RJL25
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:So what you're saying is that in order to be a law graduate you need to study part time so you can work full time to cover your expenses, taking an 8 year course and turning it into a 16+ year course.
Fucking genius. Good on ya. Or you could put it on HECS, which even poor people can do... And you can study law in 4 years, 8 years part time 8 years full time is for a double degree And yes it did take me 7 years to get my degree, If you want something you'll make the sacrifices, be it either working full time and studying part time, or just going into debt and then paying it off once your on the big bucks Edited by RJL25: 22/8/2013 12:08:10 AM
|
|
|
|
ozboy
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.5K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:ozboy wrote:thupercoach wrote:The actual quote was "There will never be a carbon tax under a government I lead".
Jools is off the hook, she never led that government. Spot on. The government was a coalition, not a Labor majority. Doesn't matter, in voter land they think she lied and her popularity never returned. The only thing that matters in politics is how people are going to vote. Doesn't matter if you disagree with the way people will vote or not, doesn't change anything. You have to deal with reality. Fantasy and reality are two different ends of the scale. Thinking and knowing are two ends as well. Regardless, the mad monk has got his wish and the PM job is in the bag. Since you're religious, do us a favour and put in a prayer for me asking for the Greens to hold the balance of power in the Senate ;)
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:So what you're saying is that in order to be a law graduate you need to study part time so you can work full time to cover your expenses, taking an 8 year course and turning it into a 16+ year course.
Fucking genius. Good on ya. Or you could put it on HECS, which even poor people can do... And you can study law in 4 years, 8 years part time 8 years full time is for a double degree So basically you're saying that you should take an obscene HECS debt or waste a large portion of your life studying because the government insists on continually cutting tertiary education funding and grooming a nation of morons.
|
|
|
ozboy
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.5K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:imonfourfourtwo wrote:RJL25 wrote:Single biggest shame in the past 5 years is that the Greens refused to accept 80% of something in order to achieve 100% of noting by voting down the ETS in the senate back in 2010 when Rudd first introduced it. If they had voted it in, the carbon price wouldn't even be a factor on the political agenda today, it would just be normal. Agreed, and to be quite honest I think they are going to suffer for it this election. They may keep their seats but it is stupid to attempt to destroy the one major party that would possibly listen to them. And as for the Courier Mail, wow. Of all that was said during the debate (which was actually quite good to watch) they chose that. Anyone who has ever done debating knows that it is a real sign of desperation to make a comment like that. I actually thought it was a fucking boring debate. And I reckon Abbott fully intended on saying that all along, he was just waiting for a chance. He knew he'd get a reaction like that in the papers Some might even say that he gave Rupert advanced notice.....
|
|
|
RJL25
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
ozboy wrote:RJL25 wrote:ozboy wrote:thupercoach wrote:The actual quote was "There will never be a carbon tax under a government I lead".
Jools is off the hook, she never led that government. Spot on. The government was a coalition, not a Labor majority. Doesn't matter, in voter land they think she lied and her popularity never returned. The only thing that matters in politics is how people are going to vote. Doesn't matter if you disagree with the way people will vote or not, doesn't change anything. You have to deal with reality. Fantasy and reality are two different ends of the scale. Thinking and knowing are two ends as well. Regardless, the mad monk has got his wish and the PM job is in the bag. Since you're religious, do us a favour and put in a prayer for me asking for the Greens to hold the balance of power in the Senate ;) I'm not religious, your confusing me with someone else. I was raised with religion and was religious, but I've been questioning it for years and am basically not anymore. And I support Gay marriage. Seirously ozboy, your confusing me with someone else, I actually think Gillard was a good PM and I support the carbon tax and wish Abbott wasn't getting rid of it. And again, doesn't matter if its fantasy or reality, its still what the voters think and its how the voters are going to vote. You can sit on your high horse all you like and say the voters are wrong, but at the end of the day the government will still change...
