Fees Protest on Wednesday

Browney7

Well, Many here going?

P_1

Depends on how the weather is. If this supposed weather warning for blizzards actually comes to pass tonight I doubt you'll be getting many out protesting on Wednesday.

rainbow kirby

Nay. Home to work on my final year project. Busy kirby is busy.

chrissor

Protesting in a blizzard, now that'll show the government that we are serious.
I'll be there hopefully.

shanegj

i have labs that can't be missed

Chakar

No.

TDOie

Wouldnt we be taken more seriously if we proposed an Alternative?

FockRoysh

I'll be goin if the weather isnt horrific. Got the tshirt ready to go!

passive

FIGHT THE BEES!

Dave!

No I shalln't as I am not arsed.

Larianne

What time is it on at?

Waltons

Not even if I were paid.

Dave!

Waltons wrote: »

Not even if I were paid.

I'll pay you with snowmen

Bubs101

The last one seemed funny but I really don't see the point of going. I couldn't give a **** what my dad spends his money on

Eoin Macollamh

How tone deaf are students these days? All of their lecturers are facing a pay cut, the whole economy is going in the tank and all they care about is that nobody make them pay some fraction of what their education actually costs.

Sorry, but this battle has been lost. We need fees. In fact, we needed them during the boom years when they would've been used to make the universities better. Student protests put a stop to that then with the result that now we'll have fees and they'll just go into general government coffers and be used to bail out banks and the like and the universities will be starved of resources even more than they are presently. Well done.

Browney7

National Demonstration Against Fees:
1:30, Garden of Remembrance, Parnell Square, Dublin

Breezer

Yes, I'm going.

Eoin Macollamh wrote: »

Student protests put a stop to that then with the result that now we'll have fees and they'll just go into general government coffers and be used to bail out banks and the like and the universities will be starved of resources even more than they are presently. Well done.

This is what I've been saying will happen all along, and half the reason I'm protesting. But you can't seriously be blaming students because the government, the Financial Regulator, and the banking executives collectively fecked up the banking system and now need to desperately plug up all the holes? Even if you do see students purely as an interest group (as opposed to the future of the country), who is at fault when a government caves in: the interest group or the government?

The_Minister

I'd say that you will have rain, that should give excuse for the low turnout.:)

kev_s88

i'll be there weather permitting

ardmacha

This is what I've been saying will happen all along, and half the reason I'm protesting. But you can't seriously be blaming students because the government, the Financial Regulator, and the banking executives collectively fecked up the banking system and now need to desperately plug up all the holes?

It is not a question of blame it is a question of raising money. People who aren't to blame are having pay cuts and paying more taxes, so should these people pay more to pay for students, many of whom are quite well off. If the government has to borrow money to pay for students then perhaps the students should just borrow it themselves.

the evil lime

Honestly I think the loss of free fees is inevitable and pretty logical too. I have no objection to it and won't be protesting it in the slightest.

Overall, I think it'll be good for education in this country.

RandolphEsq

I hope they don't just bring in 5,000euro fees straight away. They will need some sort of warning so we can save up for the fees!

But then I will be finished college so will use the money to emigrate!

anonymous_joe

BrightEyes wrote: »

I hope they don't just bring in 5,000euro fees straight away. They will need some sort of warning so we can save up for the fees!

But then I will be finished college so will use the money to emigrate!

Where to?

It's not our government that's led us into Recession (shower of tits that they are), the world's economy as a whole is in severe financial crisis.

RandolphEsq

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Where to?

It's not our government that's led us into Recession (shower of tits that they are), the world's economy as a whole is in severe financial crisis.

Yeah but if the world's economy is in recession and we are all equal in poverty than I would rather live in a country with hot, sunny weather and perma tanned sexy girls. It would be worth sacrificing 40% of what I could earn here
It's not all about having a job!

Eoin Macollamh

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Where to?

It's not our government that's led us into Recession (shower of tits that they are), the world's economy as a whole is in severe financial crisis.

