# Students 'will never pay off HECS'



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

Students 'will never pay off HECS'

07sep05
THE Federal Government's higher education fees are so high that almost a third of HECS-paying students will die before they can pay their debt off, Labor says.

Opposition education spokeswoman Jenny Macklin says massive increases in HECS fees by the Federal Government have created $2.9 billion in HECS debts that are unlikely to ever be paid back.

She says the Government must introduce a more affordable Higher Education Contribution Scheme for students to give them a hope of being able to pay their debts back.

Reports have revealed federal Education Department figures showing Australians owed more than $10 billion in HECS debt in 2003-04.

More than 28 per cent of this was unlikely to be recovered, the data showed, up from 17.4 per cent in 1995-96. 

"We now have students carrying such high levels of HECS debt (that) almost a third of them won't be able to pay it back in their lifetime," Ms Macklin told reporters.

"Students and graduates have been saddled with massive levels of debt under this government and now figures show a third of them won't be able pay their HECS debts back."

Ms Macklin said many people would not have well-enough-paid jobs to require them to pay their HECS debts back.

"What that means is they're going to carry those levels right throughout their lives and even carry them to their death," she said.

She said HECS threshold should remain where it is.

"The government of course, when they first came in, dramatically reduced the threshold. That was terribly unfair to students.

"The problem is not the threshold. The problem is that students now have to pay back such high levels of HECS they're carrying very, very large debts well into their adult lives." 

Source:
http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,16520962%5E1702,00.html

Any Comments on this subject?


----------



## tech/a (7 September 2005)

I'm interested in the thinking of people who believe they are shackled by this mean and nasty HEC'S bill.
If there are any out there perhaps you could answer these questions?

(1) You knew about it before you took on further education---why did you then choose to go forward?

(2) Why shouldnt you pay for your further education?

(3) Would it be fairer for your parents to be burdened with the costs of your education?

(4) What would you say to those who's parents couldn't afford the fees,where as HEC's makes it possible for EVERYONE?

(5) Would you not value your education more and be more selective with your choices if your paying for it yourself?

(6) Thought the whole idea was to Graduate from a higher education to get ahead of the pack and earn more than Joe Average? If so then Paying off HEC's becomes part of life---just as taxes are.

(7) Most want it all now and this can be seen by the MASSIVE credit card debt that people under 30 have---would it not be possible that most are their own enemies?

Im interested in anyones alternate Ideas as to how to pay for tuition and education?
Please dont tell me that we should pay for it through TAX  IE government pays.

Personally I think its great that the younger generation has a responsibility un to itself so early on---they might actually APPRECIATE their education!

Those that bitch I'll bet chose degrees with very little on the end of it!

Yes Kris Ive heard your long list of prospective emplyers and no one will give you a go!
Aim lower and work up.
Change your "I'm owed something attitude " You'll find employers want people who are passionate not bitter and twisted.
Result is equal to effort---find out what it takes to get a position in your field and do anything it takes to get noticed.
Offer your services for NOTHING just to get in the door!

The only thing limiting peoples advancement in ANYTHING is YOURSELF.


Thank you thank you very much!!!


----------



## markrmau (7 September 2005)

krisbarry said:
			
		

> Students 'will never pay off HECS'




And neither should they. My last bill indicates an interest rate of around 2% (indexed to inflation). Since returns of 5% pa are easily obtainable (in a cash bank account for example), it is basically free money.


----------



## sam21poddy (7 September 2005)

I always paid my HECS in advance and got the 25% discount.


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

Good views so far keep em comin'


----------



## Jesse Livermore (7 September 2005)

Hi krisbarry,

A tip for young people, don't go to university unless your desired career or business legally requires you. People need to create a distinction between education and training for knowledge and skills (which is not restricted to university) and education and training for qualifications.

Below is a list of successfull people that never went to, or never completed university:

Thomas  Edison, Inventor
Bill Gates, Microsoft
Steve Jobs, Apple Computer
Michael Dell, Dell Computer
Jesse Livermore, Trader
Ted Turner, CNN
Brad Pitt, Actor
David Beckham, Soccer Player
Anthony Robbins, Authority on Peak Performance

This list could go on forever and is not restricted to fampous people.

Jesse Livermore


----------



## Rockon2 (7 September 2005)

Spot On tech/a..

I read that  article on Hecs debt.. And thought!   What a load of codswallop and this could only be the view of labour!     yep!,, right again..


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

Has the governement factored in the "Death Factor"?

Raising fees higher and higher will only increase the population of people that cannot afford to pay and die with this debt, hence the taxpayer is forced to cover that whole debt

Is the governemnt doing more harm than good? 

Is it just artifically raising the debt levels of Australians, then writing this debt off at the other end of life (death)


----------



## Happy (7 September 2005)

Should be treated as every other expenditure: risk vs reward

If somebody had clear view where is going, would get there faster and reap the rewards paying and keeping the rest.
Reward here leaps over risk.

If somebody educated himself with hope that something will pop up, well some will get snatched (surprisingly as possible high reward for the company) and some won’t (will be not touched as considered too high risk).

With this attitude risk is just too high.


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

Happy said:
			
		

> Should be treated as every other expenditure: risk vs reward
> 
> If somebody had clear view where is going, would get there faster and reap the rewards paying and keeping the rest.
> Reward here leaps over risk.
> ...




Good view, I guess it does pose the question, is the risk (expense) worth the reward?

