National Student March 3rd November + General Fees related discussions

LeixlipRed

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

Yeah First Year Rep Elections was horribly advertised last year, much better this year. Has as much to do with the candidates being a lot more vocal this time, really getting their name out there.

I wonder how vocal they'll be when the real work to be done comes or will they be shown up as the careerists we all hope they aren't.

Check this out

USI are stating that the student registration fee will increase by 100% to 3000 euro a year, 10% cut to maintenance grants, 10% increase in the threshold to qualify for such a grant. This deserves it's own thread actually or does anyone care?

squishykins

I care! I just about managed this years fees! Just!

XxMCRxBabyxX

LeixlipRed wrote: »

I wonder how vocal they'll be when the real work to be done comes or will they be shown up as the careerists we all hope they aren't.

Check this out

USI are stating that the student registration fee will increase by 100% to 3000 euro a year, 10% cut to maintenance grants, 10% increase in the threshold to qualify for such a grant. This deserves it's own thread actually or does anyone care?

I'm gonna get attacked for this but this is why I'm actually in favour of fees as long as a proper loan system is brought in like they have in places like Sweden. With these current times these things are going to happen and the logical thing is to bring in one of these fees/loans systems so the money can go into our education system without making it harder for us students to try manage to get more money every year for our education.

Maybe that's just me though. I'm not even able to get a grant even though I am defo entitled to one so what can i do?!

LeixlipRed

In these current times these things are going to happen? So instead of taxing the rich for example we should let people from disadvantaged areas be excluded from education should we? Or instead of reclaiming our natural resources from the oil and gas companies that along with Ray Burke and FF signed deals in the 80s that swindled the tax coffers out of billions in tax revenue we should let people drop out of university and emigrate in search of a job? Admins, giz a new thread will ya

Kiwi_knock

Will be attending the March, definitely deserves a thread of its own. A lot of students and societies are spreading the word on Facebook but greater awareness is needed.

XxMCRxBabyxX

LeixlipRed wrote: »

In these current times these things are going to happen? So instead of taxing the rich for example we should let people from disadvantaged areas be excluded from education should we? Or instead of reclaiming our natural resources from the oil and gas companies that along with Ray Burke and FF signed deals in the 80s that swindled the tax coffers out of billions in tax revenue we should let people drop our of university and emigrate in search of a job? Admins, giz a new thread will ya

How does a loan system exclude anyone?! We all pay the same fees and work them off when we're working. it's been working in Sweden for over 30 years.

LeixlipRed

Because it places the crutch of massive debt on anyone who graduates from university! The assumption that a degree automatically equals a cushy, well paid job and hence easy repayment of your student loans is completely flawed. It might work in Sweden but what about Australia were every year thousands of graduates flee the country to escape paying back student loans? We have no jobs here, how will anyone repay? The truth is the loan system might come in in the long term but this government needs cash savings, loans are no good to them. Educate yourself a little and you'll see that we can all still enjoy free education, we just need to work outside the box economically.

LeixlipRed

I should also add that I'm not picking on you, I used to think these half measures (loans, etc,) were worthwile but I've realised now that free education should be a right not a privilege and it has to made work. The long term benefits outweigh any negatives in the short term. If we had a government who cared about anything but the ruling class that might be achievable of course.

XxMCRxBabyxX

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Because it places the crutch of massive debt on anyone who graduates from university! The assumption that a degree automatically equals a cushy, well paid job and hence easy repayment of your student loans is completely flawed. It might work in Sweden but what about Australia were every year thousands of graduates flee the country to escape paying back student loans? We have no jobs here, how will anyone repay? The truth is the loan system might come in in the long term but this government needs cash savings, loans are no good to them. Educate yourself a little and you'll see that we can all still enjoy free education, we just need to work outside the box economically.

Considering that those who will have these fees will only be looking for jobs in 3/4/5 years times chances are the jobs will be around then. We're not talking about those in university now!

And I never made such an assumption! I don't expect that everyone who gets a degree will make a fortune but once they earn over a certain amount they can pay through their salaries.