We are worse off than just about any other country bar Iceland and that has been the direct result of idiotic policies during the boom years here that pumped up the property bubble and made no preparation for its inevitable bursting. The governing parties over the past few years, primarily Fianna Fail, imprudently relied on stamp duty as if the bubble could never collapse.

Make no mistake: even if the government had nothing to do with the worldwide credit crisis, they pursued policies that made it impossible for us to meaningfully and effectively respond to it. We are all paying the price now.

In this context, today's protest just seemed utterly frivolous. Students demonstrated that they have no grasp whatever of the serious situation the country finds itself in.

delta_bravo

I didnt attend but saw it on the six one news there, seems like a decent turnout. A few strange posters in the crowd like 'less fees, more gees' and 'free joseph fritzl'. I dont think the student body can convey their message as well the elderly did and fees are absolutely inevitable

Alyosha

I wonder who many of the "protestors" that were in Dublin today went to private/grind schools?!

I'm all for fees being reintroduced, and not just because I'm finishing this year. Your degree should add a lot of value to your earning potential in the long term and I don't see any reason why you should get it for nothing. Maybe if a Govt loan scheme was brought in alongside fees? Something like they have in the UK - can get around 5k per annum, interest rate equal to inflation and you start paying back when you're earning £15k+

bnt

If fees come in, it won't - can't - simply be a case of "here's a bill for €5,000". That would basically "crash" the system, with thousands of students simply unable to go to university. Political and economic suicide = not gonna happen that way.

More likely is a system like the UK's Student Loans Company, as Alyosha hinted at: where students are guaranteed loans at low interest, and the option of deferring payment if they are on a low income. And - if the speculation is correct - fees will only be levied on households making more than €100,000 p.a.

I don't think that's likely to happen by the start of 2009/10: too much consultation to do, facilities to set up, and politics to argue over.

dajaffa

I won't get into a rant, but it costs less to have 1,000 people in college than on the dole queue, and I don't think being on the dole is an investment in our economic future...

There's lots of jobs where you're not paid a crazy amount, but need a degree (teaching nursing etc) and it infuritates me that fees will be a blanket introduction if they happen, whereas in the uk teaching and health science courses are exempt from fees. We have progressive taxation, if you're earning well by virtue of a free 3rd level education, or a childcare allowance that allowed you to work or whatever, you're going to pay more tax than those earning less.

Anyway if fees come in our fourth level sector will deteriorate and our school leavers will go to the UK as fees there are quite low, barely more than our "reg fee".

anonymous_joe

BrightEyes wrote: »

Yeah but if the world's economy is in recession and we are all equal in poverty than I would rather live in a country with hot, sunny weather and perma tanned sexy girls. It would be worth sacrificing 40% of what I could earn here
It's not all about having a job!

Heh, an interesting point.

Too Australia!

Eoin Macollamh wrote: »

We are worse off than just about any other country bar Iceland and that has been the direct result of idiotic policies during the boom years here that pumped up the property bubble and made no preparation for its inevitable bursting. The governing parties over the past few years, primarily Fianna Fail, imprudently relied on stamp duty as if the bubble could never collapse.

Make no mistake: even if the government had nothing to do with the worldwide credit crisis, they pursued policies that made it impossible for us to meaningfully and effectively respond to it. We are all paying the price now.

In this context, today's protest just seemed utterly frivolous. Students demonstrated that they have no grasp whatever of the serious situation the country finds itself in.

Well I know we're in a fairly bad spot, but our economy rocketed up over a decade to catch up on the growth we'd never had, then artifically continued onwards. We were always due economic recession.

Alyosha wrote: »

I wonder who many of the "protestors" that were in Dublin today went to private/grind schools?!

I'm all for fees being reintroduced, and not just because I'm finishing this year. Your degree should add a lot of value to your earning potential in the long term and I don't see any reason why you should get it for nothing. Maybe if a Govt loan scheme was brought in alongside fees? Something like they have in the UK - can get around 5k per annum, interest rate equal to inflation and you start paying back when you're earning £15k+

Ooooh, oooh, I went to a private school and protested! Then again, I don't need to give a flying fúck about fees, but I do, because not everyone in this country was as lucky as me.

