so really write to you Senators explaining why. Joyce has already said he is in favour so perhaps trying to get him to change his mind would be a good idea also write to any greens senators you have as well. Infact since this is a federal issue writing to Fielding and Xenophon might help as well to get enough votes to stop this crap even though they aren't from your state.

But the best way to knock this down is through the Senate so really write to you Senators explaining why. Joyce has already said he is in favour so perhaps trying to get him to change his mind would be a good idea also write to any greens senators you have as well. Infact since this is a federal issue writing to Fielding and Xenophon might help as well to get enough votes to stop this crap even though they aren't from your state.

I'll give that a whirl. If only I was better with words. It seems very clumsily worded so far.

Take your time Lapse, just try and get your arguments with some backing and explain why he should be against this measure. even give him a copy of that link to look over, that might help them.

If your federal member is Labor you can try, but party rules dictate that you vote as your told to vote so unless your member carries some weight than their isn't much point...

That's totally misleading advice. Labor parliamentarians caucus, they don't vote as they're "told to vote". There is a huge difference.

That's totally misleading advice. Labor parliamentarians caucus, they don't vote as they're "told to vote". There is a huge difference.

Hey I know they can debate it in caucus but once it goes to the parliamentary floor the MP's have to vote as was decided by caucus.

I shall emphasize that I have not written a letter to a polly before, so this will probably come off sounding rather amateur:

To Senator Barnaby Joyce

I write to you in regards to the proposed amenities fees to be charged to university students.

I am currently a second year university student at QUT study Health Science. I am disappointed to hear about the proposed amenities fee for university students. I believe that the scheme is open to corruption and is essentially taking money from everyone for the advantage of a select few..

Upon the introduction of VSU, it was shown that most students do not want to support their student union. At QUT, Even though there is no fee charged, only 35% of students have joined. The services they claim to provide are often irrelevant and very rarely justify the expense of student unionism. Unions have been known to abuse the money and spend it on luxuries such as parties, subsidised alcohol and the Monash University union even purchased a new car for their committee. The QUT union even spends thousands of dollars a year on sporting scholarships. Keeping in mind that many university students are required to work a job plus draw on youth allowance just to be able to afford the bare necessities, I find this disgusting abuse of money. I myself have had to work multiple jobs and some weeks had to survive on one or two meals a day.

If this amenities fee were going to actually benefit my education, I would have no problem with supporting it. As it stands however, I have heard nothing in any of the media reports about this issue of the fee actually going towards education.

The unions do provide some essential services, such as academic representation & advocacy, but I believe that this can hardly justify a $250 a year fee for all students. The unions also run non-essential services such a child care, food outlets and sporting clubs– all of which can be found outside of a university setting using the user pays scheme. Is it fair that I should be forced to pay for someone to buy a new soccer ball seeing I have no interest in soccer? Is it fair that I should be forced to subsidise the cost of cafeteria food, when there is a Woolworths 400m down the road with cheaper food? I believe that these non-essential services should be under a user-pays scheme. The unions have also been known to support political activities and protests. This is an outrageous activity and is contradictory to our freedom of association.

A quote from the QUT guild, reported in the summary report of the impact of the introduction of VSU reads:
“The Guild has had to commercialise many services in order to ensure the financial viability of the organisation. Affected services include sport, recreation activities, trips, tours and courses, student magazine, orientation week, student diaries, clubs and societies, and child care. Commercialisation has increased the cost of all of the above services.”
I have not ever made use of any of the above facilities or services. If I did choose to join a club, I would join one outside of the university because I do not agree with the way the union runs them. Why should I be forced against my will to pay for them?

I once again emphasize, that I would not have a problem if this amenities fee was going towards my education. The few essential services the guild claims to provide could be run with a fraction of the amount they are demanding and the non-essential services should be user pays.

Thank you for your consideration


What do you think?

Yep Labour cant vote against caucus without possible legal action against them. They signed a contract. The majority rule in caucus forces their vote. And the caucus meetings arnt open to the public so you never really know what your Labour politician thinks.

If your federal member is Labor you can try, but party rules dictate that you vote as your told to vote so unless your member carries some weight than their isn't much point.

If it is Liberal than you can but he is already on your side.

If other than do that might get some sympathy.

But the best way to knock this down is through the Senate so really write to you Senators explaining why. Joyce has already said he is in favour so perhaps trying to get him to change his mind would be a good idea also write to any greens senators you have as well. Infact since this is a federal issue writing to Fielding and Xenophon might help as well to get enough votes to stop this crap even though they aren't from your state.

Hey, I wrote to my local (Labour) MP, and he not only responded, but made a personal submission to Conroy presentinig my (and apparently others') concerns about the internet filter. So there!

Anyway, in regards to your gym membership thing... if you yourself are honestly going to complain not only when you have to help fund other people's stuff but when other people fund your stuff, then I guess we're done here. If you would honestly reject other people paying for stuff you use aswell as the stuff you don't, and you don't see the problem with that, then you are, to quite Orson Welles as Citizen Kane, "A long faced, overdressed, ANARCHIST!".

Svalbardania, you were right! (Except about using "anarchist" as a pejorative term.)
This is from the Sydney Morning Herald (a source I trust well ahead of the highly mischievous Murdoch press that tend to distort the news to fit their anti-labor prejudices.)

"The Howard government's voluntary student unionism legislation in 2006 barred universities from collecting compulsory fees for student unions, which provide a range of campus services as well as acting as political representatives of students.

The Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, said this had created a large gap in university funding.

"We believe it is necessary to give universities an option to impose this charge. This is a contribution which goes to universities, not to any individual student union, and it is entirely at the discretion of universities," Mr Rudd said.

Senator Joyce said he had always been concerned that the voluntary student unionism legislation was hitting services that were intrinsic to university life, especially on regional campuses.

"Sporting facilities have closed down, buildings are surrounded by bindi-eye patches, and that can lead to the demise of the university itself," he said.

"The university is more than just the development of the academic side of the person; it should also invest in their social development and encourage students to be more involved in the life of the university."

The Family First senator Steve Fielding said he did not believe that the services under discussion were so essential that all students should be forced to pay for them. "Family First is happy to look at the Government's proposals but we will need some convincing."

