Students' Union and hot air

aas

Tragedy wrote: »

(quasi because socialism is completely misrepresented by most people).

Well I haven't attached any label to the views I've been presenting in this thread, so if they're '''''quasi-socialist''''' is it not you that's been misrepresenting them?

Tragedy

aas wrote: »

Didn't you just say earlier you couldn't go to college when everyone else did because your parents were broke.

Grants were different in 2004 and I got nothing, but if the income threshold from today was applied back then, I would have gotten the full grant.

aas wrote: »

Well I haven't attached any label to the views I've been presenting in this thread, so if they're '''''quasi-socialist''''' is it not you that's been misrepresenting them?

That's the most nonsensical thing you've said all thread, and that's some achievement.
I labelled you quasi-socialist because of your utterly insane and ridiculous "tax the rich for everything" plan, so what in gods name are you rabbiting on about?

PurpleFistMixer

Tragedy wrote: »

Children of poor parents get more educational advantage than children of wealthy parents.

Seriously? Actually seriously? Are you trying to claim that someone living in a disadvantaged area with parents on the dole going to a school in a prefab that doesn't offer every subject (of those available) at higher level is at an "advantage" to someone whose parents can afford to send them to an expensive school and get grinds if they need them and who will have the free time to actually study instead of working to help support their family? If that is in fact what you're claiming, that is probably the most laughable thing I've heard on this forum and I can only conclude that you're a troll.

If that's not what you're claiming, could you care to elaborate?

aas

Tragedy wrote: »

Grants were different in 2004 and I got nothing, but if the income threshold from today was applied back then, I would have gotten the full grant.

So what are you even arguing then, that kids have it too easy these days? You're pointing out it was unfair to you, so now with grants it's more fair, and you're bitching about it because...?

That's the most nonsensical thing you've said all thread, and that's some achievement.
I labelled you quasi-socialist because of your utterly insane and ridiculous "tax the rich for everything" plan, so what in gods name are you rabbiting on about?

Uh, should I call you a quasi-door then, because you're not a door and you never suggested you were a door and I have no reason to believe you're a door and it bears no relevance to the discussion whether or not you're a door, and then add something in parenthesis about how no one but me understands doors.

JonJoeDali

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

Seriously? Actually seriously? Are you trying to claim that someone living in a disadvantaged area with parents on the dole going to a school in a prefab that doesn't offer every subject (of those available) at higher level is at an "advantage" to someone whose parents can afford to send them to an expensive school and get grinds if they need them and who will have the free time to actually study instead of working to help support their family? If that is in fact what you're claiming, that is probably the most laughable thing I've heard on this forum and I can only conclude that you're a troll.

If that's not what you're claiming, could you care to elaborate?

The parents of this hypothetical "poor" person who went to a run-down school should have made alternative arrangements (that is if they care one iota about their child's education). Rich parents often make sacrafices by making their children travel into town to avail of a good education. Or they pay over the odds for property in the vicinity of good schools.

Tragedy

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

Seriously? Actually seriously? Are you trying to claim that someone living in a disadvantaged area with parents on the dole going to a school in a prefab that doesn't offer every subject (of those available) at higher level is at an "advantage" to someone whose parents can afford to send them to an expensive school and get grinds if they need them and who will have the free time to actually study instead of working to help support their family? If that is in fact what you're claiming, that is probably the most laughable thing I've heard on this forum and I can only conclude that you're a troll.

If that's not what you're claiming, could you care to elaborate?

Firstly, have you ever been in a school in a disadvantaged area?
They almost always have the best facilities of any public school. My public primary school was the largest in europe for years, is still one of the largest in ireland, is still growing and hasn't had a new facility since before I was there(aside from prefabs) - which is over 20 years. However, all of the primary schools in nearby Tallaght I passby regularly enough are all new or with significant improvement with state of the art facilities. Same goes for the secondary schools - the amount of funding they get compared to schools in middle/upper class areas is mad. Anecdotally, they also seem to have more teachers per pupil - but that could be an administration issue rather than policy.

Then you have the fact that children from disadvantaged areas/families get bonus points in the LC(can't remember what the scheme is called however) and get the extra super grant, and even then, also get access fund money too.