And I am quite educated thanks very much. As the daughter of a self employed architect I know exactly how hard this recession is hitting and I knew before most people in this country did. I am basically the only person earning money in my house and do I get a grant? No. So I have done my research and looked at the various systems, because clearly ours is not working properly. I've thought about this a lot, unlike many (not aiming at anyone in particular) who are already to complain but haven't done their research as to what or why

XxMCRxBabyxX

LeixlipRed wrote: »

I should also add that I'm not picking on you, I used to think these half measures (loans, etc,) were worthwile but I've realised now that free education should be a right not a privilege and it has to made work. The long term benefits outweigh any negatives in the short term. If we had a government who cared about anything but the ruling class that might be achievable of course.

I understand that about free education and I wish it were more possible but if it really was so many more countries would make free education an option.

and in the same line, don't take this all as directly at you. This is the first time I've actually properly debate this so I'm also arguing against comments I have seen and heard by others before

LeixlipRed

I don't think you have examined all the options to be honest. Where have you researched? If you confine your research to the mainstream media you'll find that all anyone is saying is that a)can't let the banks go bust b)have to cut the deficit, need to make cuts or c)ok, those are true but let's fire loads of money into the economy and try to reignite it. a) is an untruth. b) obviously we need to cut the defecit, why are these cuts so obvious? And c) we cannot borrow hence we cannot do (and hence why Labour who favour this approach will be sfa use in government if they do get in).

The alternative is simple:

-let the banks go bust, default on the debts owed to bondholders.
-rewrite the constitution to allow us to rip up agreements made with Shell, Statoil, etc to allow us to nationalise (or tax at 70% or 80% just like in Norway for example) our natural resources
-Put a tax on wealth which wouldn't apply to individual homes
-Tax all those earning over 100k a year at 70%

All those measures would allow us to provide free education for all, the defecit would be hugely cut and eventually we'd get out of this mess. The only reason you think we can't have free education is because you think the economic situation must be doom and gloom. But that is not the case!

XxMCRxBabyxX

LeixlipRed wrote: »

I don't think you have examined all the options to be honest. Where have you researched? If you confine your research to the mainstream media you'll find that all anyone is saying is that a)can't let the banks go bust b)have to cut the deficit, need to make cuts or c)ok, those are true but let's fire loads of money into the economy and try to reignite it. a) is an untruth. b) obviously we need to cut the defecit, why are these cuts so obvious? And c) we cannot borrow hence we cannot do (and hence why Labour who favour this approach will be sfa use in government if they do get in).

The alternative is simple:

-let the banks go bust, default on the debts owed to bondholders.
-rewrite the constitution to allow us to rip up agreements made with Shell, Statoil, etc to allow us to nationalise (or tax at 70% or 80% just like in Norway for example) our natural resources
-Put a tax on wealth which wouldn't apply to individual homes
-Tax all those earning over 100k a year at 70%

All those measures would allow us to provide free education for all, the defecit would be hugely cut and eventually we'd get out of this mess. The only reason you think we can't have free education is because you think the economic situation must be doom and gloom. But that is not the case!

If it was all that simple why hasn't any of that been done. And don't give me the usual "our government are ****e" crap. And I'm not trying to be smart or anything!

even if we did all that there would still be the reg fees and the grant issues and everything we have now. There's also the issue that third level education is not the only issue that our government have to deal with, the country has so many issues right now that we can hardly just expect for ours to be the only one focused on

LeixlipRed

But they're all issues created by the current goverment and it's cronies! And they have no interest in pursuing those fiscal policies because it goes against everything they believe in. Greed and capitalism is all they care about, protecting their own in the bondholders and board members of our financial institutions that gambles our money away. It's too long and complex an issue to get into on a message board but if you want to know more I suggest coming along to a meeting of SWSS which is the Socialist Workers Student Soc. PM if you want details. If you really want to educate yourself about what's possible if we just forget everything that's bet into us by the mainstream political parties then that's a good place to start.

And education is certainly not the only issue but it's up there with the healthcare and welfare systems. How do we insure that the future of our country if not through education?

LeixlipRed

As some of you may or may not be aware USI has been in negotiations with the government in relation to cuts to third level education funding in advance of December's budget. Figures released in the last couple of days show that the government are planning to increase the registration fee by 100% to 3000euro, decrease maintenance grants by 10% and also increase the threshold at which one qualifies for the grant by 10%. These figures are a spectacular attack on students in this country and in anticipation of this USI have planed a march for Nov 3rd.

http://www.facebook.com/#!/event.php?eid=124538357601069

I'd encourage everyone to attend. FEE is starting up again on campus and will be setting up a stall in the Arts Block next week to inform people about these forthcoming cuts and to build for this and future protests.