Under the Government's plan universities would be allowed to collect a compulsory student amenities fee of up to $250 from next July.

In return they would have to meet new benchmarks requiring them to provide student services such as food and beverages, meeting rooms, sports and recreation, child care, counselling, health care, housing, the arts, debating, student newspapers and support for overseas students.

To soften the financial effect on students and their parents, the Government will provide new HECS-style student loans to cover the services fee, and the repayment would be deferred until the student enters the workforce."

I see that Barnaby Joyce has observed that universities didn't and can't make up the shortfall caused by the Howard Government's ideologically-driven legislation.

Svalbardania: You seem to mis understand us. I have mentioned several times that I do not like other people paying for me aswell. User pays mean that we pay for ourselves and you pay for yourself. Think of it metaphorically:

Let's You live in a share house with 3 people.
You decide that you will split the food bill evenly, but due to you been too busy, your other two housemates go shopping for you. They of course buy the most expensive cuts of meat, they don't buy any fruit or veges saying that "you have to buy your own" but they buy about 5KG of chocolate. Then of course they hand you a $150 bill every week. Then, one of your other housemates eats twice as much as you, because he is a fat bum, and you are healthy.

How long would that last? That is pretty much what the student union does.

Now, a user-pays situation:
You and your housemates do your own shopping, you buy the meat that is within your budget, you buy healthy food and only as much junk food as you need. You get away with $100, while your fat friend pays $200.

Can you honestly say you would rather live in the first system?

Yep Labour cant vote against caucus without possible legal action against them. They signed a contract...

That's not correct. Labor caucus members have been known to vote against caucus decisions. The usual sanction is ejection from the party (after much hand wringing by all concerned). This doesn't mean they give up their seats. In Oz, the person is elected for a seat, not necessarily the party. Such people are forever treated as scabs by the ALP - we are good haters.

A noteworthy floor-crosser was Senator Brian Harradine from Tasmania who based his subsequent career on this action (and on his anti-abortion stance).

Yep Labour cant vote against caucus without possible legal action against them. They signed a contract. The majority rule in caucus forces their vote. And the caucus meetings arnt open to the public so you never really know what your Labour politician thinks.

Look, it's not my job to teach civics, but I can't let this stand unchallenged.

First up, it's spelt "L-a-b-o-r". Homework: find out why.

Labor MPs who vote against caucus decisions get expelled from the party -- if they can't muster the numbers.

Liberal politicians who vote against their party-room decision get exp -- er, asked to resign/leave politics to spend more time with their family -- if they can't muster the numbers.

National Party politicians who vote against their party-room decision ... well, it's not pretty. Though some of them survive by turning into Independents.

Labor caucus (party-room) meetings aren't open to the public.

Liberal party-room (caucus) meetings aren't open to the public.

National party-room (caucus) meetings aren't open to the public.

You may not know how your Labor pollie thinks, but you know how he'll vote: party policy.

You may not know how your Liberal pollie thinks, but you know how he'll vote: party policy.

You may not know how your National pollie thinks, but you know how he'll vote: party policy.

Party discipline, party whips, party policy, party conferences, party branches, they're all part of the system of government Australia has developed. You may not approve of them, but you should at least know how they work.

Further homework: find out how the Greens form and practise their policy. I reckon, say, 2000 words, Times Roman font, 12point, single-sided, double-spaced, properly referenced, run it through Turnitin and have it on my desk by 5pm next Friday.

NOTE: In case you think I'm serious, mods can't give you homework. More's the pity.:D

:confused:Svalbardania: You seem to mis understand us. I have mentioned several times that I do not like other people paying for me aswell. User pays mean that we pay for ourselves and you pay for yourself. Think of it metaphorically:

Let's You live in a share house with 3 people.
You decide that you will split the food bill evenly, but due to you been too busy, your other two housemates go shopping for you. They of course buy the most expensive cuts of meat, they don't buy any fruit or veges saying that "you have to buy your own" but they buy about 5KG of chocolate. Then of course they hand you a $150 bill every week. Then, one of your other housemates eats twice as much as you, because he is a fat bum, and you are healthy.

How long would that last? That is pretty much what the student union does.

Now, a user-pays situation:
You and your housemates do your own shopping, you buy the meat that is within your budget, you buy healthy food and only as much junk food as you need. You get away with $100, while your fat friend pays $200.

Can you honestly say you would rather live in the first system?

Lapse, you keep portraying yourself as someone who doesn't have a voice. If my two housemates didn't care what I wanted I wouldn't live with them. Why wouldn't you talk it over with them and come to a more equitable arrangement. Then if they won't listen, find another place.
If you can lobby senators and articluate your concerns (without abuse!) then you can make positive changes. (mind you, if you were in an active democratic union, you'd have a union with some muscle backing you up):D

Look, it's not my job to teach civics, but I can't let this stand unchallenged.

First up, it's spelt "L-a-b-o-r". Homework: find out why.

Labor MPs who vote against caucus decisions get expelled from the party -- if they can't muster the numbers.

Liberal politicians who vote against their party-room decision get exp -- er, asked to resign/leave politics to spend more time with their family -- if they can't muster the numbers.

National Party politicians who vote against their party-room decision ... well, it's not pretty. Though some of them survive by turning into Independents.

Labor caucus (party-room) meetings aren't open to the public.

Liberal party-room (caucus) meetings aren't open to the public.

National party-room (caucus) meetings aren't open to the public.

You may not know how your Labor pollie thinks, but you know how he'll vote: party policy.

You may not know how your Liberal pollie thinks, but you know how he'll vote: party policy.

You may not know how your National pollie thinks, but you know how he'll vote: party policy.

Party discipline, party whips, party policy, party conferences, party branches, they're all part of the system of government Australia has developed. You may not approve of them, but you should at least know how they work.

Further homework: find out how the Greens form and practise their policy. I reckon, say, 2000 words, Times Roman font, 12point, single-sided, double-spaced, properly referenced, run it through Turnitin and have it on my desk by 5pm next Friday.

