|
Budget 2004: Your feedback (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| AussieTrance |
| quote: |
The increase of HECS is dependent on the uni's own decision
|
every university is going to raise their fees, hell, who wouldnt? The government passed that law of a 25% increase so they could save themselves a few billion, and spend it elsewhere, like propping up bloody independent (private) high schools.
| quote: |
However, at the top end, it's newly half your earnings!
|
this is also the case for people in the 40K - 50K range too, they get taxed something shocking, but no tax breaks for them...
On another topic, the money-for-kids program, is nothing more than a goverments crap attmept at our ever ageing population... fawk a one off payment, why dont you make it easier for working parents to stay home with their kids in the first few years.. 3K will last 6 months tops... |
|
|
| tubby |
public schools these days have to cater to a lowest common denominator. top performers have to look after themselves, or more commonly just get bored and lose interest. i thought the debate over increased funding to private schools was really funny. Private schools get a lot less funding per student than public schools, but whenever it goes up there's huge uproar. It is, and should be, just like our tax system, kind of reversed (cos this time the gov is giving out money in stead of taking it). More you can afford the less assistance you get, but doesn't mean you should get nothing at all.
as for uni funding, it has to come from somewhere. More and more people want to go to uni. Try asking your parents, and they'll tell you it used to be a much higher selection of students who went on to study. How to pay for all this extra education? Full-fee paying o/s students subsidise the local students, but student politicians whinge about their places being taken up. Cannot have it both ways.
the worst thing i find after all this complaining is those same student politicians take 7 years to finish their 3 year arts degrees cos they spend so much time talking themselves up. |
|
|
| bragi |
| quote: | Originally posted by P'cisT
You gotta realise if you look at the whole spectrum of the current system, the bottom end is 'relatively' fair. However, at the top end, it's newly half your earnings! |
Remember, you only get taxed through each bracket, so it's only the stuff OVER $80K where you're getting hammered. |
|
|
| webmeister |
| quote: | Originally posted by matt_a
He is aiming this year to have 40% of year 12 over 90 in the UAI! 40% You just wont find public schools that can do anything like that (not including selective highs). |
Not true .. I went to Sefton HS (which is a half-selective public school), about 65% of my grade were over 90%...
| quote: | Originally posted by matt_a
I guess they'll just rack up huge foreign debt again, and leave the next liberal government to pay it off again. Labour seem to have a tendancy of getting into financial troubles (ala Whitlam, Keating) |
Disagree with this too, I think Keating did more for our economy globally than Howard has ever done. Floating the currency, deregulating the banks, actually pushing us towards Asian markets, etc. |
|
|
| matt_a |
| quote: | Originally posted by webmeister
Not true .. I went to Sefton HS (which is a half-selective public school), about 65% of my grade were over 90%...
|
TSK TSK
I'm sure in the good old days Webby, Public Highs were good. As I said my public primary was fkn mad, now its house. The downfall the Public system has taken has only occured over the last 10 or so years. And as I said, not including selective highs. How can you compare slective highs like James Ruse etc. They are practically private. I bet they get a load more funding than regular Public Schools. Probably well deserved to as the kids that are there most of em wanna be there! They are not just at school because they have to be kinda thing. |
|
|
| webmeister |
| quote: | Originally posted by matt_a
TSK TSK
I'm sure in the good old days Webby, Public Highs were good. As I said my public primary was fkn mad, now its house. The downfall the Public system has taken has only occured over the last 10 or so years. And as I said, not including selective highs. How can you compare slective highs like James Ruse etc. They are practically private. I bet they get a load more funding than regular Public Schools. Probably well deserved to as the kids that are there most of em wanna be there! They are not just at school because they have to be kinda thing. |
Hey I'm not that old, I was Class of 98 :p
As I said, the comparison is valid as Sefton was only half selective. Not withstanding the fact that we were in a disadvantaged area (right in the centre of Bankstown), but the local kids who needed additional funding didn't get it because the selective kids from out of the area would get such high marks and push the school out of the "qualifying for disadvantaged funding" zone... |
|
|
| Romp |
There are some good public high schools but they are all in wealthy areas.
How is Latham going to fund his initiatives? Well he can spend money on services that the Liberals spend on tax cuts. If they did not have the tax cut or the family benefits in this budget there would have been billions and billions for education, health etc
Its not like we are running deficits at the moment. |
|
|
| Beemer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Romp
There are some good public high schools but they are all in wealthy areas.
How is Latham going to fund his initiatives? Well he can spend money on services that the Liberals spend on tax cuts. If they did not have the tax cut or the family benefits in this budget there would have been billions and billions for education, health etc
Its not like we are running deficits at the moment. |
Think again buddy....Latham has promised MORE tax cuts than the liberals....so, cutting out the cuts won't be where he gets all this imaginary money from :p From ABC -
'He told Sydney radio station 2GB the Opposition will offer relief to those who missed out on the Government's tax cuts.
"We're going to extend, we're going to have a bigger commitment to tax relief than what we found in the Budget," he said.
"We want to extend it out to the four out of five families and singles who didn't receive any.
"We want to make it broader, we mightn't be able to cover every single person but we want to make it broader than the current arrangements."
He says Labor is still working on its tax plan and has promised more comprehensive tax cuts than those offered by the Government.'
Anybody wanna offer me a viable source of cash that's gonna fund these lovely labor promises?? Seems Latham can't offer one himself...so maybe u supporters of his can?? :D |
|
|
| Trance Nutter |
Cheers tubby, you said more or less what i tried to say (just in a load less words)
As for whoever (sorry, forgot who it was) who said that the extra 25% HECS is going to help later years students, you do have a point i didn't think of if your referring to books in library, computers, builidngs.
However, I am doing Biotechnology (bloody expensive pracs, think gene engineering) and if we had 25% more funding now, I can't tell you how much better our resources for practical sessions would be. It would help a whole heap, and the practical would be more relevant to industry work. Maybe we would have proper equipment, rather than using tissue paper (it happened on Tuesday), nor would we be constantly using DNA which has passed its used by date, maybe for once we would have a PCR that would work properly
But wait...only people who enrol for 1st year after next year have the extra 25% added on, so people in uni now are not affected. |
|
|
| eRRaTiK |
| quote: | Originally posted by webmeister
Hey I'm not that old, I was Class of 98 :p |
that's pre-historic mate :D |
|
|
| webmeister |
| quote: | Originally posted by eRRaTiK
that's pre-historic mate :D |
Quiet you :p |
|
|
| Chookie |
| 'things' seem to be getter bigger......hmmmmmm;) :haha: |
|
|
|
|