Maybe it has come down to the crunch now that many people will not go to uni as the debt levels are far beyond the rewards of a better paid job.

Plenty of non uni based jobs are paying far beyond that of Uni Graduates


----------



## Knobby22 (7 September 2005)

There are some degrees that are not worth doing.
Maybe the Hecs fee will cause the students not to do it. 
Unfortunately, I know someone who did a useless course and now has the Hecs debt. She has got a job in sales.

Too many people think they have to go to Uni even if it means doing a useless course. Parents and educators should be giving the students better informatiopn on their choices.

I would like to see a lot of improvements in the education system on all levels, particuarly in Victoria which is controlled by left wing concepts resulting in us having the worst results of all the states.


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

I guess its all well and good when you are 17-18 to sign your life away for a uni course and defer it to HECS, but it is not till a little later in life that you realise that you may be in a lot of debt.

I am sure all memebers of this board can think of a time in their late teens they made a foolish mistake and paid the price for it in their early 20's and maybe into their 30's.  

Who has ever:

* Bought an over priced car,
* Bought a lemon of a car
* Got a credit card and went on a spending spree.
* Signed a mobile contract you really couldn't afford
* Bought a business and it went broke
* Loaned a friend or family member some money and never got it back 
* Moved out of home and couldn't afford the rent and utilitiy bills.
* Bought some shares and lost money
* Had children, then got divorced, now have to pay maintenance
  etc, etc

Yes we are all responsible for our actions but at what age? Latest reasearch suggest that we are not true adults until the age of 25. (Catalyst, ABC)

It's all in hindsight right!

The goverment has some blame in this, by offering youth so much credit, for education that it is unpayable by many, even over a life-time.

There are even new loan schemes that offer some students loans of up to $50,000, ouch now that has got to hurt the hip-pocket after graduation.


----------



## tech/a (7 September 2005)

And the alternative is?

On that list Kris.
There are a few of us who are old enough to not having had the temptation of credit cards when Young---there wern't any.

Other than that Ive done every one of your stuff ups!

My veiw is that Parents have a lot to answer for.

(1) Poor role models.
(2) Lack of interest in their kids future (selfish).
(3) Losing contact with their kids at an early age hence the communication breaks down.
(4) Lack of parental control---Once the respect for *each other * goes then there goes control.

This is in my veiw where it begins and ends.
Now if like you Kris you didnt have the above then its up to you to lead your own way!,and dont make the same mistakes with your kids.
You'll have a lot more to pass on than most---provided you dont dwell on it or focus on it!

Whare's that box.


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

tech/a said:
			
		

> And the alternative is?
> 
> On that list Kris.
> There are a few of us who are old enough to not having had the temptation of credit cards when Young---there wern't any.
> ...




Tech/a I was giving examples of foolish mistakes, not that I have made all of them, but of course I have made some of them

And yes you are absolutely correct in saying that parents have a lot to answer for.  That is a very good point!

Poor teaching methods bring all sorts of social problems, one of which is a true lack of education which therefore leads to welfare dependancy.


----------



## GreatPig (7 September 2005)

I think you're all mostly just looking at this from one side: the point of view of the student. When you do that, then yes, it's easy to say why should they get something of benefit for nothing.

However, I think you also need to look at it from the point of view of the country. Australia, like any country, needs educated people: teachers, engineers, doctors, scientists, lawyers, etc. (okay... maybe not lawyers ). For those roles, tertiary qualifications are usually mandatory.

If Australia wants to consider itself a "smart" country, a player in the world of modern technology and science, etc, then I think it needs to _encourage_ people to undertake tertiary qualifications, not discourage them. HECS is a major deterrent.

If people are penalised too heavily for undertaking tertiary studies, then the following will most likely result: either less people will take up tertiary studies, or more of those who do and end up with large HECS bills will move overseas (to avoid having to pay), creating a "brain drain".

Remember, educated people are an investment in a country's future. As with any investment, excessive taxes can kill it.

Cheers,
GP


----------



## Joe Blow (7 September 2005)

GreatPig said:
			
		

> Remember, educated people are an investment in a country's future. As with any investment, excessive taxes can kill it.




GP... that's a great point. I think it's a shame that many people seem bitter about people seemingly "getting something for free" without being able to see the long term benefits for the country as a whole. In my opinion we have evolved into a very selfish, very suspicious and very resentful culture. We are taking after the US in this way. I have spent quite a bit of time over there and the conservatives can't stand the thought of the poor and underprivileged getting ANY assistance at all, and that includes medical and education. But at the same time, they don't mind spending a few hundred billion to wage a war on the other side of the planet. 

In my opinion we're slowly losing our humanity and our sense of compassion and nobody seems to care.


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

HECS is now considered as another example of a hidden tax.  Cutting funding, tending towards a user pay system

But the question still remains, can the users pay for that system or is the goverment just re-shuffling funds? Giving in one hand at a higher price and taking in the other hand at an even great price.

In earlier times it was fully funded by the government at a large cost to the taxpayer, but free for the user. The user of the system walked debt free to contribute to society and benefit all taxpayers without leaving his felow taxpayer to pay his/her debt for life.

Now the system is part goverment funded/part private funded.  Users partially pay, or walk with a debt. which some pay by force(taxation), others pay by free will, and some do not pay at all.  They either have not enough funds to pay, they move overseas,they die, or suicide.

Some of these HECS debts are well in the tens of thousand of dollars and will be inherited again by the taxpayer some 50-80 years down the track.