IndigoStarr

I think all of the people on here who are in favour of fees need to realise that some people, like myself, would simply have to drop out of college with the reintroduction of fees. My sister won't be able to go to college if fees are introduced, and she's incredibly bright. I can't afford to be saddled with 5k per year of debt either.
Education should not be something that is solely the preserve of the wealthy. Its just not fair.

33% God

IndigoStarr wrote: »

I think all of the people on here who are in favour of fees need to realise that some people, like myself, would simply have to drop out of college with the reintroduction of fees. My sister won't be able to go to college if fees are introduced, and she's incredibly bright. I can't afford to be saddled with 5k per year of debt either.
Education should not be something that is solely the preserve of the wealthy. Its just not fair.

+1
Fees for me could easily mean having to leave. Plus it gives the rich yet another unfair advantage in education. We should be trying to close off avenues for people to succeed ahead of those brighter than them by virtue of Daddy's wallet, not open new ones.

I was kind of disappointed at the turn out today to be honest. If they do announce a reintroduction I'd hope more people would show up. Irish Ferries got around 100,000

Stabshauptmann

IndigoStarr wrote: »

Education should not be something that is solely the preserve of the wealthy. Its just not fair.

Just out of curiosity, what should be the preserve of the wealthy?

33% God

Kaptain Redeye wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, what should be the preserve of the wealthy?

Limepits

Zounds

Luxuries. The whole reason there's a debate here is because society at large can't decide if 3rd level education is a luxury or a neccisity like 1st and 2nd level.

Breezer

Zounds wrote: »

Luxuries. The whole reason there's a debate here is because society at large can't decide if 3rd level education is a luxury or a neccisity like 1st and 2nd level.

In today's Ireland, if you want almost any kind of R & D or skilled job, you need an undergraduate degree at the very least. Since these are the jobs which are going to drive our economy forward (if it ever gets back into a forward gear at all), free 3rd level education benefits society as well as the individual.

On the other hand, those in lower-paid manufacturing or unskilled jobs pay less tax in the short term, and will lose their jobs in the long term as more companies relocate to cheaper labour markets. It is now cheaper for a San Jose-based company to employ an unskilled labourer in San Jose (never mind Poland or India) than it is in Ireland, which just serves to illustrate how uncompetitive we have become. Lengthening Dole queues do not help our economy.

Therefore, it is, in my opinion anyway, perfectly clear that a 3rd level education has ceased to be a luxury and is in fact a necessity not only for the individual but for Irish society as a whole.

But never mind that. Batt O'Keeffe is on a crusade to reclaim the Holy Land and no amount of logic or reason will convince him that saving €130 million a year now will destroy our economy all over again in the long term.

fatal

Breezer wrote: »

In today's Ireland, if you want almost any kind of R & D or skilled job, you need an undergraduate degree at the very least. Since these are the jobs which are going to drive our economy forward (if it ever gets back into a forward gear at all), free 3rd level education benefits society as well as the individual.

On the other hand, those in lower-paid manufacturing or unskilled jobs pay less tax in the short term, and will lose their jobs in the long term as more companies relocate to cheaper labour markets. It is now cheaper for a San Jose-based company to employ an unskilled labourer in San Jose (never mind Poland or India) than it is in Ireland, which just serves to illustrate how uncompetitive we have become. Lengthening Dole queues do not help our economy.

Therefore, it is, in my opinion anyway, perfectly clear that a 3rd level education has ceased to be a luxury and is in fact a necessity not only for the individual but for Irish society as a whole.

But never mind that. O'Keeffe is on a crusade to reclaim the Holy Land and no amount of logic or reason will convince him that saving €130 million a year now will destroy our economy all over again in the long term.

well said

Red Alert

Free education up to and including 3rd/4th level should be a universal right. I hope the government see a huge backlash from students if they even think about trying to impose tuition fees. Any increase in stealth fees like registration fees would have to be ringfenced due to the clear waste and vanity projects that colleges use it for.