Mod: Can someone change the title to include the date? Cheers

XxMCRxBabyxX

LeixlipRed wrote: »

But they're all issues created by the current goverment and it's cronies! And they have no interest in pursuing those fiscal policies because it goes against everything they believe in. Greed and capitalism is all they care about, protecting their own in the bondholders and board members of our financial institutions that gambles our money away. It's too long and complex an issue to get into on a message board but if you want to know more I suggest coming along to a meeting of SWSS which is the Socialist Workers Student Soc. PM if you want details. If you really want to educate yourself about what's possible if we just forget everything that's bet into us by the mainstream political parties then that's a good place to start.

And education is certainly not the only issue but it's up there with the healthcare and welfare systems. How do we insure that the future of our country if not through education?

Sorry but I actually have a policy of not linking myself to any parties at all. It's nothing personal but I prefer to keep myself neutral and away from all this damn politics drama.

But I do take your points on board and I am going to look into this all more but at the moment I still stand by my original point

funky penguin

Merged with the posts from the general discussion thread, and date added to the title.

banquo

Union has big, big plans for this march. Had a big meeting about it today. More info Monday.

LeixlipRed

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

Sorry but I actually have a policy of not linking myself to any parties at all. It's nothing personal but I prefer to keep myself neutral and away from all this damn politics drama.

But I do take your points on board and I am going to look into this all more but at the moment I still stand by my original point

No, I absolutely appreciate that stance and in some ways I agree with it. What I mean is if you come along you can hear our side of the story too, no one would force you to join up like I've only recently signed up to the SWP and that took a lot of thought before I decided I was ready to actually sign a piece of paper.

Anyway, there are alternatives! Check out swp.ie for example, lot's of socialist propoganda but a lot educational and alternative stuff about the economics of it all.

LeixlipRed

banquo wrote: »

Union has big, big plans for this march. Had a big meeting about it today. More info Monday.

Good stuff, look forward to hearing about it!

kisaragi

LeixlipRed wrote: »

I don't think you have examined all the options to be honest. Where have you researched? If you confine your research to the mainstream media you'll find that all anyone is saying is that a)can't let the banks go bust b)have to cut the deficit, need to make cuts or c)ok, those are true but let's fire loads of money into the economy and try to reignite it. a) is an untruth. b) obviously we need to cut the defecit, why are these cuts so obvious? And c) we cannot borrow hence we cannot do (and hence why Labour who favour this approach will be sfa use in government if they do get in).

The alternative is simple:

-let the banks go bust, default on the debts owed to bondholders.
-rewrite the constitution to allow us to rip up agreements made with Shell, Statoil, etc to allow us to nationalise (or tax at 70% or 80% just like in Norway for example) our natural resources
-Put a tax on wealth which wouldn't apply to individual homes
-Tax all those earning over 100k a year at 70%

All those measures would allow us to provide free education for all, the defecit would be hugely cut and eventually we'd get out of this mess. The only reason you think we can't have free education is because you think the economic situation must be doom and gloom. But that is not the case!

Taxing people at 70% is ridiculous... Anyone earning over 100k obviously worked hard to get where they are and I think they deserve to keep more than 30% of their wages... It's not like 100k is a massive wage either when many of these people are likely to be far along in their career with dependent children/mortages/car loans etc etc etc...

Although I'll freely admit that economics and politics are not my area of expertise, and I don't have a better solution, but it irks me when people shout that we should just put extremely high taxes on the "rich"... when they probably contribute a lot more to the economy than those sitting on benefits.

LeixlipRed

Ah will you ever cop on! Contribute to the economy? What the hell does that even mean? 100k is a massive wage when you compare it to all the people who are getting paid 0k per year due to the ineptitudes of those in power and in the financial sector. The assumption that people on the dole are just lazy cretins devoid of interest in earning a wage is miles from the truth. Tax those who are most able to pay. Someone who earns 100k a year is far better off than a man or woman with a family who just got laid off and is now on benefits. If you don't have a better solution then maybe you should just agree this is it!

Lord TSC

If you don't have a better solution then maybe you should just agree this is it!

I've not agreed with you up until now but I at least respected how you were putting forward your point. But that last sentence is extremly dodgy. Just because people don't have a viable option doesn't mean we should just jump behind that one cause it exists. There needs to be more behind a choice than "It's the only one" and really, it's not. "Better" is a term based on personal opinion.