So if you are considering shooting your mouths of about the fact that the user should pay for their higher education, consider who is really paying for it.  The user or the wage earner. It still begs the question?

Why increase the price of education and force more not to pay, isn't the goverment shooting the geese that lay the golden eggs.


----------



## tech/a (7 September 2005)

krisbarry said:
			
		

> Tech/a I was giving examples of foolish mistakes, not that I have made all of them, but of course I have made some of them
> 
> And yes you are absolutely correct in saying that parents have a lot to answer for.  That is a very good point!
> 
> Poor teaching methods bring all sorts of social problems, one of which is a true lack of education which therefore leads to welfare dependancy.





Well I must have made more mistakes than most!!

You've won me on the teaching issues as well!! Good heavens--common ground!

I really think again that lack of RESPECT for one another Kids and Teachers is the seed for total and perminent breakdown.

*A story.*

_I was in 2nd year high, Ayre's had just spent recess time stiking a box cutter into my bike tyres---he didn't know it was my bike its something he did to amuse himself!
Just before the siren for end of recess I found Ayres at it.
I was physically in discussion with Ayres when Morley our Science teacher
found me deep in discussion.
In front of the whole class he grabbed me by the neck and literally threw me towards the end of the building--(These days he would have been expelled as a teacher--the Education department is full of whimps!).

Class was amused to see me being humiliated.
Morely told me to wait--.
He went and set the class at it.
He then came to me and told me to walk I did and turned left toward the headmasters office expecting ANOTHER dose of the cuts!
He said "Where do you think your going?"

With that he pointed to the oval.
What happened next I have never forgotten.

He put his arm around me (Over the shoulders and said "OK somethings set you off tell me all about it.") He spent the whole lesson talking with me!

Do you reckon I had respect for that guy--You bet.
Do you think I learnt a valuable lesson from his kindness---You bet.
Do you think its influenced the way I handle people---you guessed it --you bet!_
You have it right Kris in this area.


----------



## Knobby22 (7 September 2005)

I think fully paid places for people is wrong. This mean there are less Hecs places for everyone and advantages the wealthy who are already advantaged by having better schools. I don't know why Labor didn't run with this last election instead of that stupid private school thing.

I think there is some justification for Hecs, the amount should be reasonable though.


----------



## Joe Blow (7 September 2005)

Knobby22 said:
			
		

> I think there is some justification for Hecs, the amount should be reasonable though.




Agreed Knobby. Paying for something out of your own pocket does make people appreciate it more but it should be reasonable.


----------



## tech/a (7 September 2005)

Define reasonable against actual cost.

Should there be a loss picked up by whom?


----------



## Joe Blow (7 September 2005)

tech/a said:
			
		

> Define reasonable against actual cost.
> 
> Should there be a loss picked up by whom?




Tech, I think the definition of 'reasonable' is something that people have to decide for themselves. What one person finds 'reasonable' another may not. I'm not sure what a degree actually 'costs' these days but I personally don't think people should be starting their working lives $100,000 in debt because they chose to educate themselves. Initiative should be rewarded and encouraged.

The government doesn't seem to mind throwing money at people willing to have babies, so I think it should be prepared to subsidise the further education of those Australians who have shown some initiative in wanting to improve their own situation and contribute to Australian society in a positive way.

Just my  .


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

A better system for HECS IMO should be that similar to the super co-contribution scheme.

Dollar for dollar matching, up to a certain limit.

That way children and parents could both save for the cost of education, with a little help from the government.

Another option would be to increase the rate of Austudy to match that of the Unemployment benefit and recipents would then have their benefits garnished by a small percentage to cover their HECS debts. Say $20 per fortnight would go a long way to reducing long-term debt level of HECS users.

These are just two options I have thought of that may be up for debate

Yes I agree affordability is the key.  A joint effort on the part of parents, politicians, students, future students, universities, governement and welfare agency is what is greatly needed.


----------



## tech/a (7 September 2005)

How about compulsory Education policy indexed to inflation for each child upon birth.
If its not used then placed as super contribution in their first job.


----------



## Joe Blow (7 September 2005)

tech/a said:
			
		

> How about compulsory Education policy indexed to inflation for each child upon birth.
> If its not used then placed as super contribution in their first job.




Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

This thread has proven to be a good topic of discussion, with many views. Kewl!

Nothing like a good debate that affects all tax-payers to get the fire started.


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

Looking back on it now, I did what I thought was morally right and paid back the full HECS debt I incurred by free will.

My total payment was $23,000

Knowing what I know now, maybe I was very foolish to have done this.

A better option would have been for me to only earn an income under the HECS payment threshold limit and place that $23,000 + the $7,000 first home owners grant into a house.  

Then I could have let my debt be picked up by the tax-payer

What do other tax-payers think of this idea?

Was it morally right what I did or was it foolish?

Would I have been better off finacially now?


----------



## Happy (7 September 2005)

tech/a said:
			
		

> How about compulsory Education policy indexed to inflation for each child upon birth.
> If its not used then placed as super contribution in their first job.




Or better, backdated to conception date, giving head start at birth.
I bet it would fix the premature births overnight. 

Sorry, for slight mismatch with original thought.


----------



## mit (7 September 2005)

GreatPig said:
			
		

> Remember, educated people are an investment in a country's future. As with any investment, excessive taxes can kill it.




I agree. Why could we as a nation afford free tertiary education and now we can't?