The_Minister

Red Alert wrote: »

Free education up to and including 3rd/4th level should be a universal right.

A universal right?

Firstly, that would mean that people in African countries would have a right to it.

Secondly, we can't send everyone to college. We just can't.

dyl10

The_Minister wrote: »

Secondly, we can't send everyone to college. We just can't.

and we don't, but the option is there

bnt

The problem with sending "everyone" to college is: that then becomes the new baseline requirement for employment. We're seeing this already, with job specs nearly always having "a degree" on them, even when that's not always required for them to do the job. How about sending half the kids to college, the half that is above average? At least, that way, the idea of a university degree won't be cheapened to the point of near-worthlessness. Meanwhile, those without degrees - for whatever reason - become unemployable.

For the half that is below average - what is wrong with apprenticeships, clerical jobs, service work, etc.? You know, all those things that can get you making money straight away, instead of four more years spending your parents' money? I agree that the prospects are not what they used to be, since Manufacturing used to be where many below-average kids went to work - but no-one makes anything any more. You'd rather import someone from Poland or China to clean offices or work at Tesco, while we go to university. But you can't all be above average: Ireland is not Lake Wobegon.

Eoin Macollamh

dajaffa wrote: »

I won't get into a rant, but it costs less to have 1,000 people in college than on the dole queue, and I don't think being on the dole is an investment in our economic future...

I'm not sure you're right about that. According to this, in 1997/1998 the average cost per student was nearly €6,700 (£5,264) per annum. I haven't been able to find more recent data, but we've had close to 5% annual inflation since then and even higher inflation in the higher education sector. It's likely to be significantly cheaper to have someone on the dole for a year than it is to have them in university. That is not the only consideration, but that is how you've framed the question.

Mind, the alternative for those going to university is not likely to be the dole queue. It's more likely some sort of work, whether in Ireland or elsewhere.

Eoin Macollamh

IndigoStarr wrote: »

I think all of the people on here who are in favour of fees need to realise that some people, like myself, would simply have to drop out of college with the reintroduction of fees. My sister won't be able to go to college if fees are introduced, and she's incredibly bright. I can't afford to be saddled with 5k per year of debt either.
Education should not be something that is solely the preserve of the wealthy. Its just not fair.

You wouldn't be able to get student loans? Why not?

Why wouldn't you be able to pay a loan of €15,000 or even more back?

Eoin Macollamh

Breezer wrote: »

In today's Ireland, if you want almost any kind of R & D or skilled job, you need an undergraduate degree at the very least. Since these are the jobs which are going to drive our economy forward (if it ever gets back into a forward gear at all), free 3rd level education benefits society as well as the individual.

This argument is bogus. It benefits the individual far more than it benefits society. The state has some interest in seeing citizens get third-level degrees, but that interest isn't such that it would be worth subsidizing students 100% no matter what the price. On the other hand, a university degree is worth quite a lot in future earnings to the individual who acquires it. Why should that person not pay something for it? Or, to put it another way: why should that person expect to be subsidized by other taxpayers who, in the majority, do not benefit? This question becomes acute in a time of economic crisis.

gubbie

Eoin Macollamh wrote: »

I'm not sure you're right about that. According to this, in 1997/1998 the average cost per student was nearly €6,700 (£5,264) per annum. I haven't been able to find more recent data, but we've had close to 5% annual inflation since then and even higher inflation in the higher education sector. It's likely to be significantly cheaper to have someone on the dole for a year than it is to have them in university. That is not the only consideration, but that is how you've framed the question.

Mind, the alternative for those going to university is not likely to be the dole queue. It's more likely some sort of work, whether in Ireland or elsewhere.

One of the government ministers (can't remember who, just heard a sound bite on the radio) said that it costs the government over €25,000 for every lost job (tax + €200 weekly on the dole) and that's for the lower end of the scale

mloc

Putting more people into college is madness, there should be far less people in college and far more competition for places.