I agree about taxing the rich to some extent but not quite that heavily. As has been said, some people work hard for that high wage and they deserve to be rewarded as a result. I know there are some out there who abuse their positions of power for financial gain but your option is extreme. What would even be the point of working hard and working your way up the ladder if you would be punished for it? In fact, what would be the point of going to college if your reward is then to face high tax and poor income?

I find my major problem with arguements on this sort of subject though is that no one is willing to see a cut in their own lifestyle and expects everyone else to suffer. The truth is, the entire country needs to realise sacrifices are in order, for everyone from the top to the bottom of the ladder. I hate to say it, but grants and benifits do need to be cut. Taking grants as an example, I think €3,000 a year is a stupid amount tbh. I was able to walk away every year with about 1,200 of that in the bank for personal spending. And as great as that was, the government should not be funding people like that. The grants could take a hit.

I'm not saying it should all be laid on the feet of the poor. I'm writing this as someone who is currently unemployed with no job prospect in sight. Yes, the taxes on the rich (especially those over a far larger sum than Leix suggests) need to increase, but the sacrifices will and must be made by EVERYONE. And unfortunatly, that means fees are going to go up, grants are going to go down and life is going to get a little tighter.

LeixlipRed

You'll note the word maybe in the quote you've taken. If you can't present an alternative and you can't seen anything wrong with what I've presented then what's wrong with it?

Anyway, you say everyone has to suffer? Why is that? Who caused this financical crisis? People in the banking sector, legislators, politicians, etc,. I don't buy into the, "we all particapted" argument pushed around by the media. It was the banks responsibility to insure credit was given to only those who could repay. They didn't do that hence it's the banks fault and the legislators' fault for allowing the banks free reign. My view is that it was a tiny percentage of extremely well off people who ****ed us over and now the same people are telling us we have to pay for it en masse. Why is that? I'm not gonna repeat my suggestions on how we can generate money in this crisis without following any of the mainstream parties' suggested cuts. They're in a previous post, they'd generate billions in fresh revenue and we wouldn't have this crutch of the banks/bondholders.

To explain why FF/FG/Lab won't allow us to default on the debt (willingly anyway) is because we'd then find ourselves ostracised (like Argentina in 2001), no one would want to lend to us (no one in the EU or the West anyway). What Argentina did was they found other sources to buy their debt. There's always someone willing. Argentina then experienced a boom period post defaulting on their debt so it is possible to recover while being an international parriah. Anyway, all my arguments are there, there are alternatives to what you hear in the media, that's my final point.

megaten

What gets me is the assumption the government seem to have that most collage courses are actually worth full fees. I can't speak for anyone else but I barely consider my degree to be worth the 1,500 i pay now. If registration fee's were bumped to 3,000 or full fee's being introduced I'd expect a serious bump in services. Like actually having enough demonstrators in a lab or lecturer's who can write legibly.

LeixlipRed

But that won't happen, these increase in registration fees are to cover a hole in the finances, not to add more finance to the 3rd level sector. So nothing will change. Though to be honest, lectures writing illegibly is hardly something to be complaining about. Students already have a bad name as whingers for coming out with stuff like that.

banquo

Typical university: We need 100 euro for the year to function.
Govt: That's great. Here's 85. Make the rest out of the reg fee.

Reg fee = 15 euro.

Typical university: We still need 100 euro for the year to function.
Govt: That's great. Here's 70. Make the rest out of the reg fee.

Reg fee = 30 euro.

It's literally that simple.

LeixlipRed

Exactly! People think this extra money they'll be paying will convert into extra services,etc,. It won't, it's just maintaining the status quo and barely at that.

banquo

It's fees. The registration fee is a tuition fee. It has no specific purpose - it's just money that the college needs to make up the shortfall in state funding.

FYR

LeixlipRed wrote: »

I wonder how vocal they'll be when the real work to be done comes or will they be shown up as the careerists we all hope they aren't.

Check this out

USI are stating that the student registration fee will increase by 100% to 3000 euro a year, 10% cut to maintenance grants, 10% increase in the threshold to qualify for such a grant. This deserves it's own thread actually or does anyone care?