|
|
|
imonfourfourtwo
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:imonfourfourtwo wrote:RJL25 wrote:Single biggest shame in the past 5 years is that the Greens refused to accept 80% of something in order to achieve 100% of noting by voting down the ETS in the senate back in 2010 when Rudd first introduced it. If they had voted it in, the carbon price wouldn't even be a factor on the political agenda today, it would just be normal. Agreed, and to be quite honest I think they are going to suffer for it this election. They may keep their seats but it is stupid to attempt to destroy the one major party that would possibly listen to them. And as for the Courier Mail, wow. Of all that was said during the debate (which was actually quite good to watch) they chose that. Anyone who has ever done debating knows that it is a real sign of desperation to make a comment like that. I actually thought it was a fucking boring debate. And I reckon Abbott fully intended on saying that all along, he was just waiting for a chance. He knew he'd get a reaction like that in the papers When you're a bit of a hopeless political junkie and put up with nothing but staged press conferences all the time, to see them actually have a little bit of vigour in them tonight was much more interesting to see. Although watching the first campaign that I can vote in what has become abundantly clear is that facts mean nothing for both sides. The sound bite is everything. To be honest I'm leaning Labor at the moment just so Gillard's reforms can stay in place. He must have meant it, the way the papers are running with it suggest that.
|
|
|
RJL25
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:So what you're saying is that in order to be a law graduate you need to study part time so you can work full time to cover your expenses, taking an 8 year course and turning it into a 16+ year course.
Fucking genius. Good on ya. Or you could put it on HECS, which even poor people can do... And you can study law in 4 years, 8 years part time 8 years full time is for a double degree So basically you're saying that you should take an obscene HECS debt or waste a large portion of your life studying because the government insists on continually cutting tertiary education funding and grooming a nation of morons. Or you could say that its not up to the government to to pay for you to get the qualifications so you can then go and earn big money. If you want to earn big money, GOOD ON YOU! I fully support that, but its YOUR responsibility to get those qualifications, and if you can't afford them, the government will give you an interest free loan that you don't need to start paying back until your earning decent money. Thats good enough.
|
|
|
RJL25
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
At the end of the day afro your trying to run an argument that only rich people can get a tertiary education, but mate thats simply not the case! Even the poorest of poor people can go to university in this country provided they either pass the entry exams or get good results at high school. I'd say thats a pretty good thing!
But I don't believe those educations should be free, the whole point of getting a degree is, in theory at least, so that you can then get a good job. So once you've got that good job, you can pay the tax payer back thanks! Ta, no worries!
i'm still paying mine back by the way, I couldn't afford to pay for all of my degree up front, probably only about 50% of it.
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:So what you're saying is that in order to be a law graduate you need to study part time so you can work full time to cover your expenses, taking an 8 year course and turning it into a 16+ year course.
Fucking genius. Good on ya. Or you could put it on HECS, which even poor people can do... And you can study law in 4 years, 8 years part time 8 years full time is for a double degree So basically you're saying that you should take an obscene HECS debt or waste a large portion of your life studying because the government insists on continually cutting tertiary education funding and grooming a nation of morons. Or you could say that its not up to the government to to pay for you to get the qualifications so you can then go and earn big money. If you want to earn big money, GOOD ON YOU! I fully support that, but its YOUR responsibility to get those qualifications, and if you can't afford them, the government will give you an interest free loan that you don't need to start paying back until your earning decent money. Thats good enough. Touche ! bravo !! =d>
Love Football
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:So what you're saying is that in order to be a law graduate you need to study part time so you can work full time to cover your expenses, taking an 8 year course and turning it into a 16+ year course.
