Increase in Reg Fee

thebigcheese22

So the reg fee is going up to 2 grand

What do ye think? Personally the only relief is that I thought it was going to be 2500. Still though, I'm on Erasmus atm and had to get a 7 grand loan in order to do the Erasmus year (its mandatory for my course). My parents wouldn't give me a cent so it was my only option.

Now it's going up to 2150 with the capitation fee, and I'll have to save up for that over the summer, as well as paying off my loan for this year. (and I'll probably have to stay in France til September to find a job, considering the minumum wage is going to be cut by a euro) Disgraceful government are hitting the people who have no blame for this crisis. Can't express how angry I am tbh :mad:

Aodan83

thebigcheese22 wrote: »

So the reg fee is going up to 2 grand

Thought it was going up by 2 grand, so this isnt quite as bad. Still a balls of a rise tho.
But to cut the min wage by a euro seems a bit drastic. Especially since the people who this is going to affect the worst are the people who aren't going to be able to afford it soon enough.
This is the kind of thing thats going to put a lot of people under a lot of pressure.

Cuddlytroll

Personally I could nearly justify the registration increase and the cut in minimum wage, only for the increase in VAT as well. It's definitely going to hit the people who cannot afford it the hardest. I didn't like the flat rate property tax either to be honest.

pirateninja

We all knew the reg fee was going to increase, thank god USI got it completely wrong and told us it was going to be €3000 so it's not as big a blow!:p

To be honest though, this isn't going to affect people as much as people like to make out. I met a girl today who was saying that she started crying when she heard about the rise and that her parents couldn't afford to pay it. I pointed out that because she was on the grant she wouldn't be paying it anyway. People who are on the grant are still gong to have the reg fee paid.


I agree with Aodan83 on the minimum wage part. That's going to affect an awful lot of people especially with the widening of the tax bands.

UpTheSlashers

I think the government is fooling a lot of people with the reg fee increase. Who's to know that the plan was to increase it to 2000 all along and that it just wanted students to believe they were getting their way by "persuading" the govt not to increase to 3 grand?

Villette

pirateninja wrote: »

To be honest though, this isn't going to affect people as much as people like to make out. I met a girl today who was saying that she started crying when she heard about the rise and that her parents couldn't afford to pay it. I pointed out that because she was on the grant she wouldn't be paying it anyway. People who are on the grant are still gong to have the reg fee paid.

That's a very sweeping statement to make. There's a huge percentage of people who don't qualify for the grant but whose parents either can't realistically afford, or else refuse, to pay the fee.
Anyway, 2,000 is a lot of money to find, and especially for parents who also have to shell out about 5,000 for accommodation. What if there are 3 children in college at the same time? God help students who aren't getting help from parents - don't forget it's next to impossible to be assessed for a grant without a parent's income, regardless of the amount the parents choose to offer as support for their children. Part-time jobs are thin on the ground plus the reduction in minimum wage plus the fact that the money has to be paid up front means huge difficulties for many students.
Also, the Government plans to save millions through the grant system - I don't think they specified how (did they?) but it probably means either a lowering of brackets or a reduction in payments, or both, so the grant won't be a great safety net anymore.

It would have been far better if the government had introduced some kind of subsidised fees - even if it meant having to pay an extra grand or two per year in the long run - as then they would have been forced to start a system where students can access properly regulated student loans, where they don't have to be paid back until the future and after a certain a wage limit is reached and where poor students don't have to face the prospect of paying back loans straight after college or during it even.
But of course the government needs money now and so it'll stick with its method of papering over short-term cracks instead of fixing the issue.

grenache

I'm somewhat relieved that its only going up to just over 2k. Ok its inconvenient but i think the majority of people should be able to afford this. Everyone has to contribute. Although the minimum wage cut was totally uncalled for. I would be more in favour of heavily taxing those earning over ?50k a year, even if it means introducing a separate tax band for this group of earners. Also the property tax is a necessary evil, those depots in Leinster house have to find the money from somewhere. Desperate times and all that.