Join my group http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=134348353284624&index=1

FYR

CALLING ALL STUDENTS!!!! WE ARE THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY!!! TELL THIS GOVERNMENT THAT WE WILL TAKE NO MORE!! NO MORE GRANT CUTS! NO MORE RISES IN THE REG FEE! WE WILL STAND SILENTLY NO MORE!! WE NEED EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU TO TELL THEM THAT WE WILL NOT PAY A €3000 REG FEE!! JOIN THE PROTEST!! WEDNESDAY NOV 3RD 12.30PM! BUSES LEAVING FROM THE COLLEGE!!!

Liber8or

Can someone please post a link (a credible, reliable source) which states/confirms the registration fee will increase to €3000?

Or are we all marching against something which has not happened or been confirmed to happen yet?

LeixlipRed

The USI are in negotiations with the government over the coming cuts and these are the figures that they have been led to believe will be implemented in the budget. The government are unlikely to officially announce them as fact until December 7th. And no one can prove they're true in the mean time. It's extrememely unlikely that the cuts won't be severe though. But if you're waiting around for cold, hard facts I assume you'll be sitting at home on November 3rd?

LeixlipRed

FYR wrote: »

Join my group http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=134348353284624&index=1

I'll be helping out with the FEE group. We'll be in the Arts Block from Monday, come and chat to us. Vital we get all students mobilised, no matter the means.

Liber8or

LeixlipRed wrote: »

The USI are in negotiations with the government over the coming cuts and these are the figures that they have been led to believe will be implemented in the budget. The government are unlikely to officially announce them as fact until December 7th. And no one can prove they're true in the mean time. It's extrememely unlikely that the cuts won't be severe though. But if you're waiting around for cold, hard facts I assume you'll be sitting at home on November 3rd?

I have highlighted the reasons for declaring this march a pre-emptive, ill-founded cause for protest. I can appreciate and I support all students who choose to voice their concerns over their future education, but reacting to something which has not happened yet makes no sense. Throwing figures like €3000 euro around is pure scaremongering and 'sexing up' nothing but rumours and conjecture.

If we start marching for things that have not happened yet, it undermines the value of a march when it is actually needed.

LeixlipRed

Just in case you think I came up with those figures, they're from the USI. Not that that means they're true but they have been privy to this information through their bargaining with the government.

Anyway, to get to your point of marching post budget. Look at it this way, after the budget is declared that's it, it's done. If we march before then maybe, just maybe they'll realise what sort of popular support the movement has and back down, find an alternative or whatever. They're unlikely to do that after the figure have been finalised. It's clear that agitation is needed before and, like you said, after the fact.

Liber8or

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Just in case you think I came up with those figures, they're from the USI. Not that that means they're true but they have been privy to this information through their bargaining with the government.

Anyway, to get to your point of marching post budget. Look at it this way, after the budget is declared that's it, it's done. If we march before then maybe, just maybe they'll realise what sort of popular support the movement has and back down, find an alternative or whatever. They're unlikely to do that after the figure have been finalised. It's clear that agitation is needed before and, like you said, after the fact.

I did not say you came up with figure, I am fully aware that the USI did. I just wanted to know where they got their information from. Thanks for answering the question though because ever since this march was announced nobody was asking about where or how this information was formed.

LeixlipRed

I don't believe the figures are exact either but they do come from within the USI, that I know for sure. The USI isn't exactly full of radical elements either so I just can't see them exagerating them for effect. That's just my own honest opinion.

Liber8or

LeixlipRed wrote: »

The USI isn't exactly full of radical elements either

The Government want to charge us a €3000 reg fee in Sept!! The Government want to cut the grant by 10%!! THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE TOLD NO!!! STAND UP AND BE COUNTED! HELP MAKE MAYNOOTH STUDENTS UNION HISTORY! JOIN THE PROTEST! I FOR ONE HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF BEING STEPPED ON WHILE THEY CHUCK EUR50 BILLION AT SH1TEHAWK BANKERS! IF YOU WANT TO LIE DOWN AND GET TRODDEN ON THEN F*CK OFF TO BELFIELD I.T. AND LET YOUR DADDY PAY THE THREE GRAND! I'M NOT GOING TO REST UNTIL I SEE 40 BUS LOADS OF SCREAMING, PI$$ED OFF MAYNOOTHIANS DRIVING DOWN THE QUAYS! WHO'S F*CKING WITH ME?!?!?

You sure about that?

FYR

Liber8or wrote: »

You sure about that?