Also, if you think the teachers in private schools are in any substantive way better than in public schools(or middle class public schools over lower class), you're completely wrong. It isn't teachers that define the education in those schools, it's the culture.
Also also, plenty of colleges have programmes where students offer free grinds to students of disadvantaged schools.

Economically and educationally, there's no reason that every single secondary student from disadvantaged areas in Dublin/Limerick/wherever shouldn't be in third level. The reason they aren't is simply the culture that neither their family, their peers and to a lesser extent, their teachers expect them to.
And as a young person, you can be quite largely defined by people's expectations of you.


Now, the essay is over, so please do three things for me if you want to keep arguing about it:

#1 Prove that schools in lower class areas receive less funding than other schools
#2 Prove that students from lower class areas receive less(or hell, the same!) financial support from the state as students from other classes of society.
#3 Prove that there's large amount of secondary students in lower class schools working to support their family/dropping out to support their family

If you don't want, I'll have no choice but to conclude you're a troll.

aas wrote:

So what are you even arguing then, that kids have it too easy these days? You're pointing out it was unfair to you, so now with grants it's more fair, and you're bitching about it because...?

I'm not arguing? You asked me a question, I answered, and I'm arguing and bitching somehow? Maybe in bizzaroworld(population: you!) but not in this thread.

Uh, should I call you a quasi-door then, because you're not a door and you never suggested you were a door and I have no reason to believe you're a door and it bears no relevance to the discussion whether or not you're a door, and then add something in parenthesis about how no one but me understands doors.

To be correct: I didn't call you a quasi-socialist(I didn't call you anything), I said you were spouting quasi-socialist nonsense.

Oh and before either of you come back with more arguments I didn't make or righteous fury: Disadvantaged areas do need better penetration of third level education, I just don't agree that the reason there aren't many going right now is because their schools are falling down and they get feck all help in any other aspect.

Unregistered.

Tragedy wrote: »

And anyone I know who was desperate to find a job recently, found one because they were motivated enough. There are part time jobs out there, they don't pay well and they aren't nice, but they're there.

I call bull****.

I've handed out over 70 CV's two weeks ago, trying to get in early for Christmas jobs. That's in addition to the hundreds I must have handed out before, during and before the end of summer. Also, I search online and I get emails from Monster, IrishJobs and LoadzaJobs. I'd put myself in the desperate and well motivated class. Only once have I heard back from an employer. So tell me, what's there that I am missing?

Denerick

Unregistered. wrote: »

I've handed out over 70 CV's two weeks ago, trying to get in early for Christmas jobs. That's in addition to the hundreds I must have handed out before, during and before the end of summer. Also, I search online and I get emails from Monster, IrishJobs and LoadzaJobs. I'd put myself in the desperate and well motivated class. Only once have I heard back from an employer. So tell me, what's there that I am missing?

I was in the same boat (Except it was more like 700 CVs) Eventually I got a full time job in the supermarket. Hardly glamourous or the dream, but it pays the rent. Keep throwing **** against the wall and something will stick. Eventually.

PurpleFistMixer

Tragedy wrote: »

...

If you don't want, I'll have no choice but to conclude you're a troll.

Go ahead so. I could go and look things up (which you evidently haven't - the scheme is called "HEAR" and it doesn't just "give poor people extra points") but I really see no point in continuing this discussion with you. I'm one of those filthy communists you so despise so we're unlikely to get anywhere constructive.

herpderp

Unregistered. wrote: »

I've handed out over 70 CV's two weeks ago, trying to get in early for Christmas jobs. That's in addition to the hundreds I must have handed out before, during and before the end of summer. Also, I search online and I get emails from Monster, IrishJobs and LoadzaJobs. I'd put myself in the desperate and well motivated class. Only once have I heard back from an employer. So tell me, what's there that I am missing?

You're scruffy looking, dress badly, and look perpetually stoned. If you handed me a CV it would go straight into the bin.

tolosenc

JonJoeDali wrote: »

The dogma of "equality" is a euphemism for communism.