MIT


----------



## tech/a (7 September 2005)

Kris.

At 2% you wouldn't roll your Hecs into a home loan at 6% or more.

Happy.
I've just found a new birth control!!

Mit
Government cutting of expenditure.
Make em pay for education and make em pay for retirement.

And give me the highest super payout possible for being elected for 3 yr min.
You get what you pay for!!

*Yeh you reckon!*


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

tech/a said:
			
		

> Kris.
> 
> At 2% you wouldn't roll your Hecs into a home loan at 6% or more.




No tech/a you have mis-understood my point.

What I meant was to not pay back my HECS debt at all, and to have thrown $23,000 on a home instead, and that would have given me access to the first home owners grant too.

BUT

At the cost of tax-payers, twice over.

Do you get my drift now?

I was doing what was morally right for the tax-payer and that was to pay my debt instead.


----------



## tech/a (7 September 2005)

Sorry I did misunderstand.
Thats what you get for being High School Educated!!


----------



## RichKid (7 September 2005)

GreatPig said:
			
		

> I think you're all mostly just looking at this from one side: the point of view of the student. When you do that, then yes, it's easy to say why should they get something of benefit for nothing.
> 
> However, I think you also need to look at it from the point of view of the country. Australia, like any country, needs educated people: teachers, engineers, doctors, scientists, lawyers, etc. (okay... maybe not lawyers ). For those roles, tertiary qualifications are usually mandatory.
> 
> ...





I agree with your sentiments GP and with yours too Joe about appreciating the human and social side of it (it's not all about money or 'user pays'). 

A lot of 'brainy' Asian countries have free (that's right FREE) education systems, and they are not doing all that badly are they? Don't we often whinge about how we are falling behind the rest of the world? Following the Americans means we'll end up in the mess that their society is in. Someone said in another thread here that the US is a 'first world' country in which you can live in 'third world' conditions. I'm sure we can do better.

Government funding of education is an investment in the future wellbeing of this country and its peoples. It should be based on sound philosophical considerations rather than purely financial or party political interests. In some Asian and European civilisations that philosophy is usually hundreds or thousands of years old and is based on valuing knowledge and education for its own sake. That is not to say that tutors were not paid in the past by their students or that some costs were incurred but it wasn't the 'business' that some organisations here are trying to make all forms of education into. Importanty, the wise men and women of the past who valued education could see its intrinsic worth (rather than just the cost of producing courses or lighting lecture halls) and its importance to an understanding of one's self and one's surroundings. 

It may well be that these days you have to have a medical degree or a law degree or tafe qualification to get some paying jobs but education is not just about how much money you can convert it into. There is a lot that an educated and knowledgeable individual can contribute to fellow humans (and the economy) through focused study at university or other educational institutions. The importance of a good education cannot be valued in dollar sums alone. Just imagine charging every school kid for their education upto yr 12 or telling them to go out and learn how to become a bricklayer- we'll be going back to the pre-industrial era in Europe.

About the point that paying for something makes you appreciate it more- well I  have nothing against paying for some costs (Eg affordable service fees, or application fees or having stricter entrance (interview) conditions to weed out those who are just aimless and disinterested). But to make education a mere 'product' is to miss the point of education in the first place. This could well turn into a philosophy lecture! These are ideas worth thinking about.

Just my views, great topic Kris, let's see if there are any philosophy students out there who can contribute from that angle...


----------



## Smurf1976 (7 September 2005)

The bottom line is that we are always going to need a wide range of skills throughout the economy. We can't all be doing jobs that require degrees otherwise pretty soon we'll all be starving in the dark.

Unfortunately we live in a society that seems to believe that every single person ought to go to uni. Just look at the media for example - "ENGINEERS are going to drain water from New Orleans, ENGINEERS fixed the levees, ENGINEERS assessed the damange etc". And it's totally wrong because engineers did none of that. They may well have been involved in the planning and acted as managers (which is not in iteself anything to do with their engineering qualifications), but it is tradespeople and labourers that actually do such work.

If every miner, plumber, mechanic, electrician, professional driver and labourer went on strike tomorrow then the bottom line is that Australia would immediately grind to a halt. Those with the degrees would very quickly find out that they depend absolutely on those "below" them.

Slightly off topic but that nice computer you are using right now came literally from a hole in the ground and is powered (in most parts of Australia) by coal. Likewise the hospital that saved the life of someone you know was built not by doctors but by builders, electricians, plumbers etc. No tradespeople and the uni degree becomes literally useless.

So I have a question. Why, given that we need plenty of non-uni educated people and always will, is there this perception that everyone "must" go to university? It just doesn't make sense to be going to uni and then decide to become a plumber. It makes far more sense for aspiring plumbers to go straight into the relevant training as an apprentice and not waste 4 years doing a degree just to impress the parents as is too often the case.

Fair enough if someone just wants a degree. No problem there. But if it adds absolutely nothing to their productive role in an unrelated occupation then I do think it's fair that they pay at least something for it just as it's fair that they pay for anything else non-productive that they want in life. True, it has a value to society but if they are not going to put that education to any use and are earning good money doing something else then surely they can pay towards to cost of their uni education?

Just how many degree-qualified shop assistants, carpet cleaners and truck drivers can we afford? University is ONE option of many.  

P.S. No offence intended to any of the named occupations. For example only to illustrate the point.


----------



## GreatPig (7 September 2005)

Personally I'm all for how it was when I went to university (in NZ): essentially free to anyone who obtained suitable grades at high school.