NOTE: In case you think I'm serious, mods can't give you homework. More's the pity.:D

Please Ard! I did my homework!:hail: Don't beat me with cricket bat again! Use the wire brush - I like the bristles:D

:confused:

Lapse, you keep portraying yourself as someone who doesn't have a voice. If my two housemates didn't care what I wanted I wouldn't live with them. Why wouldn't you talk it over with them and come to a more equitable arrangement. Then if they won't listen, find another place.
Rental tenancy agreement - you can't get out and change houses. My uni is the only one that offers my course in Queensland - I can't get out of it.
Talking it out: why should we have to talk it out? it is just courtesy not to do that!


If you can lobby senators and articluate your concerns (without abuse!) then you can make positive changes. (mind you, if you were in an active democratic union, you'd have a union with some muscle backing you up):D
Welcome to the real world. Student unions are too busy telling themselves that they are making a difference to actually make a difference.

Please Ard! I did my homework!:hail: Don't beat me with cricket bat again! Use the wire brush - I like the bristles:D

Oh, I don't go in for anything as old-fashioned as that. I explain how I understand, no, I really do, what you're going through, and I make an appointment with the school counsellor, and I talk to your parents about how important it is to treat this whole situation sensitively, and I ask you to write a journal, or maybe do a collage, or bring along a CD of your favourite music, and I liaise with your other teachers, especially Art and Drama, and then we all discuss it with you ... sensitively and understandingly ...


And we get a sensitive and understanding doctor to prescribe something helpful when you start begging for the cricket bat. :D

Svalbardania: You seem to mis understand us. I have mentioned several times that I do not like other people paying for me aswell. User pays mean that we pay for ourselves and you pay for yourself. Think of it metaphorically:

Let's You live in a share house with 3 people.
You decide that you will split the food bill evenly, but due to you been too busy, your other two housemates go shopping for you. They of course buy the most expensive cuts of meat, they don't buy any fruit or veges saying that "you have to buy your own" but they buy about 5KG of chocolate. Then of course they hand you a $150 bill every week. Then, one of your other housemates eats twice as much as you, because he is a fat bum, and you are healthy.

How long would that last? That is pretty much what the student union does.

Now, a user-pays situation:
You and your housemates do your own shopping, you buy the meat that is within your budget, you buy healthy food and only as much junk food as you need. You get away with $100, while your fat friend pays $200.

Can you honestly say you would rather live in the first system?

Yes. Having lived in shared houses (and known several others) I would definitely prefer the first system.

Shared kitty and shared chores encourages a good social environment where everybody kicks in and everyone shares resources. If someone tries to take advantage they are usually quickly put right or, in the worst case scenario, encouraged to leave.

User pay households are at best unfriendly and at worst, full of disputes. A good example is local calls on telephone bills (admittedly in pre-mobile phone days.) A user pays system requires every phone call be recorded along with the person who made it. The records never match the bill. The user pay system engenders an expectation that no-one will pay more than they believe they should and thus the bills don't get paid. Or some sucker coughs up so the phone isn't disconnected.

Some housemates use the phone more, some use more heating in their room, some eat more, some don't do enough housework. On average people gain here, donate there. The most harmonious shared houses I have seen or lived in are those where all bills and tasks are shared equally and where the household is careful to prevent gross abuses of the privileges.

That's not correct. Labor caucus members have been known to vote against caucus decisions. The usual sanction is ejection from the party (after much hand wringing by all concerned). This doesn't mean they give up their seats. In Oz, the person is elected for a seat, not necessarily the party. Such people are forever treated as scabs by the ALP - we are good haters.

A noteworthy floor-crosser was Senator Brian Harradine from Tasmania who based his subsequent career on this action (and on his anti-abortion stance).

Yes, and they are kicked out of the party and will lose pre-selection for the next election. I know all this they are told what to vote for and if they disobey as you say they are kicked out of the party. So as I was syaing to Lapse there is little point in talking to a Labor member about this because they won't risk their seat over an issue such as this.

-snip-

Well actually Ard if a liberal pollie votes against the party line he isn't automatically expelled, he/she may find it harder to be able to rise up in the party and will be in the backbench for awhile but they will still be apart of the Liberal party.

And Nationals pollies have voted against the party line before and are still members.

Hey, I wrote to my local (Labour) MP, and he not only responded, but made a personal submission to Conroy presentinig my (and apparently others') concerns about the internet filter. So there!

And yet this filter is still being proposed and more than likely will go ahead. Of course this filter which is going to ban sites on ethunaisa and anexia

Anyway, in regards to your gym membership thing... if you yourself are honestly going to complain not only when you have to help fund other people's stuff but when other people fund your stuff, then I guess we're done here. If you would honestly reject other people paying for stuff you use aswell as the stuff you don't, and you don't see the problem with that, then you are, to quite Orson Welles as Citizen Kane, "A long faced, overdressed, ANARCHIST!".

What? I don't care if people want to fund my pleasure if they want to, what I am saying is why they should be forced to fund my pleasure.

:confused:

Lapse, you keep portraying yourself as someone who doesn't have a voice. If my two housemates didn't care what I wanted I wouldn't live with them. Why wouldn't you talk it over with them and come to a more equitable arrangement. Then if they won't listen, find another place.

You know you tell Lapse to leave, and that is what he is saying he should be able to do, to leave not have to pay this amenities fee, but with this proposal it would be like saying if you don't like it you can leave the house but you still have to split the bill three ways.

Yes! If the two oafs won't negotiate then - it depends on who owns the lease. I wouldn't stay where I couldn't see eye to eye with my housemates. But Lapse deliberately adopts a defeatist position in this hypothetical situation.

In the words of Barack: "RYes we can!"

You guys have been criticised by many posters for making mountains out of a $250 molwhill but I acknowledge that if there is a principle at stake, then it it your DUTY to fight for what you believe.
If you do fight for change - any change, be under no illusions that the victory will be easy.

As for the party solidarity with Labor, I agree with Ard's point that it exists with the Conservative parties too but there is more wriggle room (e.g.Barnaby Joyce on the Telstra sale, Petro Georgiou on refugees). But try being a Liberal and arguing for a fair Industrial Relations system and see how long you would survive in the party.
"Fairness is a swear word round here, son!"

Yes! If the two oafs won't negotiate then - it depends on who owns the lease. I wouldn't stay where I couldn't see eye to eye with my housemates. But Lapse deliberately adopts a defeatist position in this hypothetical situation.

In the words of Barack: "RYes we can!"