For the record I am a member of no radical elements but my election campaign didn't earn me the moniker of the "Lanky Lunatic" for nothing :P

LeixlipRed

Remember when I say radical I mean politically radical, not some rioting anarchist womble or something

Liber8or

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Remember when I say radical I mean politically radical, not some rioting anarchist womble or something

For the record I am a member of no radical elements but my election campaign didn't earn me the moniker of the "Lanky Lunatic" for nothing

More power to you both!

LeixlipRed

I don't even know this lad I admire his enthusiasm though, reminds me of a young Rob

Lord TSC

@LeixlipRed

"Maybe" doesn't change the fact that the post came accross a tad arrogant. I say "came accross" because I know that posts on the internet can come accross different than how they were intended. But your post seemed to imply a "This is my way, ergo it's the only way" mentality. As for alternative, I don't have any solid one but then I'm not a politician here. Nor am I an economist. I'm just a normal person. But just because I can't come up with a viable long term solution does not mean I can't see flaws with your ideas.

Take the "Tax people over 100k at 70%" point. That may sound great in theory, but it would fall apart in practice. People would become less inclined to get into the higher paying jobs since they could end up making the same or more money at far less stressful jobs. Those that would finish college with qualifications to get those jobs would likely just move out of the country to somewhere that their skill set will earn them money at a higher level without being punished. So what you end up with are the top professionals in the country just deciding it's not worth living here any more and buggering off.
You idea punishes those who got us into the mess, yes, but it also punishes and cripples far more people who did not; people who worked hard to get into the positions they did and are now being attacked despite that fact. Instead, the responisibilites need to be spread over everyone so that we can all work to rebuild the country.

Yes, it's unfair that sacrifices have to be made by the "poor". Yes, it's unfair that mistakes were made by people in power. But that doesn't mean we can just stick our heads in the sand and hope that the country can be fixed without everyone making sacrifices. We need to work to pull the country out of this mess because its a mess which hits everyone. It's easy to post on a board and bitch and moan about it, throwing the blame on everyone but refusing to accept responsibility. But that won't help the situation.

I agree those in fault should be punished but the time to complain about who is running the country has long since passed. The signs of all this were pretty clear a long time ago but we as a country have completly forgotten how to do anything about the injustices. In that way, I respect FYR's current stance of trying to encourage people to actually DO something rather than coming up with these fantastical methods of fixing the country which will never be implimented (even if I think FYR needs to lay off the swearing and caps lock; it's really not making your arguement any clearer and we can read perfectly well in normal text, thanks). I respect the French and the Greeks cause they are doing something by going out and protesting about their governments. And I respect the Iclandics (sp?) who are putting their corrupt politicians on trial for the mess. We, as Irish, will go on the odd march sure, but the sad fact is we'll probably vote in these people again and let them away with the injustices.

At the same time, with all that said, I'd be arguing for a lot of the cuts regardless of the economic climate, and I think the way the country is, we desperatly need to cut money in a lot of areas, not just one. I've already outlined my views on grants and why they should be cut. In terms of fees, I think people who say "this will stop certain people going to college" are being innocent as well. I think that there is a vast majority of poor people who will never go to college, be the fees what they are now or doubled. I think that the people who want to go now will still find a way to go if fees are increased. I think the ones who will really be affected are those who choose courses simply because it's so easy to go at the moment but then either spend most of their time partying or simply drop out quickly. A rise in fees will decrease numbers but it's always been my opinion that the decrease will not come in those who are "poor" but those who are forced to actually think about the consequences of going to college and choosing if they really want to invest their own money into the education rather than risking wasting the governments.

I also think benifits need to be examined; I live in Drogheda, and it's always annoyed me how there are some people who have kids young and choose to live on benifits and in a council house not because they can't find a job but because they don't want to; because they are choosing a lifestyle where they never have to work and are quite happy to sponge. I think the system needs to be reworked to cover those who are genuine in their job hunt but are finding it hard because of the country we live in, and at the same time punish those who have kids to get money and who have no intention of ever working. I think overseas aid should be slashed dramatically; the fact we are worrying at all about other countries when we are in the toilet really boggles me.

There is a lot of unnessecary spending on the government's part when it comes to the lower classes which could be cut. I guess that's my point. It's not nessecarily that the lower classes should be punished. I just think we need to examine closer the way in which money is thrown around at the various social levels and work out what is nessecary and what is luxury, and use the luxury to pay off our debts.