The problem with user-pays is that it favours the wealthy rather than the smart and enthusiastic. And while that could potentially result in some people going along just because they can't think of anything better to do, in my experience those people don't normally last beyond the first year anyway, as it's just too much hard work - and the pay's crap .

As for the finances: well, let's just say that the government has received _a lot_ more money from me over the years in taxes than the NZ goverment ever had to pay to educate me. Other than the fact it's a different government, I think the return on their investment has been very good!


Smurf: One of the problems is that not everyone knows exactly what they want to do before they go to university. They often just take courses of interest and see what develops while they're there and afterwards. It might seem nice for everyone to have their assigned roles beforehand and only receive training appropriate to those roles - all very efficient - but I'm not so sure that such a brave new world would really work 

Cheers,
GP


----------



## Joe Blow (7 September 2005)

RichKid said:
			
		

> About the point that paying for something makes you appreciate it more- well I  have nothing against paying for some costs (Eg affordable service fees, or application fees or having stricter entrance (interview) conditions to weed out those who are just aimless and disinterested). But to make education a mere 'product' is to miss the point of education in the first place.




Hi RK,

Firstly, great post! I agree that the education system should not fall prey to economic rationalism and that the cornerstone of equal opportunity is equal access to further education.

When I made the remark that paying for something makes you appreciate it more I guess I was basing it on my own tertiary education experience. Unfortunately when something - like further education - is completely free, people will abuse the privilege. I did one of those degrees in Film and Television like Krisbarry (about 15 years ago) and even though I no longer work in the industry, I have never regretted my choice. At the time the course I was doing - even though it was a degree course - was part of the TAFE system and was completely free of fees. Some of the students at the college I was studying at were there because they didn't get into the course they wanted at another university and just considered it three years off from the dole and were quite happy to sit around, do very little and receive Austudy payments. In my view, that's just a waste of a place that someone who really wants to study could have taken. When someone contributes some of their own money to their education - whether it be in the form of an upfront payment or through the taxation system later - I think you can't help but see further education as a investment in yourself. I think that produces a better calibre of student and creates a better atmosphere in which to learn and ultimately a more effective higher education system.

Sorry for that long paragraph.   But even though I believe in student fees of some sort I believe that they should be affordable and that even someone from the poorest of families should be able to access tertiary education without creating a mountain of debt for themselves.


----------



## clowboy (7 September 2005)

Why does it need to be compulsory to save for something????

Also, by my understanding there is already a compulsory savings plan in place for all sorts of things, one of them being education.

Last I heard it was called TAX and the valuse of the compulsory deposits is going up day by day.

Once upon a time tax was half of what it is today and everything was free, now everything is becoming user pays, the math just doesnt add up.


----------



## Julia (7 September 2005)

Really interesting thread and good to see tolerant exchange of valid points of view.

Two more well known people who didn't have a formal tertiary education:
  Phillip Adams, Radio National
  Sandy McCutcheon, Radio National, both of whom can hold their own in any company and would be judged successful by most standards.

Julia


----------



## krisbarry (7 September 2005)

Great debate on this thread, so many members with such a wide variety of backgrounds and very different views.  Well done!

On a somewhat side track, but still very relevant, is the abolishment of compulsory unionism.

For those who have never attended uni, compulsory union fees are charged each year to fund a wide variety of support networks.  Some of which include sporting facilities, libraries, welface officers, counselors, nurses, canteens etc.

No union fees or a user pay system would almost wipe out all of the above networks.

Does this then pose the question that Universities no longer provide such diverse cultural/educational environments/experience and then just become degree churning factories for the wealthy?


----------



## Smurf1976 (7 September 2005)

Joe Blow said:
			
		

> I agree that the education system should not fall prey to economic rationalism and that the cornerstone of equal opportunity is equal access to further education.
> 
> ...But even though I believe in student fees of some sort I believe that they should be affordable and that even someone from the poorest of families should be able to access tertiary education without creating a mountain of debt for themselves.



Very strongly agreed. Everyone should have the option of a university education regardless of socioeconomic background. Likewise access to other forms of higher education including TAFE.   

That said, IMO it doesn't make sense that every single person ought to be taking the option of uni just because they can. It makes sense for some but not for others who would be better off getting going at TAFE etc. rather than getting a degree just for the sake of it.

Good to see that we've had a very civilised discussion on what can be an emotive topic.


----------



## bvbfan (7 September 2005)

krisbarry said:
			
		

> For those who have never attended uni, compulsory union fees are charged each year to fund a wide variety of support networks.  Some of which include sporting facilities, libraries, welface officers, counselors, nurses, canteens etc.
> 
> No union fees or a user pay system would almost wipe out all of the above networks.
> 
> Does this then pose the question that Universities no longer provide such diverse cultural/educational environments/experience and then just become degree churning factories for the wealthy?




I work at a uni campus and I was having this talk with one of the ladies from a childcare centre there, if the VSU (voluntary student unionism) is passed then basically the childcare would go as it would not have the funds and also that would spend students with young kids out of the education system as the costs would be prohibitve for them to study...
Now who really wins is this case, I think it the long run it would be better for the parent(s) to study and be able to provide for their kids later on than living of welfare which is what will happen IMO if they don't continue studies.

As for my HECS debt, unless I get a job that pays me over the threshold (around 36,000 rising to 38000 next year I think) I am not going to pay back any of the debt, I simply can't afford to.