Fucking genius. Good on ya. Or you could put it on HECS, which even poor people can do... And you can study law in 4 years, 8 years part time 8 years full time is for a double degree So basically you're saying that you should take an obscene HECS debt or waste a large portion of your life studying because the government insists on continually cutting tertiary education funding and grooming a nation of morons. Or you could say that its not up to the government to to pay for you to get the qualifications so you can then go and earn big money. If you want to earn big money, GOOD ON YOU! I fully support that, but its YOUR responsibility to get those qualifications, and if you can't afford them, the government will give you an interest free loan that you don't need to start paying back until your earning decent money. Thats good enough. Everybody should be afforded the opportunity to pursue knowledge. Instead we keep cutting funding making higher education only an option for richer families and as a result Australia continues to slide down global rankings in academic performance. The pursuit of knowledge should not come with a price tag. And given that higher earning jobs return the favour by paying higher taxes, the onus should be on the government to facilitate peoples higher education. Instead of continuing to slash funding and make tertiary education a dream to all except the richer areas of society. HECS isn't interest free, you pay 20% interest you twat. So even then, the government is profiting off peoples desire for knowledge, instead of facilitating it. Edited by afromanGT: 22/8/2013 12:20:26 AM
|
|
|
RJL25
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:So what you're saying is that in order to be a law graduate you need to study part time so you can work full time to cover your expenses, taking an 8 year course and turning it into a 16+ year course.
Fucking genius. Good on ya. Or you could put it on HECS, which even poor people can do... And you can study law in 4 years, 8 years part time 8 years full time is for a double degree So basically you're saying that you should take an obscene HECS debt or waste a large portion of your life studying because the government insists on continually cutting tertiary education funding and grooming a nation of morons. Or you could say that its not up to the government to to pay for you to get the qualifications so you can then go and earn big money. If you want to earn big money, GOOD ON YOU! I fully support that, but its YOUR responsibility to get those qualifications, and if you can't afford them, the government will give you an interest free loan that you don't need to start paying back until your earning decent money. Thats good enough. Everybody should be afforded the opportunity to pursue knowledge. Instead we keep cutting funding making higher education only an option for richer families and as a result Australia continues to slide down global rankings in academic performance. The pursuit of knowledge should not come with a price tag. And given that higher earning jobs return the favour by paying higher taxes, the onus should be on the government to facilitate peoples higher education. Instead of continuing to slash funding and make tertiary education a dream to all except the richer areas of society. HECS isn't interest free, you pay 20% interest you twat. So even then, the government is profiting off peoples desire for knowledge, instead of facilitating it. Edited by afromanGT: 22/8/2013 12:20:26 AM err afro, seriously champ, ANYONE can afford to go to uni because the GOVERNMENT WILL PAY FOR IT IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD IT! You just have to then pay it back once your earning good money. And 20% interest? Fucking LOL The interest rate is tied to CPI, so if CPI for the year is 3%, then the interest rate for that year is 3%, if it was 2 %, then for that year the interest rate is 2%. Meaning that the money you owe to the government is simply maintained in real dollar terms rather then discounted over time by rising cost of money. Please tell me in what year the rate of CPI in Australia was 20%?? Also if you move overseas, or just never earn over the minimum threshold, then you never have to pay it back!
|
|
|
imonfourfourtwo
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:So what you're saying is that in order to be a law graduate you need to study part time so you can work full time to cover your expenses, taking an 8 year course and turning it into a 16+ year course.