I could keep ranting but I have a feeling that Leix and some others may be sitting at their computers, shaking their heads and getting ready to rant back so I'll stop for now :P

(God, I love a good debate like this )

LeixlipRed

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

@LeixlipRed

"Maybe" doesn't change the fact that the post came accross a tad arrogant. I say "came accross" because I know that posts on the internet can come accross different than how they were intended. But your post seemed to imply a "This is my way, ergo it's the only way" mentality. As for alternative, I don't have any solid one but then I'm not a politician here. Nor am I an economist. I'm just a normal person. But just because I can't come up with a viable long term solution does not mean I can't see flaws with your ideas.

That's not how I meant it to come across at all. I believe in free will, everyone is entitled to an opinion and entitled to express it.

Take the "Tax people over 100k at 70%" point. That may sound great in theory, but it would fall apart in practice. People would become less inclined to get into the higher paying jobs since they could end up making the same or more money at far less stressful jobs. Those that would finish college with qualifications to get those jobs would likely just move out of the country to somewhere that their skill set will earn them money at a higher level without being punished. So what you end up with are the top professionals in the country just deciding it's not worth living here any more and buggering off.
You idea punishes those who got us into the mess, yes, but it also punishes and cripples far more people who did not; people who worked hard to get into the positions they did and are now being attacked despite that fact. Instead, the responisibilites need to be spread over everyone so that we can all work to rebuild the country.

I should make it clear that sort of policy I suggested would see savagely high tax rates for those who earn 200k+, etc,. To be honest, I'm a socialist and the rest of your argument to me just seems pointless, no one should earn these ridiculous sums of money anyway and if we more concerned with an equal society as opposed to a materialistic one there's be far less stressing about getting into high paid jobs (because they wouldn't exist )

Yes, it's unfair that sacrifices have to be made by the "poor". Yes, it's unfair that mistakes were made by people in power. But that doesn't mean we can just stick our heads in the sand and hope that the country can be fixed without everyone making sacrifices. We need to work to pull the country out of this mess because its a mess which hits everyone. It's easy to post on a board and bitch and moan about it, throwing the blame on everyone but refusing to accept responsibility. But that won't help the situation.

I truly believe that the poor and working classes should make absolutely no sacrifices because they have nothing to sacrifice. You're also starting to imply that I'm doing nothing but moaning on the internet which is not true at all.

I agree those in fault should be punished but the time to complain about who is running the country has long since passed. The signs of all this were pretty clear a long time ago but we as a country have completly forgotten how to do anything about the injustices. In that way, I respect FYR's current stance of trying to encourage people to actually DO something rather than coming up with these fantastical methods of fixing the country which will never be implimented (even if I think FYR needs to lay off the swearing and caps lock; it's really not making your arguement any clearer and we can read perfectly well in normal text, thanks). I respect the French and the Greeks cause they are doing something by going out and protesting about their governments. And I respect the Iclandics (sp?) who are putting their corrupt politicians on trial for the mess. We, as Irish, will go on the odd march sure, but the sad fact is we'll probably vote in these people again and let them away with the injustices.

I absolutely advocate people DOING something. Get out on the streets, protest. Agitate in university, in your work place, at trade union meetings, whatever! The French and the Greeks have history and tradition when it comes to protesting, we have none and it's so much more difficult to inspire mass movement here. And I'm advocating the alternative to voting in the same cretins, socialism, that's the alternative.

At the same time, with all that said, I'd be arguing for a lot of the cuts regardless of the economic climate, and I think the way the country is, we desperatly need to cut money in a lot of areas, not just one. I've already outlined my views on grants and why they should be cut. In terms of fees, I think people who say "this will stop certain people going to college" are being innocent as well. I think that there is a vast majority of poor people who will never go to college, be the fees what they are now or doubled. I think that the people who want to go now will still find a way to go if fees are increased. I think the ones who will really be affected are those who choose courses simply because it's so easy to go at the moment but then either spend most of their time partying or simply drop out quickly. A rise in fees will decrease numbers but it's always been my opinion that the decrease will not come in those who are "poor" but those who are forced to actually think about the consequences of going to college and choosing if they really want to invest their own money into the education rather than risking wasting the governments.