With a huge lack of funding and resources, the lowest common denominator attitude has devalued Irish degrees with a massively deleterious effect on graduate employment prospects in other countries. Not everyone has a right to go to college. Equality is artificial and an a completely unnatural concept; the need to raise standards in our educational institutions means that many of those currently in the system should simply not be there.

In a way it's quite like the housing bubble; increasing the number of incoming students is like increasing house prices; the standard of student drops and ultimately the whole system is over-valued, its real value, in terms of international competitiveness and global standards far lower than it would be with a more selective base of students.

Marching against the reintroduction of fees is infantile. The money is not there to pay the bills anymore, and its time to realise that. Students have to pay. Whether it be loan based or not is immaterial on this point, once the exchequer is not footing the whole cost. Unfortunately this means it will be more difficult for some people to attend college. Ultimately, it should be. A college education should not be handed out on a plate to anyone who wants it. It should be earned and with the effort, hopefully respected.

33% God

mloc wrote: »

Ultimately, it should be. A college education should not be handed out on a plate to anyone who wants it. It should be earned and with the effort, hopefully respected.

I wouldn't see "my Daddy can pay for it and your Daddy can't" as "earned"

El Siglo

mloc wrote: »

Putting more people into college is madness, there should be far less people in college and far more competition for places.

With a huge lack of funding and resources, the lowest common denominator attitude has devalued Irish degrees with a massively deleterious effect on graduate employment prospects in other countries. Not everyone has a right to go to college. Equality is artificial and an a completely unnatural concept; the need to raise standards in our educational institutions means that many of those currently in the system should simply not be there.

In a way it's quite like the housing bubble; increasing the number of incoming students is like increasing house prices; the standard of student drops and ultimately the whole system is over-valued, its real value, in terms of international competitiveness and global standards far lower than it would be with a more selective base of students.

Marching against the reintroduction of fees is infantile. The money is not there to pay the bills anymore, and its time to realise that. Students have to pay. Whether it be loan based or not is immaterial on this point, once the exchequer is not footing the whole cost. Unfortunately this means it will be more difficult for some people to attend college. Ultimately, it should be. A college education should not be handed out on a plate to anyone who wants it. It should be earned and with the effort, hopefully respected.

So really university and all forms of third level education is a privilege of the few then? The whole idea of having free third level education is to create a better educated work force, now quality issues aside how many people have come out of Irish universities with degrees in the last 10 years, now compare that figure to the 10 years previous? Now fees will probably be introduced, known the way our government continues to work, but the level of highly educated people will drop like a stone and from the most vulnerable and disadvantaged parts of society. I don't like the current situation of the universities being taken the piss of with messers who just come in, piss about for 3 or 4 years, get their 'whatever' class degree and take a job in daddy's firm or piss about for another few years, but that's their loss. With free education there have been people from the poorest areas of country that have got something that their parents not so long ago were told to never contemplate. Even myself, from a fairly rough background, crap secondary school, did okay-ish in the Leaving Cert, I ended up in Belfield, and now I'm getting two awards for getting the highest results. Now this wouldn't have been possible 15 years ago. You can argue that the quality of our degrees has become diluted etc... I don't think so, because maybe if you were to journey to the midlands, or South Hill in Limerick, or anyother disadvantaged area, you will find scores of people who barely finished secondary school, let alone have a degree from one of the best universities in the country. A degree hasn't lost it's weight, it's not a matter of just having a degree like it was in the 70's or 80's, it's the quality of your degree. More people with degrees should be a driver not a deterrent of quality, if more people have degrees, how many of them have good, solid degrees, how many have 1st's, how many have degrees in really tricky subjects (Actuary, Theoretical Physics, Electrical Engineering, Psychology, Law, Radiography etc...). If you want to see crap degrees in stupid subjects, go to britain a good few of their 'universities' run ridiculous courses, an Irish graduate would run rings around a british graduate!