You guys have been criticised by many posters for making mountains out of a $250 molwhill but I acknowledge that if there is a principle at stake, then it it your DUTY to fight for what you believe.
If you do fight for change - any change, be under no illusions that the victory will be easy.

As for the party solidarity with Labor, I agree with Ard's point that it exists with the Conservative parties too but there is more wriggle room (e.g.Barnaby Joyce on the Telstra sale, Petro Georgiou on refugees). But try being a Liberal and arguing for a fair Industrial Relations system and see how long you would survive in the party.
"Fairness is a swear word round here, son!"

That all depends what you mean by fair. If by fair you mean the system pre=2005 then I would say you would have a very good chance as that is the current platform of the party. Shame it isn't apart of Labors.

And yet no one who supports this measure has been able to answer any of my questions. Save you Collect who did answer my question as to what a student union can do for my education but as I showed I can still get these benefits without the need of being forced to pay.

Yes, and they are kicked out of the party and will lose pre-selection for the next election. I know all this they are told what to vote for and if they disobey as you say they are kicked out of the party. So as I was syaing to Lapse there is little point in talking to a Labor member about this because they won't risk their seat over an issue such as this...

What you are saying here is essentially correct. I was commenting on Self-sacrifice's misapprehension.

I also took exception to the comment that Labor members vote how they're told to. That gives the impression (deliberately?) that some sort of sinister party machine is pulling strings behind the scenes. I tell ya, the ALP isn't that well organised.

Svalbardania: You seem to mis understand us. I have mentioned several times that I do not like other people paying for me aswell. User pays mean that we pay for ourselves and you pay for yourself. Think of it metaphorically:

Let's You live in a share house with 3 people.
You decide that you will split the food bill evenly, but due to you been too busy, your other two housemates go shopping for you. They of course buy the most expensive cuts of meat, they don't buy any fruit or veges saying that "you have to buy your own" but they buy about 5KG of chocolate. Then of course they hand you a $150 bill every week. Then, one of your other housemates eats twice as much as you, because he is a fat bum, and you are healthy.

How long would that last? That is pretty much what the student union does.

Now, a user-pays situation:
You and your housemates do your own shopping, you buy the meat that is within your budget, you buy healthy food and only as much junk food as you need. You get away with $100, while your fat friend pays $200.

Can you honestly say you would rather live in the first system?

You make a good point, I'll acknowledge that.

However, the student union may not be able to do all that rubbish stuff anymore under THIS system. In terms of the VSU debate, you've swung me, I can see the benefits of not forcing people to join the union, but this isn't a return to CSU.

Taking your metaphor: You life in a flat with three people. You all equally pay rent, but you all buy your own food and luxury items. Everything is sweet. Once a year, you have to pay an amenities fee for upkeep to the room with the ping pong table and theatre area. These are free for all tenants to use, but need money for maintenance.

In fact, that's pretty much what this is. I can see how you'd be disgruntled by that actually, you seem pretty consistent on most of these things. In broader terms, I imagine you are a low-tax low-spend type, oui? Just clarifying. Coz you know, the Howard government presided over massive spending increase, paid for in a large part by the windfall from resources revenue, but whatever, that's neither here nor there.

But perhaps there is another alternative idea. Perhaps, by funding all these groups, activities, and so forth it encourages participation, for one to get out and actively engage with all parts of university life. Something to think about...

What you are saying here is essentially correct. I was commenting on Self-sacrifice's misapprehension.

I also took exception to the comment that Labor members vote how they're told to. That gives the impression (deliberately?) that some sort of sinister party machine is pulling strings behind the scenes. I tell ya, the ALP isn't that well organised.

I apologise that I didn't make myself clearer.

And I do know that now a days that the ALP doesn't have people behind the scenes pulling the strings anymore, the 47* faceless men have become less important on ALP policy. It wasn't done deliberately, I am aware that I wasn't clear in my statement.

*I don't remember the exact number, but I do know that was knocked on the head when the media started asking why Whitlam leader of the ALP at the time was sitting outside of the conference awaiting to hear about party policy.

Yes. Having lived in shared houses (and known several others) I would definitely prefer the first system.

Shared kitty and shared chores encourages a good social environment where everybody kicks in and everyone shares resources. If someone tries to take advantage they are usually quickly put right or, in the worst case scenario, encouraged to leave.

User pay households are at best unfriendly and at worst, full of disputes. A good example is local calls on telephone bills (admittedly in pre-mobile phone days.) A user pays system requires every phone call be recorded along with the person who made it. The records never match the bill. The user pay system engenders an expectation that no-one will pay more than they believe they should and thus the bills don't get paid. Or some sucker coughs up so the phone isn't disconnected.

Some housemates use the phone more, some use more heating in their room, some eat more, some don't do enough housework. On average people gain here, donate there. The most harmonious shared houses I have seen or lived in are those where all bills and tasks are shared equally and where the household is careful to prevent gross abuses of the privileges.
You are taking the metaphor too far here. Paying $10 as you walk into the gym or join a new club is a bit different to self-reporting every phone call you make.

Yes! If the two oafs oh you :p

You guys have been criticised by many posters for making mountains out of a $250 molwhill but I acknowledge that if there is a principle at stake, then it it your DUTY to fight for what you believe.
If you do fight for change - any change, be under no illusions that the victory will be easy.
$250 is alot of money. There are some weeks when an extra $20 would be the difference between living off rice & soy sauce and eating something with meat in it.
[/QUOTE]

You make a good point, I'll acknowledge that.

However, the student union may not be able to do all that rubbish stuff anymore under THIS system. In terms of the VSU debate, you've swung me, I can see the benefits of not forcing people to join the union, but this isn't a return to CSU.
holy crap... that is the first time that has ever happened on the internet... :eek:

Taking your metaphor: You life in a flat with three people. You all equally pay rent, but you all buy your own food and luxury items. Everything is sweet. Once a year, you have to pay an amenities fee for upkeep to the room with the ping pong table and theatre area. These are free for all tenants to use, but need money for maintenance.If I don't use the ping pong table, or want the ping pont table there, why am I forced to pay for it?