Fucking genius. Good on ya. Or you could put it on HECS, which even poor people can do... And you can study law in 4 years, 8 years part time 8 years full time is for a double degree So basically you're saying that you should take an obscene HECS debt or waste a large portion of your life studying because the government insists on continually cutting tertiary education funding and grooming a nation of morons. Or you could say that its not up to the government to to pay for you to get the qualifications so you can then go and earn big money. If you want to earn big money, GOOD ON YOU! I fully support that, but its YOUR responsibility to get those qualifications, and if you can't afford them, the government will give you an interest free loan that you don't need to start paying back until your earning decent money. Thats good enough. Everybody should be afforded the opportunity to pursue knowledge. Instead we keep cutting funding making higher education only an option for richer families and as a result Australia continues to slide down global rankings in academic performance. The pursuit of knowledge should not come with a price tag. And given that higher earning jobs return the favour by paying higher taxes, the onus should be on the government to facilitate peoples higher education. Instead of continuing to slash funding and make tertiary education a dream to all except the richer areas of society. HECS isn't interest free, you pay 20% interest you twat. So even then, the government is profiting off peoples desire for knowledge, instead of facilitating it. Edited by afromanGT: 22/8/2013 12:20:26 AM I would make a comment coming from a single parent family of four earning under $40 000 a year and getting my 92 ATAR...but when Monash pays for all my fees plus $13 000 a year for my on campus accommodation and other expenses I guess I can't complain.
|
|
|
RJL25
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
imonfourfourtwo wrote:afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:So what you're saying is that in order to be a law graduate you need to study part time so you can work full time to cover your expenses, taking an 8 year course and turning it into a 16+ year course.
Fucking genius. Good on ya. Or you could put it on HECS, which even poor people can do... And you can study law in 4 years, 8 years part time 8 years full time is for a double degree So basically you're saying that you should take an obscene HECS debt or waste a large portion of your life studying because the government insists on continually cutting tertiary education funding and grooming a nation of morons. Or you could say that its not up to the government to to pay for you to get the qualifications so you can then go and earn big money. If you want to earn big money, GOOD ON YOU! I fully support that, but its YOUR responsibility to get those qualifications, and if you can't afford them, the government will give you an interest free loan that you don't need to start paying back until your earning decent money. Thats good enough. Everybody should be afforded the opportunity to pursue knowledge. Instead we keep cutting funding making higher education only an option for richer families and as a result Australia continues to slide down global rankings in academic performance. The pursuit of knowledge should not come with a price tag. And given that higher earning jobs return the favour by paying higher taxes, the onus should be on the government to facilitate peoples higher education. Instead of continuing to slash funding and make tertiary education a dream to all except the richer areas of society. HECS isn't interest free, you pay 20% interest you twat. So even then, the government is profiting off peoples desire for knowledge, instead of facilitating it. Edited by afromanGT: 22/8/2013 12:20:26 AM I would make a comment coming from a single parent family of four earning under $40 000 a year and getting my 92 ATAR...but when Monash pays for all my fees plus $13 000 a year for my on campus accommodation and other expenses I guess I can't complain. Well according to afro thats simply impossible, if your not rich then you simply must not be able to be going to uni. Your clearly lieing
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:err afro, seriously champ, ANYONE can afford to go to uni because the GOVERNMENT WILL PAY FOR IT IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD IT!
You just have to then pay it back once your earning good money.
And 20% interest? Fucking LOL The interest rate is tied to CPI, so if CPI for the year is 3%, then the interest rate for that year is 3%, if it was 2 %, then for that year the interest rate is 2%. Meaning that the money you owe to the government is simply maintained in real dollar terms rather then discounted over time by rising cost of money.
Please tell me in what year the rate of CPI in Australia was 20%??
Also if you move overseas, or just never earn over the minimum threshold, then you never have to pay it back! I've had 20% added to my HECS debt. My course was 13.5k/year and the last statement I had my debt was around 48k (lower than it was courtesy of some months earning over 1500/week at Crown). I'll see if I can find an old statement but I've moved so many times this year I've got no idea where they are. I'll likely never be able to pay that debt back. The government continuing to slash tertiary funding and put the onus on students only serves to cost them more money when people can't pay their debts back any way.
|
|
|
imonfourfourtwo
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.9K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:imonfourfourtwo wrote:afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:So what you're saying is that in order to be a law graduate you need to study part time so you can work full time to cover your expenses, taking an 8 year course and turning it into a 16+ year course.