I see where all this education reforms is going, we'll end up like the US and have degrees that cost $100,000+ ...oh wait I think we already do (dentistry and I wouldn't be surprised if medicine wasn't around that)


----------



## Happy (8 September 2005)

Why so many of us do so much self-padding for having civilised discussion?

Isn’t it normal to have civilised discussion?

Does it mean that if I hang around long enough there will be some blood or verbal violence?


----------



## mime (8 September 2005)

tech/a said:
			
		

> Offer your services for NOTHING just to get in the door!
> 
> The only thing limiting peoples advancement in ANYTHING is YOURSELF.
> 
> ...




Nice call. Education is only half of what you need these days. Pratical skills such as people skills gained through experence is the second half.

I intend to go to uni next year however the course I intend to do is only 2 years fulltime. How high do you think hex will be on that?

Oh and what does VSU pay for? I remember seeing Miss Higgins for free at Uni of Syd at the expense of the union. 

I'll make a bet with you that the uni's  get plenty of funding they just(like all government agencies) miss spend it.

Didn't Gough Whittlam make uni free and because of decisions like this the country went into resession or something? People say he was a great guy(Mark Latham) but what about the famililes that lost their savings and homes because of his irrersponsible actions?

Sorry about my crappy spelling. I think ACA are on to something


----------



## Smurf1976 (8 September 2005)

Happy said:
			
		

> Why so many of us do so much self-padding for having civilised discussion?
> 
> Isn’t it normal to have civilised discussion?
> 
> Does it mean that if I hang around long enough there will be some blood or verbal violence?



Education is one of those emotive issues that can really get opposing sides fired up. It tends to provoke similar emotional responses like abortion, forests, uranium mining, gay marriage etc. Why? I'm not completely sure but education is just one of those "touchy" issues so it's good that we're all being sensible about it here.


----------



## tech/a (8 September 2005)

mime

Ive seen this in action.

I managed to get the local pub interested in talking to both my kids.
Kris doing Doctorate and Nat who works as a secretary.
I suggested they offer a few free shifts.

They did.
Over the next 2 yrs Kris managed the bottleshop for weekend shifts at $20/hr and Nat ended up nights in one of the Bars at $18/hr.
sure I had a little influence but the bottom line was they were able to perform and gave the employer an opportunity to look at them.

We should perhaps have a hints section for commonsence methods of personal advancement!!
Let a few schools know about it and then see if we cant get a degree formulated----would get you further I'll bet than some of the ARTS degrees students take!


----------



## krisbarry (8 September 2005)

tech/a said:
			
		

> mime
> 
> Ive seen this in action.
> 
> ...




Great thoughts tech/a, my parents always encouraged me to work from a young age too.  My brother and I with the help of my dad grew plants and sold them to the local plant nursery.

My dad later got me a job at the local video store.

I then joined up with my brother and sister working in a local supermarket.

Work ethics have always been a part of my life.

I worked right throughout my highschool years and all the way through uni, working in pubs, bars, waiting etc.  Bloody hard work and many late nights.

The wheels fell off for me when I finshed my degree, volunteered my time in many working environments only to be told that they were either sacking people or no jobs existsed.  

It was not my attitude, or work skills, as I work very hard at anything I do, it is just a very cut-throat industry with very little jobs and many out of work artists etc.  Had I known this when I was 17, I would have not studied it.

But at 17, I had never even thought of the high unemployment levels in all art related jobs.  No career counciler told me that they just encouraged me to follow my dreams/passions/goals. BIG MISTAKE!!!

I spent over 4 years on unemployment, and working casual jobs to make end meet.

My point is why does the government fund usless degrees, where very little jobs exist.

I am sure we all know of an out of work artist.


----------



## tech/a (8 September 2005)

Hmm check your private mails Kris!


----------



## Julia (8 September 2005)

The side link in this discussion into school holiday jobs etc reminded me of my first holiday job.  It was in NZ before Post Offices had much in the way of automation.  At age 15, I spent six weeks 8am to 5pm Monday to Friday standing at a bench stamping the postmark on every letter that was posted.
It taught me a bit about patience and controlling boredom.

Any job at any age is the source of some learning.  I don't care if a kid stacks shelves at Woolworths, he/she is learning something about self discipline, the need for social skills, etc and if they demonstrate a good attitude chances are that will lead to a better job.  All this is good preparation for university study if that's what is the ultimate aim.

Julia


----------



## Kauri (8 September 2005)

I have resisted throwing in my 2 bobs worth so far, but I have spied a vacant soapbox...    : 
  When I left school I took up a trade, looking to gain qualifications which would see me employable during my working life. In the first year of my apprenticeship I worked pretty much as an unskilled labourer, my mate from school worked at the same place as a labourer and earned a lot more than I did. In the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th years I worked at the level or above of a semi-skilled labourer, again at a discount pay wise to my mate, in my 5th and final year I worked basically as a tradesman in all but name, at just about at the same rate of pay as my mate who was now working as my trades assistant. Basically, I paid for my qualifications by working for my employer at  pay rates lower than the rates applicable for the work I was doing. If I had chosen to go to university over the workplace to gain qualifications, why should that be free? Later on, to make myself more employable I looked at adding to my qualifications i.e. gaining an Internal Combustion Engine Drivers ticket, for which I had to pay for upfront. If I had decided to enhance my employability by studying Ancient Greek Mythology at university instead, why should that be free whilst my engine drivers ticket isn't? I believe the earnings threshold allows most people a chance at tertiary education, it is the individuals choice as to whether they study for future employment, or instead to be a highly sought after Greek mythologist. 
   Better jump off the soapbox now, before the rotten eggs and tomatoes start coming my way.