In fact, that's pretty much what this is. I can see how you'd be disgruntled by that actually, you seem pretty consistent on most of these things. In broader terms, I imagine you are a low-tax low-spend type, oui? Just clarifying. Coz you know, the Howard government presided over massive spending increase, paid for in a large part by the windfall from resources revenue, but whatever, that's neither here nor there.
If money needs to be spent on something that is going to be better for the community, state or country, I say spend it. If this can be sourced to the private sector, or made into an earner (ie, union running the shops) then why should the public pay for it?
If however, the money is going into buying the committee a bar tab, I object.

But perhaps there is another alternative idea. Perhaps, by funding all these groups, activities, and so forth it encourages participation, for one to get out and actively engage with all parts of university life. Something to think about...
Which is pretty much the only argument the unionists have been throwing at us. There are other ways to socialise! There are other places you can play a sport! there are other groups you can join up to play UN!

Well actually Ard if a liberal pollie votes against the party line he isn't automatically expelled, he/she may find it harder to be able to rise up in the party and will be in the backbench for awhile but they will still be apart of the Liberal party.

And Nationals pollies have voted against the party line before and are still members.

I know. I also know about getting the numbers, and juggling factions, and I'd contend that "automatic" expulsion isn't all it's cracked up to be.

I'd written a lengthy post discussing this when I realised what a threadjack it was. So I think I'd best abandon this thread before I really blot my copybook. See ya.

But but Ard, we all like you in our threads, don't go :( /threadjack

OMG MODALERT HIJACK!@!!!!

You should join us in F7 Ard :)

Well unfortunately, they Australian government isn't ACTUALLY taking away our freedoms. Not with this, anyway. That's just a bunch of hyperbole from angry right-wing yobbos who hate the fact that living in our society means looking out for other people aswell as oneself, and who feel that everything in this world should be user-pays, not subsidised in any way.

Plus, there has never been a bloody or violent history in Australia. The worst we got was typical colonial violence against the natives, or a bunch of gold miners going on strike and getting shot at. So overthrowing the government just ain't happening, especially when the government faces a hostile Senate like they do now.

Of course, what most of you arguing against this fail to realise is that so much more can be done by the universities if we give them this small amount of money, instead of if everyone had to pay for what they used. As Howard fans, I thought you would appreciate the idea of economies of scale.

And in regards to the $250 "eating into your booze money", you can actually defer the payment, and add it onto your HECS. Yes, I realise how big your HECS debt already is, and you don't want to make it bigger. But $250 a year is nothing on top of that, really. If you must buy more liquor, you can just defer the payment till you're earning the squillions a university degree theoretically gets you, where you'll be able to afford both booze and the fee. Why is this such a big deal? Are we back to the principle of "I don't want to pay for stuff I don't use?" Coz you KNOW that's a dead argument...

It´s your government, your country. You know both better than I do. But I see so much whining on the subject that I don´t know, perhaps something drastic was called for. I mean, this debate, or ongoing debate, is good and all but, if there´s really this much angst against the new PM, do something more concrete? It´s what my countrymen would do. But once again, this is Australia and I don´t know much about it. I could be speaking out of place. *shrugs*

<snip> ... if there´s really this much angst against the new PM, do something more concrete?

1. There isn't this much angst against the new PM:

Australian Voter Support for Rudd at Near Record, Newspoll Says

By Madelene Pearson

Nov. 11 (Bloomberg) -- Australian voter support for Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was unchanged at a near record amid the global financial crisis and as he prepares to meet world leaders in Washington, a Newspoll survey showed.

Rudd's approval rating remained at 65 percent ...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aZlhaPH_Al6I&refer=australia

... It´s what my countrymen would do. But once again, this is Australia and I don´t know much about it. I could be speaking out of place. *shrugs*

2. You're interrupting a national pastime, Nanatsu-san. Whining about the government is what we do best, even better than when we're whining about the cricket or the football. We're good at it, we enjoy it and no European coloniser is going to stop us!

*leads revolt against Nanatsu*

(This time I'm really gonna stay away from this thread. Really. I'm gonna put this whole thread on Ignore. Honest. And stop snickering like you don't believe a word I say, Lapse.)

1. There isn't this much angst against the new PM:



http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aZlhaPH_Al6I&refer=australia



2. You're interrupting a national pastime, Nanatsu-san. Whining about the government is what we do best, even better than when we're whining about the cricket or the football. We're good at it, we enjoy it and no European coloniser is going to stop us!

*leads revolt against Nanatsu*

(This time I'm really gonna stay away from this thread. Really. I'm gonna put this whole thread on Ignore. Honest. And stop snickering like you don't believe a word I say, Lapse.)

Ardchy-chama, don´t make me steal your other eyebrow, like Lapse did.:eek:

But seriously, I´m also going to stay away from this thread on account that 1) I don´t understand Aussies and, 2) I don´t want to interrupt this national past-time. I am an Eurocoloniser, if one comes right down to it. Spain pwnd the Americas for 400 years!!!

*runs away*
:tongue:



NOTE: I swear I´m kidding, Ardchy, so don´t hit me with your mighty, golden mallet of Mod-Doom.

2. You're interrupting a national pastime, Nanatsu-san. Whining about the government is what we do best, even better than when we're whining about the cricket or the football. We're good at it, we enjoy it and no European coloniser is going to stop us!

If we ever have a bill of rights made (and God forbid we ever do) then this should be the first one written. Of course there isn't much angst for the new PM because he knows how to play the media and win the polls week by week not to mention that he just gave almost everyone an extra $1000, except for a poor struggling student such as myself whom he would rather take $250 from. So the poepl like him for that and see it as good economic policy despite most of that money heading overseas if the retail predictions are true. We will just have to wait until he does something against the majority of Australians rather than small groups of Australians (Students, young people, upper middle class working Australians)

If we ever have a bill of rights made (and God forbid we ever do) then this should be the first one written. Of course there isn't much angst for the new PM because he knows how to play the media and win the polls week by week not to mention that he just gave almost everyone an extra $1000, except for a poor struggling student such as myself whom he would rather take $250 from. So the poepl like him for that and see it as good economic policy despite most of that money heading overseas if the retail predictions are true. We will just have to wait until he does something against the majority of Australians rather than small groups of Australians (Students, young people, upper middle class working Australians)

well, he's already ripped the schools off in his computer bungle
Now he's stuffing up his broadband plan by putting a giant dirty internet filter on it.
He's ripped off pensioners
He's ripped off students
He's ripped off everyone who likes to have a couple of drinks

The voting populace of Australia is stupider than most people give it credit for.