Fucking genius. Good on ya. Or you could put it on HECS, which even poor people can do... And you can study law in 4 years, 8 years part time 8 years full time is for a double degree So basically you're saying that you should take an obscene HECS debt or waste a large portion of your life studying because the government insists on continually cutting tertiary education funding and grooming a nation of morons. Or you could say that its not up to the government to to pay for you to get the qualifications so you can then go and earn big money. If you want to earn big money, GOOD ON YOU! I fully support that, but its YOUR responsibility to get those qualifications, and if you can't afford them, the government will give you an interest free loan that you don't need to start paying back until your earning decent money. Thats good enough. Everybody should be afforded the opportunity to pursue knowledge. Instead we keep cutting funding making higher education only an option for richer families and as a result Australia continues to slide down global rankings in academic performance. The pursuit of knowledge should not come with a price tag. And given that higher earning jobs return the favour by paying higher taxes, the onus should be on the government to facilitate peoples higher education. Instead of continuing to slash funding and make tertiary education a dream to all except the richer areas of society. HECS isn't interest free, you pay 20% interest you twat. So even then, the government is profiting off peoples desire for knowledge, instead of facilitating it. Edited by afromanGT: 22/8/2013 12:20:26 AM I would make a comment coming from a single parent family of four earning under $40 000 a year and getting my 92 ATAR...but when Monash pays for all my fees plus $13 000 a year for my on campus accommodation and other expenses I guess I can't complain. Well according to afro thats simply impossible, if your not rich then you simply must not be able to be going to uni. Your clearly lieing I'm Aboriginal, from a rural area and come from a low-income area. Add to that my score and the universities couldn't throw enough money at me. Which is great because it means I can pay back Dad who borrowed thousands of dollars just to send me to a catholic school. I know a few from low SES families who go to uni but all still live with their families. The statistics are quite bad for low SES students, only 10 percent of Monash students for example are low SES. Which explains why so many uni students dont care that some tertiary funding is being re-directed to help disadvantaged school kids. Poor students dont deserve assistance over uni students (even though unis got a huge cash boost after raising their caps on offers).
|
|
|
RJL25
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
Honestly afro, cry me a river.
You wanted the degree, you were happy for the government to pay for it, and all they are asking for back is a pretty fucking small percentage of your salary to recoup the cost.
The interest rate is tied to CPI, I think you'll find if you study your statements you'll see that it all adds up, if it doesn't then contact them and sort it out.
It's not like you don't have a degree now is it... so I guess the system has provided you with your quest for knowledge then yes? I'm so sorry that you've had to pay for it though, that must be tough... unfortunately its not the governments job to give you everything you want for free though!
Edited by RJL25: 22/8/2013 12:44:49 AM
|
|
|
afromanGT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 77K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:It's not like you don't have a degree now is it... so I guess the system has provided you with your quest for knowledge then yes? I'm so sorry that you've had to pay for it though, that must be tough... unfortunately its not the governments job to give you everything you want for free though!
Edited by RJL25: 22/8/2013 12:44:49 AM You've clung to entirely the wrong points of the argument. The government should be more willing to invest in the country's future, instead of cutting funding to tertiary education, which sees Universities cutting budgets and education suffering. Like I said, we're slipping down the global rankings for academic achievement at an unprecedented rate. Your whole argument was to the effect of "It's all for YOUR benefit so why should YOU complain?" Quite simply because I don't think that the government is doing enough to address training in necessary positions, we're drastically short handed for doctors for one. And because of tertiary cuts it's becoming an increasing pipe dream. Even imonfourfourtwo admitted that he has received additional help which is only available to a small portion of the population.
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:So what you're saying is that in order to be a law graduate you need to study part time so you can work full time to cover your expenses, taking an 8 year course and turning it into a 16+ year course.
