Australian PM blasts Obama...

A Surprise Left

Jeanie wrote:

Because your student union also provides services that you do use ASL.
At least it did before it was shut down.

i'm no longer a student but what services did i use that were paid for with my $500 odd? i used one or two services but certainly not to the value of $500 or so. that money is better in my pocket that paying for a student union that many students don't use.

ClimberInOz

A Surprise Left wrote:

i'm no longer a student but what services did i use that were paid for with my $500 odd? i used one or two services but certainly not to the value of $500 or so. that money is better in my pocket that paying for a student union that many students don't use.

Insurance is probably the biggest one. I personally used the accomodation and employment services but not much else. Having said that I was happy to pay my bit. I also am not a student anymore, but was there during the introduction of VSU and I definitely noticed a difference in the amount of support for students.

I'll admit that a lot of student unions were fairly innefective, but that is not cause for abolishment, merely legislation to ensure more efficient workings.

Jeanie

ClimberInOz wrote:

Insurance is probably the biggest one. I personally used the accomodation and employment services but not much else. Having said that I was happy to pay my bit. I also am not a student anymore, but was there during the introduction of VSU and I definitely noticed a difference in the amount of support for students.

I'll admit that a lot of student unions were fairly innefective, but that is not cause for abolishment, merely legislation to ensure more efficient workings.

I agree ClimberInOz, if they were going to abolish it for altruistic reasons then absolutely they needed to legislate and FUND a more efficient system.

Jeanie

A Surprise Left wrote:

i'm no longer a student but what services did i use that were paid for with my $500 odd? i used one or two services but certainly not to the value of $500 or so. that money is better in my pocket that paying for a student union that many students don't use.

Unfortunately ASL these services cost money to set up the infrastructure in order for the services to be delivered. If you did pay your $500 and you didn't then avail yourself of ALL the services that could be provided to you for your $500 then isn't that your bad?

catefrances

Jeanie wrote:

I agree ClimberInOz, if they were going to abolish it for altruistic reasons then absolutely they needed to legislate and FUND a more efficient system.

altruistic = liberal party. bwah haha!!!
didn't you hear, our tertiary education system is a hotbed of leftist ferment that has to be trodden underfoot at every available opportunity. if we're not careful those socialist bleeding hearts will undermine the very fabric of our society.

Jeanie

catefrances wrote:

altruistic = liberal party. bwah haha!!!
didn't you hear, our tertiary education system is a hotbed of leftist ferment that has to be trodden underfoot at every available opportunity. if we're not careful those socialist bleeding hearts will undermine the very fabric of our society.

Yeah, I completely agree with you cate!! (as usual!! ) But they did try to rabbit on while they were busy destroying telling us that they believed in non-compulsory unionism and the right of the individual to decide. All f**king hearts and flowers and butter wouldn't melt in my scary little mouth.
No mention of "this is a practice run for the rest of the country"!

Last Exodus

Jeanie wrote:

Charming!!

Nah! It's all good here Last Exodus! How's the plumbing there?

I just had to use my new word once...

Jeanie

Last Exodus wrote:

I just had to use my new word once...

Very impressive!! And your plumbing? :D:D

A Surprise Left

Jeanie wrote:

Unfortunately ASL these services cost money to set up the infrastructure in order for the services to be delivered. If you did pay your $500 and you didn't then avail yourself of ALL the services that could be provided to you for your $500 then isn't that your bad?

well i was there to study and was working quite a lot as well so i was not there to join a host of clubs and didn't need to use childcare. i don't see why i should have to pay for something that i don't need.

Jeanie

A Surprise Left wrote:

well i was there to study and was working quite a lot as well so i was not there to join a host of clubs and didn't need to use childcare. i don't see why i should have to pay for something that i don't need.

Yep, and I agree with you ASL, but the fact of the matter is that the government doesn't pay for counselling services, health care, childcare and many other services provided by your Student Union. And those things cost money. They can't run with only user pay fees, well the kind that students can afford anyway, so in order for the structures to be in place for you to be able to access them, should you want or need to, then the only way for SU to make the services available is to make a compulsory student union fee. IF the government hadn't run our academic institutions into the ground with their user pays logic, then frankly, it is the responsibility of said government to provide these services to students. AND don't be telling me that that is unreasonable. I have to pay a premium on my car registration every year, as we all do, because other people have accidents that require a lot of money to resolve and care for the injured and deceased. This money SHOULD come from the government. I haven't had an accident, so why should I pay? I pay ASL because maybe one day I will need the services of the TAC and it will be operational, and ready to support me with whatever services I require. So no, you shouldn't have to pay compulsory Student Union fees but surely you can see why they are necessary?