It´s your government, your country. You know both better than I do. But I see so much whining on the subject that I don´t know, perhaps something drastic was called for. I mean, this debate, or ongoing debate, is good and all but, if there´s really this much angst against the new PM, do something more concrete? It´s what my countrymen would do. But once again, this is Australia and I don´t know much about it. I could be speaking out of place. *shrugs*

Also, when committed conservatives are complaining about $250 amenities fees and internet filters you know the government's not doing too badly. Mind you, I agree with them on the filter - thanks for treating us like children, guys.

well, he's already ripped the schools off in his computer bungle
Now he's stuffing up his broadband plan by putting a giant dirty internet filter on it.
He's ripped off pensioners
He's ripped off students
He's ripped off everyone who likes to have a couple of drinks

1) Yep he didn't think that one though (same as deposit guarantee policy on the run) but it won him the election so it hardly matters. At least he was honest in his ad campaigns but it is a shame the AEU had to lie when talking him up.
2) Yep, so much for bringing Internet filters up to speed.
3) Don't know to much about this.
4) Yep, and I was reading today that they are going to be cutting funding to universities next year.
5) Not only that he was collecting the taxes before they were approved by the Senate the fact that hardly anyone cared goes to show that the people don't know how the system works and don't really seem to care when the government takes money off them illegally.

The voting populace of Australia is stupider than most people give it credit for.

Yep and Rudd is smart he knows the people are stupid and he will continue to play the tabloids and the people will lap it up.

Also, when committed conservatives are complaining about $250 amenities fees and internet filters you know the government's not doing too badly. Mind you, I agree with them on the filter - thanks for treating us like children, guys.

You work for a Labor MP surely you could have some sway in trying to get Combet to change his mind?

And I resent being called something I am not, i.e Conservative.

You work for a Labor MP surely you could have some sway in trying to get Combet to change his mind?

And I resent being called something I am not, i.e Conservative.

Sorry, what are you?

I've never met Greg Combet.

Sorry, what are you?

I've never met Greg Combet.

Sorry I meant talking to your boss, who might be able to talk Combet into changing his mind.

I would call myself a liberal that's with a small 'l'.

Sorry, guys. It seems I accidentally closed this thread.

How I managed that I don't know (the cat stood on the keyboard?) I was sober, I swear, but I don't remember a thing ... :eek:

(Except that I clearly remember NOT promising to exempt all fellow Australians from moderator activity, so don't try that one on.)

Anyway, be assured: there's nothing wrong with this thread, nothing to see here, move along, post along, maintain the rage.

Sorry, guys. It seems I accidentally closed this thread.

How I managed that I don't know (the cat stood on the keyboard?) I was sober, I swear, but I don't remember a thing ... :eek:

(Except that I clearly remember NOT promising to exempt all fellow Australians from moderator activity, so don't try that one on.)

Anyway, be assured: there's nothing wrong with this thread, nothing to see here, move along, post along, maintain the rage.

Another Krudd coverup!

And Greg Combet lives just a few suburbs away from me ... and a few more, and a few more ... Leapin' lefty conspiracies, Batman!

Sorry, guys. It seems I accidentally closed this thread.

How I managed that I don't know (the cat stood on the keyboard?) I was sober, I swear, but I don't remember a thing ... :eek:

(Except that I clearly remember NOT promising to exempt all fellow Australians from moderator activity, so don't try that one on.)

Anyway, be assured: there's nothing wrong with this thread, nothing to see here, move along, post along, maintain the rage.

OMGZ Mod Bias!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :eek::eek2::eek::eek2:

What exactly is this service fee going towards that could not be paid for by increasing course fee or money from the government?

Oh silly me politics.

What exactly is this service fee going towards that could not be paid for by increasing course fee or money from the government?

Oh silly me politics.

Well, I'm not sure if you noticed before... but this is basically just an increase in the course fee. It can be paid separately, or it can be added onto the HECS. That's all it is, just a raise in the course fee of $125 a semester.

Why can't the government pay for it? Hmmmm, well let's think about that for a minute. In the current financial situation, the government is facing pressure from conservatives to remain fiscally conservative, maintain the budget surplus and prevent recession. And yet at the same time, Coalition supporters want him to spend more. I'm seeing a problem with that.

My personal feeling (even if it isn't well thought out or researched) on government is that they might as well spend more and tax more, but I know that's anathema to Australian conservatives, so Rudd won't. Now, when he's doing the right (right) thing, he's getting abused for not spending enough. Brilliant.

Well, I'm not sure if you noticed before... but this is basically just an increase in the course fee. It can be paid separately, or it can be added onto the HECS. That's all it is, just a raise in the course fee of $125 a semester.

Why can't the government pay for it? Hmmmm, well let's think about that for a minute. In the current financial situation, the government is facing pressure from conservatives to remain fiscally conservative, maintain the budget surplus and prevent recession. And yet at the same time, Coalition supporters want him to spend more. I'm seeing a problem with that.

My personal feeling (even if it isn't well thought out or researched) on government is that they might as well spend more and tax more, but I know that's anathema to Australian conservatives, so Rudd won't. Now, when he's doing the right (right) thing, he's getting abused for not spending enough. Brilliant.

Well actually in the current economic climate with Australia facing a recession and unemployment rising Rudd should be increasing spending in order to prevent this and re bolster the economy. It is no wonder that he is getting criticism for tying to keep a surplus, he should be spending and putting the budget in deficit (which is going to happen anyway) I predict at least $50 billion deficit. Of course perhaps another reason for this increase in fess is because as I was reading the other day the government is going to decrease its funding to universities next year.

...because as I was reading the other day the government is going to decrease its funding to universities next year.

You read that where?

With Julia Gillard as Minister for Education? Deputy Prime Minister? Former leader of the Australian Union of Students? I think you're being mischievous.

You read that where?

With Julia Gillard as Minister for Education? Deputy Prime Minister? Former leader of the Australian Union of Students? I think you're being mischievous.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24637387-25192,00.html

Her you go and the article also gives a few other reasons not yet mentioned on this thread as to why this is a bad idea.