Fucking genius. Good on ya. Or you could put it on HECS, which even poor people can do... And you can study law in 4 years, 8 years part time 8 years full time is for a double degree So basically you're saying that you should take an obscene HECS debt or waste a large portion of your life studying because the government insists on continually cutting tertiary education funding and grooming a nation of morons. Or you could say that its not up to the government to to pay for you to get the qualifications so you can then go and earn big money. If you want to earn big money, GOOD ON YOU! I fully support that, but its YOUR responsibility to get those qualifications, and if you can't afford them, the government will give you an interest free loan that you don't need to start paying back until your earning decent money. Thats good enough. Eh, degrees don't equal big money. Right now, degrees don't even equal a guaranteed job. And while they claim that HECS is interest free and is only "indexed" with the CPI from year to year, you can bet your house now that if CPI ever lowered that your HECS wouldn't. -PB
|
|
|
Roar_Brisbane
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:ozboy wrote:RJL25 wrote:LOL news limited hates Rudd so much :P No it's Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch is directing his papers' front pages. I meant to say news corp. In any case thanks for repeating what I just said, news corp hates Rudd That is terrible.
|
|
|
RJL25
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.4K,
Visits: 0
|
Roar_Brisbane wrote:RJL25 wrote:ozboy wrote:RJL25 wrote:LOL news limited hates Rudd so much :P No it's Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch is directing his papers' front pages. I meant to say news corp. In any case thanks for repeating what I just said, news corp hates Rudd That is terrible. Well yes, but at the same time Labor didn't do much complaining when News Corp endorsed Rudd in 2007...
|
|
|
Joffa
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 66K,
Visits: 0
|
Why, In a time of severe budgetary crisis, according to Tony Abbott, is $5 million being given to the Broncos to upgrade their facilities, when they can easily afford to pay or it themselves? Brisbane Broncos Ltd (BBL) 24 JULY 2012 | PRINT: 24 JULY 2012 | PAGE 31 | Brisbane Broncos Limited is expected to make a pretax profit for the half year ended June 30 of about $2.22 million compared with $1.17 million in the previous corresponding period. http://www.afr.com/tags;jsessionid=128E26D39934D1F910A6D8A8D98E0438?tag=C_BRISBANE%20BRONCOS%20LIMITED-BBLEdited by Joffa: 22/8/2013 07:55:32 AM
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:Roar_Brisbane wrote:RJL25 wrote:ozboy wrote:RJL25 wrote:LOL news limited hates Rudd so much :P No it's Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch is directing his papers' front pages. I meant to say news corp. In any case thanks for repeating what I just said, news corp hates Rudd That is terrible. Well yes, but at the same time Labor didn't do much complaining when News Corp endorsed Rudd in 2007... Would be hard to retrospectively find the papers, but I don't recall Murdoch doing this kind of stuff back with Kevin 07. I wouldn't say News Corp endorsed Kevin, was more Murdoch stated in an interview that he supports Kevin. -PB
|
|
|
pv4
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
Thought this belonged in here, one of those "kutgw Labour" type stabs
Saw three guys on the way to uni standing on the side of the road, in full work outfit, with signs saying "work wanted, driver/plant operator/labourer". First time I've seen guys doing that in a long time.
|
|
|
Roar_Brisbane
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:RJL25 wrote:Roar_Brisbane wrote:RJL25 wrote:ozboy wrote:RJL25 wrote:LOL news limited hates Rudd so much :P No it's Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch is directing his papers' front pages. I meant to say news corp. In any case thanks for repeating what I just said, news corp hates Rudd That is terrible. Well yes, but at the same time Labor didn't do much complaining when News Corp endorsed Rudd in 2007... Would be hard to retrospectively find the papers, but I don't recall Murdoch doing this kind of stuff back with Kevin 07. I wouldn't say News Corp endorsed Kevin, was more Murdoch stated in an interview that he supports Kevin. -PB Yea I can't recall seeing anything like this during the Kevin 07 period.