----------



## krisbarry (8 September 2005)

Yes Kauri, valid points also.  I somewhat agree.

I think that the government should look very closely at the inconsistancy within the education system, both internally and externally.  It also needs to take a broader approach, thinking outside the 4 walls of an instition.

Why is some free, others partially funded, and some no funding at all.

Some form of discounted fee structure should be standard across the board to better oneself no matter the course, institution, level of training etc.

** The goverenment should also study job growth rates and sectors and apply a more rigid funding cut or increase depending on employment uptake.


----------



## Happy (10 November 2006)

> From ABC, November 10, 2006
> 
> International students turning to sex work to pay fees
> 
> ...




Surely some turn to crime and possibly drugs or another illegal ativity to pay student fees.

We discussed topic extensively, but if one wants something that cannot afford, finds an excuse to do something that –normally- wouldn’t do.

Another solution could be work full time and study part time, or forget uni for now or for good.


----------



## Julia (10 November 2006)

Happy said:
			
		

> Surely some turn to crime and possibly drugs or another illegal ativity to pay student fees.
> 
> We discussed topic extensively, but if one wants something that cannot afford, finds an excuse to do something that –normally- wouldn’t do.
> 
> Another solution could be work full time and study part time, or forget uni for now or for good.



Happy,
I can see your point, but also can, sadly, see why the students would do this.  They can earn huge amounts of money in a short time.  Hard to see though that the experience wouldn't have some sort of emotional effect on them, even if they manage to stay physically safe.

Julia


----------



## Kauri (10 November 2006)

Happy said:
			
		

> Happy,
> Local student Rebecca, who is studying for her *Masters in sexual health*, says she found it tough to make ends meet, trying to balance working part-time and keeping up with her studies.
> "I found that instead of working 30 hours a week, at $10 an hour and being taxed on that money, I could earn that money in one shift, a shift at a sex services premises, and it allowed me more time to study," she said.




   Ironic,and sad.


----------



## Happy (10 November 2006)

I have a problem with mental adjustment and willingness to venture into –inappropriate- solutions as opposed to dignified.

-At all cost- mentality seems to be justification in itself.

And what next? 

Our at -all costs students-, graduate and what morals do they bring into educated and noble World?

Anything goes!  Crime?  Corruption?  Or blind eye to them?


----------



## chops_a_must (10 November 2006)

My HECS debt is well above $20,000 and climbing.

I went to TAFE whilst at uni, so I could work for myself, and pay my way through Uni.

I don't have a problem with this, because I plan to be at uni for a long time. So I do owe something.

What I do have a problem with is this; when baby boomer types tell me I should pay full fees, when they had to pay absolutely NOTHING for the exact same degree.


----------



## macca (11 November 2006)

Hi ya Chops,

I know it is often quoted as being true that BB did not pay uni fees, I am a baby boomer and if I wanted to go to uni I had to pay full fees up front before I could start.

Free Uni started in about 1975, BB time frame is 1946 to 1966, so about half of the BB did go to Uni free, us earlier ones missed out completely.

We did not get the option to "pay it off if when we got a good job". 

When it was free, there were way too many lazy deadheads wasting everyones time and taking the places of those who really wanted to go.

I truly believe the current way is the best way, it tends to deter those who just don't want to get a job yet so they go to Uni. Yet it enables those with the ability to go to Uni to get their degree, then use the degree to earn a higher income to pay it off.

It is a much fairer way than when I was young.


----------



## chops_a_must (11 November 2006)

I understand that. In those days it was also much much easier to get scholarships.

I don't believe degrees should be totally free, but I do think fees are too high as they are at the moment. And the system is much fairer now than when it was reserved for the elite, although it is going that way again IMO.

They do need to do something about graduates who straight away go to live overseas, and never have to pay off their debts.


----------



## macca (11 November 2006)

In the sixties quite a few companies had uni trainees, you went to Uni part time and as long as you passed they paid the fees but you had to sign some kind of bond/contract to work there for 5 years after you graduated or pay them back the money for your course.

Imagine the screaming now if you could not leave Oz for 5 years after graduating, unless your HECS was paid in full


----------



## chops_a_must (11 November 2006)

That sounds like what they do with some med students already.


----------



## son of baglimit (11 November 2006)

this has been covered in a roundabout sort of way, but i'm just gonna state some facts for those who werent aware - and from my sources thats most of the community.

you only pay off your HECS debt in 2 ways.........

1. making voluntary payments.
2. lodging a tax return which states your taxable income was over the relevant threshold for that particular year.

lets assume then you never make a voluntary payment, and you never have taxable income greater than the threshold (06-07 around 38k). this simply means you will NEVER reduce your HECS debt.

what happens to the debt ? how many knew it dies with you ?
it doesnt line up with other creditors looking for piece of your estate. it simply goes away (at the moment anyway - the govt might change that one day)
in the meantime anyone out there with a grandparent bored with life, get them to enrol in a uni course, put it on hecs and they'll never have to pay it, so long as their income stays below the threshold. or maybe youre in your last year of employment - consider a uni course to give you something to do.

p.s. a warning to those who salary sacrifice or have any other FBT event - this amount is added to your taxable income when calculating the threshold for hecs liability - so dont think salary sacrificing your way out of a hecs debt will fix this - it wont.

enjoy that course.