Well, given that class is by and large driven by money, a society in which everyone has the same amount of money to spend would suggest to me the end of waged labour and the destruction of the classed society - 2 very important aspects of communism that differentiate it from socialism.

aas wrote: »

Do you think the children of wealthy parents should have advantages over the children of poor parents?

If the only thing determining that advantage is money, then it's only natural, right?

Anyway, back OT - apparently some pro-fees stuff is happening at the next SU Council. Should be loltastic.

Mark200

tolosenc wrote: »

Well, given that class is by and large driven by money, a society in which everyone has the same amount of money to spend would suggest to me the end of waged labour and the destruction of the classed society - 2 very important aspects of communism that differentiate it from socialism.

That's a completely flawed system. Fine, everyone starts off with the same amount of money... but eventually you'll just have the most successful and skilled salesmen making more money than others and you'll be back to where we are today.

tolosenc

Zackly. Human nature prevails.

cedissapointed

'Should the students' Union not spend their time and resources on matters where their opinions may actually count, such matters as a lunch room on campus (the JCR is not on campus) perhaps?; where their opinions may actually count; instead of protesting the inevitable reintroduction of fees'



IS THIS A BLOODY WINDUP:mad: We need a day out protesting we need to tell our government how they have failed the poor and particularly the vunerable in society.:o

How they are allowing FAS to steal jobs from us and places like JOBFIT are stealing jobs from what could be filled by graduates from colleges and working class people who could work immediately..:(

They have gambled some peoples pensions on the rogue traders and banksters and business elites,and there have been hardworking men who have paid into these pensions since they were very young right up to the date they were let go.

Our government are allowing this and funding these disasters even in the light of all the scandals that have come forth..

Fianna failers and fine gaelers can have thier jobs in banks and have a job in a political party..Some guy can have two high paid jobs,where is the crime in that?Can you see what the **** is happening here?Protesting about lunches when your future is being robbed by these elite!?

There are hardworking people who have to emigrate yet again because their government have failed them,and guess what?They still get to stay in ireland and wreck this country.It is still in some ways a banana republic,jobs for the boys.Students need to protest also about their futures being stolen,by our lame government.When you leave college over half of you will not be employed.And agencies like FAS and JOBFIT are even going to steal whatever jobs are left (eg in tescos or whatever).

Students need to protest about their future being stolen from them.

cedissapointed

''I've handed out over 70 CV's two weeks ago, trying to get in early for Christmas jobs. That's in addition to the hundreds I must have handed out before, during and before the end of summer. Also, I search online and I get emails from Monster, IrishJobs and LoadzaJobs. I'd put myself in the desperate and well motivated class. Only once have I heard back from an employer. So tell me, what's there that I am missing?''

What you are missing is that FAS and JOBFIT are replacing the numbers of full time employment that businesses have the capacity to have are being REPLACED BY FAS AND JOBFIT.

In otherwords , FAS and JOBFIT are sucking up all the positions and replacing it with FREE LABOUR.

amacachi

Guessing you don't like JOBFIT so?

Mark200

cedissapointed wrote: »

Students need to protest about their future being stolen from them.

I'm glad it achieved so much.

aas

Mark200 wrote: »

I'm glad it achieved so much.

Well they added thousands of students to the voting register over the past 2 days on the momentum of it, so even if 25,000-40,000 students protesting makes no difference to the outcome of the fees/registration fee question (and I doubt that that's the case), there are already other important results visible already.

gearoidof

Denerick wrote: »

Keep throwing **** against the wall and something will stick eventually.

I like that quote, well done on a good post, Denerick.

--
In an attempt to make my post kinda on topic...
@cedissapointed a list of good places to eat lunch on campus:
1) JCR
2) Society rooms
3) Buttery, Dining hall, Hamilton cafe
4) GMB
5) etc.

If you can define properly what your ideal lunch room has in it, as well as what "on campus" is, people would take your more seriously

PurpleFistMixer

Regarding eating lunch on campus, the Hamilton is rather lacking in nice places to sit down. There are those benches along the length of the building but they don't exactly induce a friendly/communal lunch atmosphere, and that one area upstairs with sofas is either closed off or woefully insufficient given how many people tend to be in the Hamilton. Personally I just go to society rooms to eat, but that's not an option for everyone.

gamma23

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

Regarding eating lunch on campus, the Hamilton is rather lacking in nice places to sit down. There are those benches along the length of the building but they don't exactly induce a friendly/communal lunch atmosphere, and that one area upstairs with sofas is either closed off or woefully insufficient given how many people tend to be in the Hamilton. Personally I just go to society rooms to eat, but that's not an option for everyone.