|
|
|
Roar_Brisbane
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
Joffa wrote:Why, In a time of severe budgetary crisis, according to Tony Abbott, is $5 million being given to the Broncos to upgrade their facilities, when they can easily afford to pay or it themselves? Brisbane Broncos Ltd (BBL) 24 JULY 2012 | PRINT: 24 JULY 2012 | PAGE 31 | Brisbane Broncos Limited is expected to make a pretax profit for the half year ended June 30 of about $2.22 million compared with $1.17 million in the previous corresponding period. http://www.afr.com/tags;jsessionid=128E26D39934D1F910A6D8A8D98E0438?tag=C_BRISBANE%20BRONCOS%20LIMITED-BBLEdited by Joffa: 22/8/2013 07:55:32 AM Just a way to win some votes in Queensland. As Broncos fan I was quite surprised.
|
|
|
australiantibullus
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.3K,
Visits: 0
|
RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:RJL25 wrote:afromanGT wrote:So what you're saying is that in order to be a law graduate you need to study part time so you can work full time to cover your expenses, taking an 8 year course and turning it into a 16+ year course.
Fucking genius. Good on ya. Or you could put it on HECS, which even poor people can do... And you can study law in 4 years, 8 years part time 8 years full time is for a double degree So basically you're saying that you should take an obscene HECS debt or waste a large portion of your life studying because the government insists on continually cutting tertiary education funding and grooming a nation of morons. Or you could say that its not up to the government to to pay for you to get the qualifications so you can then go and earn big money. If you want to earn big money, GOOD ON YOU! I fully support that, but its YOUR responsibility to get those qualifications, and if you can't afford them, the government will give you an interest free loan that you don't need to start paying back until your earning decent money. Thats good enough. Everybody should be afforded the opportunity to pursue knowledge. Instead we keep cutting funding making higher education only an option for richer families and as a result Australia continues to slide down global rankings in academic performance. The pursuit of knowledge should not come with a price tag. And given that higher earning jobs return the favour by paying higher taxes, the onus should be on the government to facilitate peoples higher education. Instead of continuing to slash funding and make tertiary education a dream to all except the richer areas of society. HECS isn't interest free, you pay 20% interest you twat. So even then, the government is profiting off peoples desire for knowledge, instead of facilitating it. Edited by afromanGT: 22/8/2013 12:20:26 AM err afro, seriously champ, ANYONE can afford to go to uni because the GOVERNMENT WILL PAY FOR IT IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD IT! You just have to then pay it back once your earning good money. Also if you move overseas, or just never earn over the minimum threshold, then you never have to pay it back! Sure, you can get into uni and have hecs. But the cost of rent and food pretty much doubled during the Howard years. (not to mention that most of the class sizes have doubled and unis have seriously cut their academic staff, paying more now to be given less) A very high percentage of people who pull out of uni are from poor families. I went to uni in the late 90s and it wasn't too bad. I think it was only about 2% that were skipping meals because they couldn't afford FOOD. But these days a lot of students are seriously doing it very tough. They might be able to pay for the course later but it is hard when you have to study long hours, work long hours and still cant afford all your books. Two thirds of uni students live below the poverty line. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-15/majority-of-students-in-poverty2c-research-shows/4821230http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/student-poverty-increasing-by-degrees-20130721-2qcom.htmlhttp://www.news.com.au/national-news/two-thirds-of-uni-students-live-in-poverty-according-to-new-report/story-fncynjr2-1226679332065http://www.unistudent.com.au/site/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=135:student-poverty-the-real-barrier-to-low-ses-participation-in-universities&catid=44:latest-news&Itemid=50 http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/students-get-a-hard-lesson-in-poverty/story-e6frgcjx-1226679289034http://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/povertys-one-of-the-hard-lessons/1949754/http://dtl.unimelb.edu.au/R/LAPQ5EISRUI182IP63K8TJX6P53U2Y8KIA8CF7G4N9RBMGE798-00463?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=273633&local_base=GEN01&pds_handle=GUESThttp://www.standard.net.au/story/1639683/survey-shock-two-thirds-of-uni-students-live-below-poverty-line/http://blog.eliteediting.com.au/scholarships/below-the-breadline-the-truth-about-student-poverty/