PhatPiggins

grenache wrote: »

I'm somewhat relieved that its only going up to just over 2k. Ok its inconvenient but i think the majority of people should be able to afford this. Everyone has to contribute. Although the minimum wage cut was totally uncalled for. I would be more in favour of heavily taxing those earning over ?50k a year, even if it means introducing a separate tax band for this group of earners. Also the property tax is a necessary evil, those depots in Leinster house have to find the money from somewhere. Desperate times and all that.

So will it be existing employees on the minimum wage who will be on a new rate of €7.65 or just new entrants ?

Eliot Rosewater

PhatPiggins wrote: »

So will it be existing employees on the minimum wage who will be on a new rate of €7.65 or just new entrants ?

All existing employees.

The minimum wage needs to be lowered. Irish people seem to be living in this dream where Ireland can be one of the most expensive countries in Europe and still have high employment rates. Many have pinned their hopes on the "knowledge economy". However, the huge effect of Dell leaving exposes these things as false. Ireland still needs manufacturing jobs, and this need will only increase as places like India, China and Eastern Europe start producing knowledge workers who will compete with Ireland.

The Celtic Tiger has proven to be unsustainable and fundamentally deceptive. We need to adopt a sense of realism and start making ourselves competitive again.

invinciblePRSTV

LOL, spot the sucker who probably has mammy and daddy paying his way and doesn't know what it's like to live on the M/W.

Anyway, reg fee goes up, student drop out rates go up. Associates of mine are struggling big time to fund this years fee due to parental difficulties, and some have had to 'defer' their year whilst they try to find the current reg free & college expenses.

Sad times.

Eliot Rosewater

If we don't lower the minimum wage those in the dole queue have a lower chance of getting out of it, and those on the minimum wage have a higher chance of joining those on the dole. Oh, and the college graduates will be entering into a poorer economy.

But, you know, all the economic problems don't matter, pull the "mammy and daddy" argument and they automatically get solved...

invinciblePRSTV

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

If we don't lower the minimum wage those in the dole queue have a lower chance of getting out of it, and those on the minimum wage have a higher chance of joining those on the dole. Oh, and the college graduates will be entering into a poorer economy.

But, you know, all the economic problems don't matter, pull the "mammy and daddy" argument and they automatically get solved...

Show me these economic arguments. All i see are a few special interest groups, and a couple of celeb economists (not all by any means) who advocate cutting the M/W by 12.5%. Even FG disagree with this approach.

Out of interest, knowing you're of the libertarian bent, wouldn't you be ideologically opposed to a M/W existing in general? and do you, or have you ever, had a job? if not how do you pay for college?

UnionOfV

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Show me these economic arguments. All i see are a few special interest groups, and a couple of celeb economists (not all by any means) who advocate cutting the M/W by 12.5%. Even FG disagree with this approach.

Why don't you explain why we should have the second-highest minimum wage in the EU? Living costs simply don't justify it. So long as we have serious unemployment issues we should be taking steps to improve chances of employment, not trying to improve the livelihoods of those already employed.

Byron85

UnionOfV wrote: »

Living costs simply don't justify it.

It depends. Having had a 2 minimum wage jobs in 3 years, if you're earning minimum wage and only getting 12 - 20 hours a week in work, you'd be lucky to cover living expenses. It's only really once you start working over 30 -35 hours a week that you'll cover living expenses and have some disposable income.

I lived and worked in Dublin and Cork and living expenses are the major issues. You can't cut minimum wage without serious drops in rent, more so than anything else. The government have cut the wrong thing first. Lower living expenses and then lower minimum wage. As usual though, they got it arse backwards.

Should there be a minimum wage? Yes. Minimum wage is an employer's way of saying they'd pay you less if they could for the most amount of work. Also, unions have a valid reason to exist. The current ones in Ireland are bloated and overpaid hypocrites though. Having worked with two well known Irish companies with no union representation, they'll shaft you when they can simply because you have no voice.

Eliot Rosewater

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Show me these economic arguments.

When a big company is deciding where to set up, or when an existing company is deciding to expand, or when a new company is investigating starting up, the cost of labour is a huge factor. The cheaper labour the more likely a company is to set up in Ireland. Also if an SME wants to take on a new worker it is much more feasible if the wage rate is lower.