Yeah the seating is pretty insufficient, it was discussed at the most recent SU meeting of Hamilton reps too. The fire regulations for the building are pretty stringent despite that doubling the amount of those benches and arranging them to try and make it more inviting was discussed, but given the uncertainty in the budget it was decided to hold off on that for a few months at least.

Finding other spaces within the fire regulations is difficult but the top of the Ham Café was discussed as a possibility for being used as a lunch room.

If anyone has suggestions on any other space we could use in the Hamilton please do suggest.

JonJoeDali

If you don't like the Ham Caf. Don't eat there. It's a dump.

There's always the Science Gallery or the Pav (not to mention Centra, the art gallery, Brewbaker's etc. in the vicinity).

The SU moaning about the Ham Caf is like lab rats on a wheel.

Jammyc

Whats the problem with the Ham Caf?

JonJoeDali

Jammyc wrote: »

Whats the problem with the Ham Caf?

The burgers are made out of cow's hoofs, the seats are hard and filthy and the "art" is out of a catalogue. Uninspirational, clinical atmosphere which no thought went into beyond some architect with a copy AutoCAD and funny ideas about how professional scientists and students like to eat lunch. He/she should stick to designing prison canteens. Anyway, the Ham Caf is just a symptom of much bigger architectural failings.

Jammyc

JonJoeDali wrote: »

The burgers are made out of cow's hoofs, the seats are hard and filthy and the "art" is out of a catalogue. Uninspirational, clinical atmosphere which no thought went into beyond some architect with a copy AutoCAD and funny ideas about how professional scientists and students like to eat lunch. He/she should stick to designing prison canteens. Anyway, the Ham Caf is just a symptom of much bigger architectural failings.

I agree with you on the seats, food no. What do you expect when paying little more than 4.50 for dinner? As for art. I go to the Ham Caf to eat, not to be inspired.

JonJoeDali

Jammyc wrote: »

I agree with you on the seats, food no. What do you expect when paying little more than 4.50 for dinner? As for art. I go to the Ham Caf to eat, not to be inspired.

Seeing as you look at lunch time from a purely utilitarian perspective, I wouldn't be surprised if you look at going to college every day as a process of reading books, attending lectures and using the computer.

Which is not surprising for students who frequent the Hamilton end of college.

Jammyc

JonJoeDali wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if you look at going to college every day as a process of reading books, attending lectures and using the computer.

And when the stomach grumbles, throwing some food into it so I can comfortably attend the rest of my lectures, read the rest of what I was reading and keep on using the computer. That being said, just because I'm not divinely inspired or happen to gain great insight into life by looking at a painting while eating a chicken curry, doesn't mean that the Hamilton Cafe is a kip.

PurpleFistMixer

JonJoeDali wrote: »

Seeing as you look at lunch time from a purely utilitarian perspective, I wouldn't be surprised if you look at going to college every day as a process of reading books, attending lectures and using the computer.

Which is not surprising for students who frequent the Hamilton end of college.

Sick burn!

AndrewJD

JonJoeDali wrote: »

Which is not surprising for students who frequent the Hamilton end of college.

Because the Arts Block is the epitome of elegance and taste?

bythewoods

Jammyc wrote: »

Whats the problem with the Ham Caf?

SO MANY PROBLEMS.

-The food is shit, and overpriced.
-The Indian manager guy's a prick.
-Even if the place is empty, and you're sitting with people who all bought food, and even if you buy tea/ coffee there they still ask you to leave if you take out your own food. And I know, I know, it's a "business", but c'mon like... it's in college and it's not as if they offer any Vegan food for me to purchase.
-The coffee tastes like ass dipped in ass.
-It's shit.

(I don't actually frequent it at all, but I did a bit last year. It upsets me greatly.)