Rally The Troops!!!

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Stabshauptmann

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

All Primary and Secondary education is 100% free. Third level is massively subsidized and for most people it's free, the fact that not everyone is getting a grant to spend during the year on various expenses is not something that's causing concern at Secondary and Primary level.

When calculating cost, the 2nd principal of economics springs to mind. The cost of soething is what you give up for it. There is direct costs such as fees (which one doesnt have to pay for primary and secondary) there are the indirect costs such as books, uniforms, transport etc. and there are opportunity costs, what else could you be doing with the time and effort you put into education.
Looking at education this way, primary and secondary education isnt free.

Yes third level is subsidized, not as much as secondary and primary but then again the costs are higher. No dispute there. But when you say not everyone gets the grant, very few ppl get the grant. And those who get the grant will tell you how useless it is. One of the things im disputing is the effectiveness of the current level of subsidization.

Of course at that age you have your parents to take care of you....by Third level you should be an adult therefore capable of taking care of yourself.

Perhaps somebody doing Arts with 15 hrs a week could get a part time job. Courses such as commerce or particularly engineering dont allow alot of free time.

I'm not saying that grants are wrong I do want free access to Third level education to all capable students I just don't think everyone should have cheques written out to them when the money could be spent on more important things.

No Im not advocating grants for all either nor do I get the feeling you oppose grants. I believe though that not enough get grants and that for those who do get it its not enough.

I'm not disputing that fact it's just that the money could also be spend on other things like our Health system or Pensions or improving our terrible road system or building proper schools for Primary school kids who are still being taught in pre-fab buildings or a million other projects.

I listed similar priorities Health, Education, Transport and security. While education may not deserve 100% of the state budget it desrves more than the 5.9 per cent of GNP it currently gets.

Why should we the healthiest, fittest, most employable people in the state get funds above the rest?

I would have thought a post grad has better employment prospects than an 18 year old fresher. The oppurtunitys should be open to all. College has a huge opportunity cost as regards to employment, reminds me of another of the 10 principals of economics, ppl respond to incentives. If college life is going to be too hard/expensive ppl wont do it.

Oh and funding everything is a pipedream, some people will complain about the 99% tax rates.

Im not suggesting funding the local cinema.

Universities are not in the business of being businesses. Some R&D can have commercial applications a lot on the other hand is rubbish - it just acts as teaching material. Most funding in Ireland for major Post-Grad/Lecturer projects comes from SFI not companies. When companies see the level of investment being put in to our education system they see Ireland as a good country to work in, creating jobs and wealth for the population when they move here. The money being invested into R&D is valuable as a tool to attract foreign investment.

What Im saying is that R&D is human capital, scientific discoveries and progress benifit society as a whole and thus society should pay=state funding.
I also said that companies often benifit from such R&D and thats why I sugested companies pay.

I live on €35 a week easily. Many people who go to UCD don't need grants ( 60% came from private schools ) the fact that people who can easily afford to pay for college get it for free is a great waste. People whose family can easily afford it should pay. As Syth said the rich should pay, they don't need the free ride.

It doesnt make economical sense to penalize wealth. Equity in society should be exacted as early as possible and in a uniform way, taxation, there are good reasons for this but I suggest you jst borrow my textbook because Id only be quoting huge chunks.

This was about to happen last year but it was protested againts by lots of well of kids in UCD ( remember that? ) so the goverment shot that reform down.

Like I said, this governments motives arn't in the public interest.

There are an awful amount of problems still to address, Health and Secondary/Primary education should be brought up to Northen-European levels. Our wealth is new to us so we have some work to do before we reach the levels of progress seen in other EU states, but I do believe that for our size and history we are doing well and that we will eventually get there.

I feel we are moving further to the right, that we are adopting a more capitalist system that a mixed economy. I dont believe things are about to get better re: our public services.

Rich people will then leave the country and withdraw their funds from the Irish economy. Bono et all won't pay 90% tax.

I didnt suggest 90%, somewhere around 60% like alot of us paid in the 80s should suffice.

No the rich pay for education while the poor don't;I think that's a better system.

I suggesting a more descrete way of doing this on sounder economic principals, easier to implement and with more all round benifits. Reform of the tax system is my agenda.

It is my belief that you won't be paying for Paradise On Earth by cash, cheque Necromancer? ;)So you want free education for all and basically world class Health, Education, Public Transport for lower Tax rates then countries who are struggling to pay for their Welfare systems are paying? Well I've been won over Necromancer. You are obviously on the ball, wish you were running the country. It would be sunshine lollypops and other sweet things 24 hours around the clock and it would all be free...from the lollypop fairy :rolleyes:

France isnt a scandanavian country, its beside germany, its hard to miss, its the largest counrty in western europe (just thought id return some of the sarcasm and helpfull comments that your summery had).
Whats interesting about France is that the right which is now in power is destroying a system which was implemented by the left and has been working fine for decades. Again I could talk about economics and altering the factors of "the invisible hand".
In scandanavia where political conditions have remained stable the system is still working fine.
Why should one of the wealthies countries in the world have anything less than world class Health care?