....Of course there isn't much angst for the new PM because he knows how to play the media and win the polls week by week not to mention that he just gave almost everyone an extra $1000, except for a poor struggling student such as myself whom he would rather take $250 from...

I have no idea how his approval rating hasn't gone down. My approval of him has certainly gone down.

And... wait... so does that mean if you're on student allowance you don't get the $1000?

well, he's already ripped the schools off in his computer bungle
Now he's stuffing up his broadband plan by putting a giant dirty internet filter on it.
He's ripped off pensioners
He's ripped off students
He's ripped off everyone who likes to have a couple of drinks

The voting populace of Australia is stupider than most people give it credit for.

*Admits voting mistake and runs for cover*

*Admits voting mistake and runs for cover*

Which party (or an independent?) would you have voted for then?

If I was looking at cutting the budget I'd start with some of the coal subsidies, and some of the military aquisitions (if the global recession goes into the mid 10's). Oh, and I'd get the water buy-back taken from the GST funding to the states (to try and prevent any more Queensland shenanigans).

I have no idea how his approval rating hasn't gone down. My approval of him has certainly gone down.

And... wait... so does that mean if you're on student allowance you don't get the $1000?

From how I understood the centrelink site, we are pretty much the only group that doesn't get the bonus.

*Admits voting mistake and runs for cover*

*shakes fist* young bloody liberals (with lowercase L)

You're so lucky for being able to opt out of student union fees. I wish I had that choice. If it weren't for the 70$ or so I paid every 4 monthes I wouldn't even know my S.U. existed

You're so lucky for being able to opt out of student union fees. I wish I had that choice. If it weren't for the 70$ or so I paid every 4 monthes I wouldn't even know my S.U. existed

Do something about it Sparky!

Organise your own happening on campus and get the S.U. to help fund it. Create some energy. Jeez! People keep saying how helpless they are on this thread. You are not helpless!!!

We are the wealthiest and best-educated 10% on this planet. We have benefits that the third-world would dream about and what do we do?

We whinge! :mad:

I have no idea how his approval rating hasn't gone down. My approval of him has certainly gone down.

And... wait... so does that mean if you're on student allowance you don't get the $1000?

Pretty much, something I don't understand why. Maybe because the government doesn't care about students or maybe they think students are immune to increases in prices.

Organise your own happening on campus and get the S.U. to help fund it. Create some energy. Jeez! People keep saying how helpless they are on this thread. You are not helpless!!!

You (yet again) miss it! WE DO NOT WANT TO HAVE OUR OWN HAPPENING! WE DO NOT WANT THE SU TO FUND IT! THE SU (in my opinion) IS USELESS, CORRUPT ETC. ETC. I DO NOT WANT TO, OR HAVE THE TIME TO GET INVOLVED. Why should I be forced, to pay for a corrupt regime, when I do not want there services, in any way?

Pretty much, something I don't understand why. Maybe because the government doesn't care about students or maybe they think students are immune to increases in prices.

Fuckers.

Fuckers.People expect politicians to be something else? o_0

People expect politicians to be something else? o_0

It seems Aussies do. *nod*

Politicians will always be fuckers.

You (yet again) miss it! WE DO NOT WANT TO HAVE OUR OWN HAPPENING! WE DO NOT WANT THE SU TO FUND IT! THE SU (in my opinion) IS USELESS, CORRUPT ETC. ETC. I DO NOT WANT TO, OR HAVE THE TIME TO GET INVOLVED. Why should I be forced, to pay for a corrupt regime, when I do not want there services, in any way?

I try not to use the royal "We", Lapse. When you say "we", you need to define who "we" happens to be. The "we" is you and those who appear to agree with your position.
You wouldn't want "we" to mean the overwhelming majority of students, would you?
After all, you don't know how they feel.

As for you slippery debating trick of trying to depict your opponents as learning impaired and your use of capital letters (the text equivalent of SHOUTING), well these are just more examples of rudeness and immaturity.

You've made your position pretty clear and you are merely repeating yourself.

THE $250 student fee has been demonstrated to be something other than what you claim it to be. The Australian's take on this is pretty much misinformation too. When has the Australian ever been anything more than a mouthpiece of the Liberal Party?
And the only thing you seem prepared to do about it is to repeat your opinions IN CAPITAL LETTERS WITH LOTS OF EXCLAMATION MARKS!!!!:mad::mad:

It seems Aussies do. *nod*

Politicians will always be fuckers.If ever a good place to post this:
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE4AC4QA20081113
This might take care of the problem, no?

i try not to use the royal "we", lapse. When you say "we", you need to define who "we" happens to be. The "we" is you and those who appear to agree with your position.
You wouldn't want "we" to mean the overwhelming majority of students, would you?
After all, you don't know how they feel.

As for you slippery debating trick of trying to depict your opponents as learning impaired and your use of capital letters (the text equivalent of shouting), well these are just more examples of rudeness and immaturity.

You've made your position pretty clear and you are merely repeating yourself.

The $250 student fee has been demonstrated to be something other than what you claim it to be. The australian's take on this is pretty much misinformation too. When has the australian ever been anything more than a mouthpiece of the liberal party?
And the only thing you seem prepared to do about it is to repeat your opinions in capital letters with lots of exclamation marks!!!!:mad::mad:

i only used 1 exclamation mark whilst shouting thankyou very much!

(EDIT: THAT SHOULD AHAVE BEEN IN ALL CAPS)

People expect politicians to be something else? o_0

Yes. Absolutely.

It seems Aussies do. *nod*

Politicians will always be fuckers.

1. No, actually.
2. No, actually.

Just letting you know that the posts missing from this thread were veering into an economic debate and have been diverted to a new thread, here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=573037).

Its is most certainly taking away personal freedoms. Anything that forces someone to do something is a violation of rights.

Our need for oxygen forces us to breath and our impulses force us to have sex! DOWN WITH BIOLOGICAL FASCISM! :rolleyes:

Safety laws force us to be safe and force us to ovoid hurting ourselves and others! Those fascist bastards!

Gravity forces us to stay on earth unless we have enough velocity, shoudln't it be a right, and what about black holes, there's no escaping them! Dammit physics stop oppressing us!!!

Ahem. Peanut gallery's that-a-way. Topic: University fees/Australia/compulsory, voluntary.