----------



## Julia (11 November 2006)

son of baglimit said:
			
		

> this has been covered in a roundabout sort of way, but i'm just gonna state some facts for those who werent aware - and from my sources thats most of the community.
> 
> you only pay off your HECS debt in 2 ways.........
> 
> ...




Absolutely right, Son of Baglimit.  A woman I know is in her late 70's, certainly very bright and dedicated to her subject, but she has done a Bachelor's, Masters, Honours, and is now working on a PhD all on HECS which she will never pay off.  She is very well off indeed, and is happy to contribute her services as a counsellor on a voluntary basis.  So I guess from that point of view she is taking on the one hand, but contributing to the community on the other.

Julia


----------



## Kremmen (14 November 2006)

markrmau said:
			
		

> And neither should they. My last bill indicates an interest rate of around 2% (indexed to inflation). Since returns of 5% pa are easily obtainable (in a cash bank account for example), it is basically free money.




I think this is the most important point. The ALP line is emotive crap. "Students will die before they can pay their debt off" is a lie. They will die before they pay their debt off, not before than *can* pay it off.

"We now have students carrying such high levels of HECS debt (that) almost a third of them won't be able to pay it back in their lifetime" is, again, a flat out lie. The true statement would exclude the words "be able to". Once you have a HECS debt, growing at a tiny rate, it is obviously to your benefit to pay it off as slowly as possible ... and preferably never. Not only does it disappear when you die, but it doesn't count as a debt for any other purpose. It doesn't affect your ability to get bank credit, for example.


----------



## krisbarry (14 November 2006)

Kremmen said:
			
		

> , but it doesn't count as a debt for any other purpose. It doesn't affect your ability to get bank credit, for example.




Yes it does...as your wages are garnished till the loan is paid off, therefoe your ability to borrow money is somewhat affected.

I was earning $21,000 in a job back in 2000 and my wage was garnished $60 per fortnight.  Not a lot some say, but a huge amount when looking at the the annual salary.

Banks look at the net salary and apply a debt/earning ratio when applying for loans.


----------



## nizar (14 November 2006)

I heard that if u work overseas you can get away with not paying HECS.
Any substance to this?


----------



## nizar (14 November 2006)

Julia said:
			
		

> Absolutely right, Son of Baglimit.  A woman I know is in her late 70's, certainly very bright and dedicated to her subject, but she has done a Bachelor's, Masters, Honours, and is now working on a PhD all on HECS which she will never pay off.  She is very well off indeed, and is happy to contribute her services as a counsellor on a voluntary basis.  So I guess from that point of view she is taking on the one hand, but contributing to the community on the other.
> 
> Julia




In her 70s?
I thought HECS was only introduced in the late 80s and before that tertiary education was basically free?
I would be hope to be well off in my 70s!


----------



## Julia (14 November 2006)

nizar said:
			
		

> In her 70s?
> I thought HECS was only introduced in the late 80s and before that tertiary education was basically free?
> I would be hope to be well off in my 70s!



Nizar

Yes, her original degrees were in a different field, and in her 70's she decided to take up study again.

Julia


----------



## Happy (14 November 2006)

If it is one person in a blue moon, no problems.

But let’s have a look at it from slightly exaggerated perspective – so we can see it better.

Imagine one year, and every year after that, we get twice as many 70 y olds and older, as HSC 18, 19 or 20 y olds, taking up places at the universities.
On a surface we might say good on them, but let’s have a look at consequences of this.

Average life expectancy is around 80, and last few years some people are unable to look after themselves as opposed to look after community.

This would lead to national tragedy, because of shortage of educated people who would be able to provide services for 30 years or more.
(Could compare to IVF at 65)


----------



## chops_a_must (14 November 2006)

nizar said:
			
		

> I heard that if u work overseas you can get away with not paying HECS.
> Any substance to this?



This is true.


----------



## Julia (14 November 2006)

Happy said:
			
		

> If it is one person in a blue moon, no problems.
> 
> But let’s have a look at it from slightly exaggerated perspective – so we can see it better.
> 
> ...



Certainly you're right, Happy.  But this woman is the only person I've ever known who has resumed studying at this late age.  I doubt it's going to become a widespread problem.  

I really just mentioned it because it was so unusual.  And perhaps also because it's good to see that not everyone tosses in the towel when they get to be old.

Julia


----------



## Kremmen (15 November 2006)

Stop_the_clock said:
			
		

> Yes it does...as your wages are garnished till the loan is paid off, therefoe your ability to borrow money is somewhat affected.
> 
> I was earning $21,000 in a job back in 2000 and my wage was garnished $60 per fortnight.




That seems high. HECS repayment on $21k/year should have been about 3%, which is $12/week. Compared to the rest of your tax, it's a very minor issue. Now, you have to be earning over $36k to pay any HECS debt back at all. While a HECS debt might make a tiny difference to your ability to borrow money, it's miniscule compared to what would happen if we had to get into real (commercial/bank/etc) debt to pay fees.


----------



## TraderPro (15 November 2006)

nizar said:
			
		

> I heard that if u work overseas you can get away with not paying HECS.
> Any substance to this?




 chops_a_must said its true... but is it if you work for an overseas company - paying that country's taxes? or even if you are still being paid in Australia but are working for the same company overseas?


----------