In economic terms, labour is a product like any other, and its price is inverse proportional to ones propensity to purchase it. You will be more likely to buy a Dairymilk bar if it 70c instead of 80c. You will be more likely to hire a worker if it is €7.65/hr instead of €8.65/hr.

The minimum wage particularly affects unskilled jobs. The "knowledge economy" is nothing more than deception really. It allows Irish people to live in a dream land where they can have a gigantic living standard and still retain employment in a free-market Europe. This is not so. Hence why Dell leaving hurt so much.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Out of interest, knowing you're of the libertarian bent, wouldn't you be ideologically opposed to a M/W existing in general? and do you, or have you ever, had a job? if not how do you pay for college?

I don't see how my personal means and broad leanings are relevant to the discussion. But anyway, I haven't worked since I started college: when I was growing up my parents saved money for my education instead of buying me soccer jerseys and Gameboys and such, and so I don't need to work now. Not that I'm "well off" or anything; I couldn't afford a night out on the town once a week (I generally cycle when I do go to the pub, to save on taxis and buses.)

Before college, I worked a number of jobs, mostly sub-M/W. I worked for a charity company, for instance, 5 days a week 10am-7pm per day, and got €305 per week. About €6.70/hr (this was Feb. 2009). They didn't cover the €20/30 travelling expenses.

Eliot Rosewater

Byron85 wrote: »

You can't cut minimum wage without serious drops in rent, more so than anything else. The government have cut the wrong thing first.

Problem here though is that the government has created an artificial floor in the rent market through rent-allowance. Landlords won't reduce their rents because the government still pay the high rents. If the government cut rent allowance or the dole people would still cry shame. When you have to make cuts and make the economy more competitive there's no acceptable place to start.

Byron85 wrote: »

The current ones in Ireland are bloated and overpaid hypocrites though.

It's interesting that David Begg was involved with the Central Bank during the boom years, and thus bears a small element of responsibility for the banking fiasco.

I think Trade Unions can be good, however the Public Sector ones are doing the country a disservice. They've 30% higher pay than the private sector, mostly guaranteed jobs and guaranteed pensions and they're still trying to play the oppressed narrative.

grenache

PhatPiggins wrote: »

So will it be existing employees on the minimum wage who will be on a new rate of €7.65 or just new entrants ?

Just the new entrants. It is illegal for employers to reduce the wage of a current employee as it is in direct violation of their written contract. These were the exact words spoken by David McWilliams on the News at 1 the day after the announcement.

KnifeWRENCH

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

LOL, spot the sucker who probably has mammy and daddy paying his way and doesn't know what it's like to live on the M/W.

Less of the attitude, please. No need to speculate on other user's financial situations, or refer to them as "suckers".

rebel girl 15

PhatPiggins wrote: »

So will it be existing employees on the minimum wage who will be on a new rate of €7.65 or just new entrants ?

grenache wrote: »

Just the new entrants. It is illegal for employers to reduce the wage of a current employee as it is in direct violation of their written contract. These were the exact words spoken by David McWilliams on the News at 1 the day after the announcement.

It is just new entrants, but afaik if the businesses are stuggling, then they can renegotiate the employees contract down to the new minumum wage from the old one.

PhatPiggins

grenache wrote: »

Just the new entrants. It is illegal for employers to reduce the wage of a current employee as it is in direct violation of their written contract. These were the exact words spoken by David McWilliams on the News at 1 the day after the announcement.

Then I'd argue that its not that such a bad a measure if it leads to job creation. If they lower welfare by similar percentages I can't see it affecting participation.

Lets be honest the welfare levels in Ireland are a serious disincentive to working.