Aaaah! We'd just about flogged this dead horse to death anyway.

We elect governemnts to take away our freedoms!
How's that for a paradox?

If ever a good place to post this:
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE4AC4QA20081113
This might take care of the problem, no?

Yes but will student fees get you a discount?:p

THE $250 student fee has been demonstrated to be something other than what you claim it to be. The Australian's take on this is pretty much misinformation too. When has the Australian ever been anything more than a mouthpiece of the Liberal Party?

When they rag on the liberal party that's when.

And yet no one has shown to me or Lapse how the $250 is a needed benefit instead of a waste. I might as well flush the money or better yet give it to a charity it would do a lot more good.

When they rag on the liberal party that's when.

And yet no one has shown to me or Lapse how the $250 is a needed benefit instead of a waste. I might as well flush the money or better yet give it to a charity it would do a lot more good.

I dunno, the girls who need somewhere to leave their baby whilst they study would say it's not a waste... but since that doesn't help you, I don't expect you to change your mind. Ah well, I'm done here, no more lurking.

I dunno, the girls who need somewhere to leave their baby whilst they study would say it's not a waste... but since that doesn't help you, I don't expect you to change your mind. Ah well, I'm done here, no more lurking.
But why must we pay for that? There are child care facilities in the private sector aswell!

But why must we pay for that? There are child care facilities in the private sector aswell!

Ah, private sector failures/bungles (ABC Learning in this case), how I love you so...

Ah, private sector failures/bungles (ABC Learning in this case), how I love you so...

And yet there are so many other Private childcare centres that aren't experiencing this problem. Methinks it has more to do with the management of the company rather than a fault in the system.

But now that ABC has been nationalised the government can pay for it and uni's won't have to worry.

Ah, private sector failures/bungles (ABC Learning in this case), how I love you so...

The union at my uni recently lost half their savings in a dodgy investment company, and then fired half their childcare staff for it! (I linked it back a few pages)

But now that ABC has been nationalised the government can pay for it and uni's won't have to worry.
Am I the only one who saw Gillard's eyes light up with joy at the prospect of being able to "transfer the centres to the community"?

That woman is dangerous, I reckon. She doesn't talk about it in public a lot, but she's not that rosy, pig-skin colour of Rudd, she's full-on dark red.

Nah! You've got her wrong on this Neu L. She came out with the riudiculous comment that "Child Care is not the business ogf government."

Well whose business should it be then? Childcare is pre-school education.
Why have the white shoe brigade (ABC) running it?

How early should kids be started in government education then? Whenever the parent feels like it? 2? If the government is paying for it I want to see some education put on the yougsters. Prehaps the alphabet, time telling and other random stuff that you see on play school

Am I the only one who saw Gillard's eyes light up with joy at the prospect of being able to "transfer the centres to the community"?

That woman is dangerous, I reckon. She doesn't talk about it in public a lot, but she's not that rosy, pig-skin colour of Rudd, she's full-on dark red.

I can't stand Julia Guilard. I agree that she's dangerous, but I think the commie reference was uncalled for.

Nah! You've got her wrong on this Neu L. She came out with the riudiculous comment that "Child Care is not the business ogf government."

Well whose business should it be then? Childcare is pre-school education.
Why have the white shoe brigade (ABC) running it?

What I always wonder is why a lot of people don't have other family members that can look after their children. I never went to child care. My grandmother looked after me and then I went to preschool.

I personally don't think that child care should be the business of the government. However, if child care centres are falling apart, parents are forced to choose between work and looking after their child. They're stuck between a rock and a hard place, and that's why I think the government needed to step in.

You assume everyone has a family like yours. By the time I was 5 two grandparents on dads side were dead as they were pack a day smokers since they were children (luckily no one in my family now smokes) and the ones on mums side had their hands full as the gran suffered from dimentia. Only one grandparent is still alive.

of my uncles/aunts only one was in the same city and he is a contract worker who can be called out on a moments notice to do industrial repairs. There wasnt anyone outside the family to take care of me so my mother worked part time.

Every situation is different and it can not be assumed that someone has nearby relatives

How early should kids be started in government education then? Whenever the parent feels like it? 2? If the government is paying for it I want to see some education put on the yougsters. Prehaps the alphabet, time telling and other random stuff that you see on play school
I agree. I hope however, that the govt will still be charging the people that make use of the childcare
What I always wonder is why a lot of people don't have other family members that can look after their children. I never went to child care. My grandmother looked after me and then I went to preschool.
My Grandparents lived 5 hours drive away when I was young, fortunatly my Mum wasn't working so she looked after us until preschool. Even until grade 2 we didn't go to after school care - and that was only when she couldn't get the arvo off. I guess we were lucky that our family had the freedom so that my Mum could get away with not working full time. With 3 of us however (spread over 6 years) the childcare costs would have amounted up.
I personally don't think that child care should be the business of the government. However, if child care centres are falling apart, parents are forced to choose between work and looking after their child. They're stuck between a rock and a hard place, and that's why I think the government needed to step in.
I think there needs to be a bit more planning by mothers. Children are 17 year commitments. It's not fair on the child, it's not fair on the parents, it's not fair for the rest of the society that have to pay for it.

My Grandparents lived 5 hours drive away when I was young, fortunatly my Mum wasn't working so she looked after us until preschool. Even until grade 2 we didn't go to after school care - and that was only when she couldn't get the arvo off. I guess we were lucky that our family had the freedom so that my Mum could get away with not working full time. With 3 of us however (spread over 6 years) the childcare costs would have amounted up.

I'm lucky that my grandmother was able to look after me, but my parents both worked full time... more than full time... my mum worked all the time, and she still always managed to make sure I had everything. I just can't understand this mums who don't even work and they still send their kids to childcare. I think that childcare centres are great, but they should be for people who need them.

I think there needs to be a bit more planning by mothers. Children are 17 year commitments. It's not fair on the child, it's not fair on the parents, it's not fair for the rest of the society that have to pay for it.

Definitely.
We already have the stupid baby bonus. I think that was a terrible idea though: paying promiscuous teenagers to get knocked up? Great idea. How about instead if you get married and have a baby, the government pays off your HECS debt? Then you'll have kids with educated, financially stable parents.