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh :-$ Don't talk about young people doing it tough, you will send batfink into a spaz. -PB
|
|
|
Scoll
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.6K,
Visits: 0
|
imonfourfourtwo wrote:Scoll wrote:Can't we all put aside these partisan politics and agree that both major parties are downright abysmal and the near future is going to be a heck of a depressing time for Australia? >_> Not at all. The politics is dirty but hey that's to be expected. The lived reality is that Australia is one of the best countries in the world in just about every aspect. Fair enough, be a bit ambitious but when looking at Australia from a global perspective we are a great country. And to be honest it doesn't matter which party gets in to government because neither are irrationally radical to the point where we will plummet into the abyss. My politics lecturer once said that as much as we complain how stupid voters can be, we can never say we voted in the wrong person, each have their drawbacks for sure but really each PM has helped get Australia to where we are today. Neither party will do anything so radical that would see the country suffer terribly, Australia's political thought is far too pragmatic. Fuck dirty politics, that has always been a fixture and is completely irrelevant. There is precious little in the way of meaningful, sensible policy from either party. When you spend years convincing people that the biggest issues facing our nation are asylum seekers and a tax on carbon then try and run a four week campaign on a half thought out agenda our nation suffers for it. Had we mature, well governed parties (or at least one) we may have actually been in the situation where this election meant something. The mere fact that it doesn't is a blow to the development of the country. As it stands it's a choice between a hollow party that hasn't progressed from its long passed glory days and united behind a leader who acts like a man child or a fractured party trying desperately to leave behind something they can point to and say "I built that" whilst bitterly supporting an old snake oil salesman. Neither have substance, neither carry with them an intellectual air. It's Big Brother, only the house is Australia and we have to live with the housemates.
|
|
|
australiantibullus
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.3K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh :-$
Don't talk about young people doing it tough, you will send batfink into a spaz.
-PB No, I don't want that. We like the usual batfink who writes with the rational, mature and articulate style we are used to.
|
|
|
australiantibullus
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.3K,
Visits: 0
|
Scoll wrote:imonfourfourtwo wrote:Scoll wrote:Can't we all put aside these partisan politics and agree that both major parties are downright abysmal and the near future is going to be a heck of a depressing time for Australia? >_> Not at all. The politics is dirty but hey that's to be expected. The lived reality is that Australia is one of the best countries in the world in just about every aspect. Fair enough, be a bit ambitious but when looking at Australia from a global perspective we are a great country. And to be honest it doesn't matter which party gets in to government because neither are irrationally radical to the point where we will plummet into the abyss. My politics lecturer once said that as much as we complain how stupid voters can be, we can never say we voted in the wrong person, each have their drawbacks for sure but really each PM has helped get Australia to where we are today. Neither party will do anything so radical that would see the country suffer terribly, Australia's political thought is far too pragmatic. Fuck dirty politics, that has always been a fixture and is completely irrelevant. There is precious little in the way of meaningful, sensible policy from either party. When you spend years convincing people that the biggest issues facing our nation are asylum seekers and a tax on carbon then try and run a four week campaign on a half thought out agenda our nation suffers for it. Had we mature, well governed parties (or at least one) we may have actually been in the situation where this election meant something. The mere fact that it doesn't is a blow to the development of the country. As it stands it's a choice between a hollow party that hasn't progressed from its long passed glory days and united behind a leader who acts like a man child or a fractured party trying desperately to leave behind something they can point to and say "I built that" whilst bitterly supporting an old snake oil salesman. Neither have substance, neither carry with them an intellectual air. It's Big Brother, only the house is Australia and we have to live with the housemates. sad but true
|
|
|