Protesting fees is not infantile, protesting means that people wont allow themselves to be walked on, if you think protesting against the government doesn't work, have a look at France. The reason why people see this protest as more of a publicity campaign by su hacks, is that it is being done by the wrong people, representing the wrong group. It's a middle-class affair for middle-class people. Rich people don't care, 5 years of grind schools or Blackrock, what's another 3 or 4 years at Belfield? Poor people won't protest, just yet as they're more concerned with day-to-day issues like, having the children's allowance payment, or having enough money to get through the week.

I think the only way that students will ever 'mobilise' (terrible word, I know!) to this issue, is if the government actually goes through with reintroducing fees, then you'll see the uproar, give it another year and things might be a lot different.

A degree that is earned shouldn't be judged on how much you're willing to pay for it, a degree is earned by the work you put into it.

Any question of the coffers being empty well the money is there alright, it's just being spent on rubbish, like recapitalising Anglo-Irish and bailing out developers. Really though why should students take the hit because of our government's ineptitude and lack of serendipity? End of Rant!

mloc

33% God wrote: »

I wouldn't see "my Daddy can pay for it and your Daddy can't" as "earned"

I strikes me that most of the anti-fee side is harbouring some sort of class driven chip on thier shoulders with all this talk of "daddy" paying for things and public/private schools etc.

The reality is, for anyone who actually looks at the figures, the introduction of so called free fees has made a negligable impact on college attendance by those in lower income brackets. The real drivers behind increased attendance are higher competitiveness in the job market, vastly decreased academic standards (i.e. less academic students can get places) and a higher quality of life simply meaning more people have funds to pay for the non-fees side of college attendance.

I am aware of several individuals, my own father and uncle included, who went to university coming from what would be described as a very low income household at the time. My uncle now is probably the leading academic in his field worldwide and it was has hard work and commitment to academia, not handouts, that got him where he is. To say poorer individuals did, or could not, go to college before the introduction of free fees is absurd. The change comes from a cultural change in peoples attitudes and aspirations towards a college education.

dyl10

A fact that a lot of people have to get over is that free fees is not just an economic policy, it's a form of social policy that the lower middle class probably see the most benefit of.

If you don't directly feel the benefits of free fees, it's easy to dismiss them and ask for their reintroduction.
I don't benefit from free medical cards for over 70s, I don't really care a whole lot about them, but a lot of pensioners do. They protested and won to keep their social benefit, like a lot of students are now.

Free third level is not a right, but it's certainly something I want to see present in my country.

33% God

mloc wrote: »

I strikes me that most of the anti-fee side is harbouring some sort of class driven chip on thier shoulders with all this talk of "daddy" paying for things and public/private schools etc.

The reality is, for anyone who actually looks at the figures, the introduction of so called free fees has made a negligable impact on college attendance by those in lower income brackets. The real drivers behind increased attendance are higher competitiveness in the job market, vastly decreased academic standards (i.e. less academic students can get places) and a higher quality of life simply meaning more people have funds to pay for the non-fees side of college attendance.

I am aware of several individuals, my own father and uncle included, who went to university coming from what would be described as a very low income household at the time. My uncle now is probably the leading academic in his field worldwide and it was has hard work and commitment to academia, not handouts, that got him where he is. To say poorer individuals did, or could not, go to college before the introduction of free fees is absurd. The change comes from a cultural change in peoples attitudes and aspirations towards a college education.

It's not a class issue. The fact is that if fees are reintroduced my attendance at this university might be forced to end, depending on the way that they are brought in. My family are struggling to send me here as it is even without an extra few grand in tuition. We simply don't have the money and I don't feel that I should punished for not coming from a wealthy family. Why should that have anything to do with my access to education? Surely achievement should be the ONLY criteria.

Your family were lucky that they could do that. My father couldn't go to university till after I was born and he want as a mature student (when fees were abolished). He simply couldn't afford to. His family couldn't even afford the opportunity cost of him going to university even if he could have supported himself independently. While there were people from poorer families who managed to go it was much harder for them, and it shouldn't be. There were plenty more who just couldn't go.