That's just the economist in me, the human in me has made a list of 30+ people who should be tried as enemies of the state.

grenache

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

It is just new entrants, but afaik if the businesses are stuggling, then they can renegotiate the employees contract down to the new minumum wage from the old one.

thing about contract renegotiation is that the employee has to agree to it. Of course the employer the can choose lay off the employee, but that may not be in his/her interests.

invinciblePRSTV

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

When a big company is deciding where to set up, or when an existing company is deciding to expand, or when a new company is investigating starting up, the cost of labour is a huge factor. The cheaper labour the more likely a company is to set up in Ireland. Also if an SME wants to take on a new worker it is much more feasible if the wage rate is lower..

Wrong. FDI almost always pays far and above the M/W. And, like indigenous businesses, it's other factors like huge energy costs & professional fees that makes Ireland expensive, not the M/W. If we're talking about cutting wages, its the JLC agreements, public pay and the aforementioned professional pay that need to be cut, not the M/W.

The SMEs have been and always will be opposed to the idea of the M/W, they fought it's introduction, they fought it being raised, and now they've cheerleaded it's reduction, they are only out to look after their own back pockets, to hell with their workers and their - already low - standard of living.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

In economic terms, labour is a product like any other, and its price is inverse proportional to ones propensity to purchase it. You will be more likely to buy a Dairymilk bar if it 70c instead of 80c. You will be more likely to hire a worker if it is €7.65/hr instead of €8.65/hr.

I ask for facts and you give me gibberish. There is no definitive economic case for cutting the M/W to stimulate employment, just soundbytes & what if-fery. Btw you didn't answer my question, are you not opposed to the M/W in principal?

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

The minimum wage particularly affects unskilled jobs. The "knowledge economy" is nothing more than deception really. It allows Irish people to live in a dream land where they can have a gigantic living standard and still retain employment in a free-market Europe. This is not so. Hence why Dell leaving hurt so much.

More gibberish, knowledge economy? free market Europe? these things have nothing to do with the M/W but let's roll with it anyway. The headline figure argued by the vultures is that because the M/W is high it must be cut, what it ignores is that the M/W when it comes to purchasing power is far down the list in comparison. it's middle of the road in the EU amongst those countries have a M/W. Those that don't, such as the Nordic countries & Germany, pay well anyway. In otherwords, cutting the M/W won't bring down the cost of living, just make already successful companies, like Tesco & the Musgrave Group, even wealthier.

And Dell didn't pay M/W.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I don't see how my personal means and broad leanings are relevant to the discussion. But anyway, I haven't worked since I started college: when I was growing up my parents saved money for my education instead of buying me soccer jerseys and Gameboys and such, and so I don't need to work now. Not that I'm "well off" or anything; I couldn't afford a night out on the town once a week (I generally cycle when I do go to the pub, to save on taxis and buses.)

Just as i suspected, it's all well and good arguing for savage cuts to the M/W and large increases in the Reg Fee when mum and dad pay your way, but step out of the ivory tower and into the real world and you might realise that plenty of your fellow UCC students, their families and everyone else don't have a benefactor. It's very easy to argue for something when you have no idea of the consequences of your argument.

Eliot Rosewater

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Wrong. FDI almost always pays far and above the M/W.

Yes, but M/W is a benchmark. Only about 3% of the working population are on €8.65 an hour.

Additionally, a big minimum wage raises the prices of things like food and clothing. Your local Centra would be able to provide cheaper products if it had cheaper labour. The whole economy is interconnected; you cannot view any one thing in isolation.

The IMF is asking for a minimum wage. Why do you think it is doing this, if not for economic purposes? Is there some conspiracy?

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

More gibberish, knowledge economy? free market Europe? these things have nothing to do with the M/W but let's roll with it anyway.

Of course free market Europe and knowledge economy considerations impact on M/W. In the former case, we are in competition with other countries who have a lower M/W.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Just as i suspected, it's all well and good arguing for savage cuts to the M/W and large increases in the Reg Fee when mum and dad pay your way...

Your basically criticising me because my parents saved money for my education instead of buying me toys and stuff. Yeah? I don't have any qualms about it. The finances of my family have been run frugally for my life so that my siblings and I would be able to make the most of our time in education. I find it strange that your portraying this as a bad thing.

Anyway, I understand that the government has socially conditioned the population into not saving money for Uni, and that it is often impractical to demand up front fees. My stance reflects this.