I also think benifits need to be examined; I live in Drogheda, and it's always annoyed me how there are some people who have kids young and choose to live on benifits and in a council house not because they can't find a job but because they don't want to; because they are choosing a lifestyle where they never have to work and are quite happy to sponge. I think the system needs to be reworked to cover those who are genuine in their job hunt but are finding it hard because of the country we live in, and at the same time punish those who have kids to get money and who have no intention of ever working. I think overseas aid should be slashed dramatically; the fact we are worrying at all about other countries when we are in the toilet really boggles me.

There is a lot of unnessecary spending on the government's part when it comes to the lower classes which could be cut. I guess that's my point. It's not nessecarily that the lower classes should be punished. I just think we need to examine closer the way in which money is thrown around at the various social levels and work out what is nessecary and what is luxury, and use the luxury to pay off our debts.

I could keep ranting but I have a feeling that Leix and some others may be sitting at their computers, shaking their heads and getting ready to rant back so I'll stop for now :P

(God, I love a good debate like this )[/QUOTE]

Of course there are unnecessary expenditures within the government, that's obvious. But there are no need to pursue massive sweeping cuts. You haven't addressed the previous points I made as to how we could generate cash to get us out of this mess. Those are the alternative economic agenda. You won't read about it in the media because it scares the hell out of every centrist/right wing politician because they only have an interest in maintaining capitalism and greed.

funky penguin

FYR wrote: »

The Government want to charge us a €3000 reg fee in Sept!! The Government want to cut the grant by 10%!! THE GOVERNMENT WILL BE TOLD NO!!! STAND UP AND BE COUNTED! HELP MAKE MAYNOOTH STUDENTS UNION HISTORY! JOIN THE PROTEST! I FOR ONE HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF BEING STEPPED ON WHILE THEY CHUCK EUR50 BILLION AT SH1TEHAWK BANKERS! IF YOU WANT TO LIE DOWN AND GET TRODDEN ON THEN F*CK OFF TO BELFIELD I.T. AND LET YOUR DADDY PAY THE THREE GRAND! I'M NOT GOING TO REST UNTIL I SEE 40 BUS LOADS OF SCREAMING, PI$$ED OFF MAYNOOTHIANS DRIVING DOWN THE QUAYS! WHO'S F*CKING WITH ME?!?!?

Less of this please.

FYR

Kiwi_knock wrote: »

Funky is right, that kind of attitude will not fill 40 buses. All it does it scare away most moderate students who might have taken part. I know it is well intentioned but all it does is alienate a vast majority of students. Your posts reeks of extremism and I do not believe that is what this March is about, it is about motivating as many students as possible Nationwide to take a stand and show that they will not be be easy targets for the Government. To make that done the USI and our SU have to make this March as moderate as possible. I will fully take part and support the March but I feel extreme views like this could be detrimental to what the USI and the SU are trying to achieve.

I am far from extremist, I very seldom protest and am not a member of any of the "Radical" movements. I am centre left in my beliefs but feel that the government are planning on stepping on students.

Kiwi_knock

FYR wrote: »

I am far from extremist, I very seldom protest and am not a member of any of the "Radical" movements. I am centre left in my beliefs but feel that the government are planning on stepping on students.

Your post came across as quite extremist even though I understand you do not hold any radical views. I agree with your view but there is a better ways of promoting the March than your post. Good luck with promoting the March in the college during the week.

LeixlipRed

To calls his views extremist are a bit wide of the mark. He's just being enthusiastic! I don't think he's calling for students to riot in the streets or anything. I do agree that the march must have as broad a appeal as possible though. Individual blocs within the march can use the day to get their particular point across to those students who do turn up.

FYR

LeixlipRed wrote: »

To calls his views extremist are a bit wide of the mark. He's just being enthusiastic! I don't think he's calling for students to riot in the streets or anything. I do agree that the march must have as broad a appeal as possible though. Individual blocs within the march can use the day to get their particular point across to those students who do turn up.

I would disagree with this. I don't see the event as being a suitable platform for pursuing any individual group's political agenda.
We should go as one unified student body and I feel that no groupd should distribute their literature or display their banners. It would be far more effective if we marched as one.

LeixlipRed

Well we'll agree to disagree on that one.

Kiwi_knock

I admit my use of extremism was wrong but as FYR is a member of the SU and will actively be involved with promoting the March his enthuasiasm should be best placed in encouraging as many students as possible to attend in a controlled way with reasoned logic instead of saying the old slogans of down with the government and the like.