What exactly I said was "We have a relativly low level of tax compared to France or scandanavia and yet it is these counties we constantly benchmark our services against."

Taxation in the Republic, as a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP), is 28 per cent, compared to an EU average of 40.5 per cent.
Europe has better public servies than Ireland. Even france on its down hill slump is providing better services. If raising our tax to the europeen average would give us services on the eurpeen average then that is what Id like to see happen.
Ive read papers by leading economists detailing how we could raise tax revenue by introducing more bands and we could infact reduce the tax liability of the majority of ppl with nobody paying more than 60%.
It had a very strong impression on me.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Gaijin

"No but the costs of Transport for a year getting to and from college for me are very comparable to the cost of the registration fee, so surely that's just as big a barrier to me going to college. Why shouldn't that be free? And free for all in fact"

Im assuming(from your previous posts) that you can afford the cost of going to college and that you could if fee's were re-introduced. If so, by your own standards then no you shouldn't get free transportation

Im fully aware that we are in fact agreeing on the point of helping those who cannot afford the cost of university. But the general consensus on this thread seems to be that it's not so clear cut as to who should be aided and who shouldn't. I do believe that the current system of means testing and grant entitlements is unfair and incorrect. That a lot more people should be entitled to grants and are not. Also there are people receiving grants who should not be.

As to "free transport for all", is that really feasible? It would be great but wouldn't really work out. Free for those who cannot afford it, sure, but not for everyone.

I don't believe that anyone here or indeed any student would say "I should get free transport,I should get free clothes, everything I need should be handed straight to me" (or along the lines of grandpa simpson only, "im young...gimie gimie gimie!)

I do however believe it is perfectly reasonable for students to expect that fee's should be free. There are those who can afford to pay, there are those who can just about afford to pay but its a struggle and there are those who could easily get mumsie to pay. The trouble is determining who can & can't.
A reorganisation of the tax system (i.e taxing people appropriately) could fund third level(fee's anyway)

Why should you pay for those free loading hippie students I hear you say?
Well because third level education IS a right not a privilage(i can't remember who said the opposite) There are plenty of other things that come out of your tax that don't directly benefit you. Besides people aren't living in retched poverty because they are part funding university fee's.

So in summary of a very long post... :eek:
Yes fee's should be free
But I would agree with you that there are certain limits to what can be provided to students...but I think common sense would tell you that the state isn't going to provide students with the latest o'neills tracksuit bottoms

AngelofFire

The difference is that I realise (unlike most students) that nothing comes for free. The money to fund the colleges has to come from somewhere, and I'd rather have the people going to college spend the money rather than every taxpayer contribute.

In a cohesive society certain things must be paid for collectively. It is in everyones interest that education is well funded by the exchequer, it gaurantees that society can continue to function and that everybody can achieve their human potential. If you dont want your taxes going towards paying for education then you dont want a future for your children.

The money to fund the colleges has to come from somewhere

So does the 400 million earmarked for the greyhound and bloodstock industry, but i dont hear you complaining about that.

How about Transport to and from college, should the government pay for that too?

Its already well subsidised, i pay 12euro per week for unlimted travel on dublin bus. Im not arguing extreme collectivisation here, but its also interesting that you`re arguing an extreme free market as a mechanism of countering any form of collectivisation.

OK, so you oppose Fees, but what's so abhorrent about Government backed student loans, or a Graduate Tax?

Since introduced in australia, it has detered people from going to university. Graduate students are faced with the prospect of being Aus$10,000 in debt. In ireland the levels of debt are high enough as it is, most first time buyers need a combined income of €90,000 to be able to afford a shack in dublin, imagine if added to that they had to pay 10,000 euro of a student loan.The best way for the rich to pay for college is to introduce higher bands for those earning >€150,000, they`re hardly going to notice the extra 4 or 5 percentage points.

Syth

Necromancer wrote:

Ive read papers by leading economists detailing how we could raise tax revenue by introducing more bands and we could infact reduce the tax liability of the majority of ppl with nobody paying more than 60%.
It had a very strong impression on me.

Interesting. How could one get said papers and/or find out more information about that theory?

As for the free transport thing, I think that should be part of your grant application. That way of you need it, it should make you more likely of getting a grant, or if like me, you cycle in, and hence have no transport costs, then it shouldn't matter.

OfflerCrocGod

Rally The Troops was taken literally I see