ThumbingMyWay32

Jeanie wrote:

I have to pay a premium on my car registration every year, as we all do, because other people have accidents that require a lot of money to resolve and care for the injured and deceased. This money SHOULD come from the government. I haven't had an accident, so why should I pay?

So you would rather pay your premium to the government instead of to your insurance provider?

catefrances

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

So you would rather pay your premium to the government instead of to your insurance provider?

where'd you get that from?

Jeanie

Oops!

Jeanie

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

So you would rather pay your premium to the government instead of to your insurance provider?

It's not the insurance provider that I pay the TAC premium to. It is a compulsory payment to the government on my car registration that we all have to pay every year, purely to fund the TAC.
So I'm already paying the money to the government.

Separate to paying this compulsory payment to the goverment as part of my vehicle registration, I also pay an insurance premium on my vehicle to a private insurance company. Hope that clarifies.

ThumbingMyWay32

Jeanie wrote:

It's not the insurance provider that I pay the TAC premium to. It is a compulsory payment to the government on my car registration that we all have to pay every year, purely to fund the TAC.
So I'm already paying the money to the government.

Separate to paying this compulsory payment to the goverment as part of my vehicle registration, I also pay an insurance premium on my vehicle to a private insurance company. Hope that clarifies.

Ohh that's just the government being the government. No worries. They're just looking out for ya Jeanie.

Jeanie

ThumbingMyWay32 wrote:

Ohh that's just the government being the government. No worries. They're just looking out for ya Jeanie.

Yeah, funny!! :D My government doesn't give a screaming shit about me Thumbing, well as far as I can see anyway. Our current administration has a really poor track record for caring about it's constituents.

I have no objection to paying premiums that will ensure that services are available to everyone, particularly when people really need them. BUT I am sick and tired of my government, robbing the poor to pay the rich. I'm sick of their complete and utter lack of compassion, and I'm tired of them redirecting monies that people pay in the form of taxes and premiums, to trivial or worse truly offensive things. I'm tired of them lining their own pockets while people struggle. I got through my life just fine without the current government and I'll get by just fine after they are gone too. I hate my government!! DID YOU HEAR THAT ASIO!!!

Scubascott

Jeanie wrote:

At the risk of being further probed by ASIO, anybody else be voting for Johnny at the next election? Anybody got any theories about what he's trying to deflect attention from with his Obama comments?

I don't know that he's trying to deflect attention. Now that the debate has gone on for a few days I'm pretty convinced that what Johnny really meant was that a early pullout from Iraq would be disastrous. He may have a point, but I don't see what that has to do with us. Its an American problem, I say let America deal with it.

Scubascott

A Surprise Left wrote:

i disagree with howard on many issues but i reckon he was right with this issue. why should i have funded a host of clubs and services at my university days that i never used, to the tune of $500 or so? particulary as a poor student?

Because having that host of clubs and services available makes university life far more interesting and fun. University education should be a life experience, not just a means of getting a piece of paper that you can hang on your wall.

Anyway, whether or not you agree with that sentiment is beside the point. Howard doesn't give a shit about student's right to choose. If he did he would have let us choose by voting on whether or not VSU should be introduced. I'm sure that his real motive was to cripple the student unions (mission accomplished) so that there would less resistance when he slashed tertiary education funding.

Hinny

As someone who works with a fair few people with severely crippling injuries from motor vehicle accidents, I cannot express how much I support the idea of compulsory third party insurance.

Jeanie

Scubascott wrote:

I don't know that he's trying to deflect attention. Now that the debate has gone on for a few days I'm pretty convinced that what Johnny really meant was that a early pullout from Iraq would be disastrous. He may have a point, but I don't see what that has to do with us. Its an American problem, I say let America deal with it.

Yeah, I don't know scott, I just don't trust him. I've seen him do this exact thing too many times. Embroil himself in a controversy to cover his actions on other agendas behind the play. Anyway, it still remains to be seen as far as I can see. I doubt I've heard many words come from his mouth that I actually believe.
I agree that now that everybody has gone in and made an even bigger mess of the place that pulling out now would be truly horrific for those left behind. But you are right, as the Americans are quick to point out, who cares about the small amount of support that Australia has provided? As this seems to be the case, then I say bring our boys home. I'd prefer to see them safe at home or at least in the Pacific area on peace keeping duties. Not much point in loosing any of them if the Americans don't appreciate our support anyway, and/or because our PM was too pig headed to bring them back.