More Student Protests Over Fees? Hmph.

Eliot Rosewater · 15-11-2011 11:43AM

Sulmac wrote: »

This would be far more inequitable than any student loan/graduate tax system would be, arguably.

Absolutely. And I have little doubt that if the USI changed their stance from blanket no-fees to pro-loan system they'd be much more succesful. The irony (another one!) is that by pursuing their current stance, ostensibly motivated by accessibility considerations, they've made college even more inaccesible.

Lockstep · 15-11-2011 11:54AM

JustinDee wrote: »

It isn't "disingenous" in the slightest.

Yes it is.
See how this argument works?

JustinDee wrote: »

It always staffed well. More staff on weekends and holidays. Less on a wednesday or a tuesday with management also serving.
This was a busy city centre bar, by the way and still is.

What a strange model.
Wednesday and Tuesdays can get mad busy. The bar I work in is the same in that it's more staff on weekends and holidays and less on weekdays but this isn't a hard and fast rule. Last Friday was very quiet so two staff members went home whereas the Friday before that was so busy they had to double the amount of bar staff.
Your bar never had this?

JustinDee wrote: »

You keep talking like the late '80s/early '90s are a different era in Ireland's history. They aren't.

Yes, they are.
Once again, using your argument.

JustinDee wrote: »

According to the CSO website, net migration in 1988 was -41,000, in 1989 was -43,000. In 2011, it is recorded at -31,000. In 1989 there were 70,600 emigrants and in 2011, there were 76,000. You going to argue over that amount?

5-6k a year is a high number for such a small island, would you not agree? Especially with the increased tendency for migrants to our most highly skilled.

JustinDee wrote: »

This isn't college, kiddo. My "claims" aren't unsubstantiated at all. They're from my experience. It didn't all happen in an isolated time-capsule either. Just like your examples of students who apparently can't get work in Galway actually.

First of all, if we're going to have this conversation I'd appreciate you not being bitchy. I'm in my 20s so trying to portray me as an 8 year old isn't on.
Secondly, once again, your argument is utterly unsubstantiated. I've brought up concrete data, all you've done is keep saying you were there and you know you're right.
You're dead right that my claims on Galway are anecdotal but neither am I saying that mine have some sort of precedence over your own anecdotes. They're two different experiences and while I have serious doubts about yours, there's nothing I can do to prove or disprove them. However, your claims about the 80s have been shown to be bogus as I have provided sources that refute them.
Otherwise it goes down the line of 'I lived in the UK on the 12th of August 1994 and the Queen used to vomit on pennies and throw them at children. Whaddya mean there's evidence that the Queen wasn't in the country at the time. I HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS AND I KNOW IT'S TRUE!"

JustinDee wrote: »

Don't bother with the moral relativist approach. Thats not what I'm doing. Distancing subjectively a very recent time in the economic cycle is all very convenient but it doesn't change a thing.

It might have been very recent but it is not comparable. The Great Depression was very recent to someone living in 1950s America but it was in no way similar or comparable. I have already shown sources to show
1-A much higher debt problem nowadays
2-Higher emigration nowadays
3-Brain drain nowadays
This isn't moral relativism. It's refuting your claims and being met with "Yeah well I have no proof or sources but you weren't there!"

JustinDee wrote: »

No. Melodramatic 'outrage' about grant decreases, abolishment or the gall of having to actually pay for third-level education.

Most students already pay for third level education (except for those on grant) Even if you're on the full, non-adjacent grant it works out at around €95 a week. That ain't much to live on, especially when rent is at least €50 a week.

Godge · 15-11-2011 12:30PM

Lockstep wrote: »

It might have been very recent but it is not comparable. The Great Depression was very recent to someone living in 1950s America but it was in no way similar or comparable. I have already shown sources to show
1-A much higher debt problem nowadays
2-Higher emigration nowadays
3-Brain drain nowadays
This isn't moral relativism. It's refuting your claims and being met with "Yeah well I have no proof or sources but you weren't there!"

.

But we are talking about how difficult it is to get a job.

Of your three points, number 1 is irrelevant and numbers 2 and 3, while unfortunate and unacceptable should make it easier rather than harder to get a job.

The important fact, as provided by JustinDee, is that unemployment was higher in the 80s.

Look, I have said this to you before, I am not aware of any student that wants a part-time job not being in a position to get a part-time job. Living in Dublin 15, an area of high unemployment, with lots of students that go to Maynooth (hours from anywhere according to you), that is a good anecdote.

JustinDee · 15-11-2011 12:52PM

Lockstep wrote: »

What a strange model.
Wednesday and Tuesdays can get mad busy. The bar I work in is the same in that it's more staff on weekends and holidays and less on weekdays but this isn't a hard and fast rule. Last Friday was very quiet so two staff members went home whereas the Friday before that was so busy they had to double the amount of bar staff.
Your bar never had this?

See? Places not necessarily run to your template of apparent guile-of-industry and success.

Lockstep wrote: »

5-6k a year is a high number for such a small island, would you not agree? Especially with the increased tendency for migrants to our most highly skilled

The "tendency"? What "tendency"? Did you actually go through the CSO website at all? This is where the figures come from.

Lockstep wrote: »

First of all, if we're going to have this conversation I'd appreciate you not being bitchy. I'm in my 20s so trying to portray me as an 8 year old isn't on

I'm not portraying you as anything. I'm saying you were no more than 4 years old in 1988, if you are in your early twenties.

Lockstep wrote: »

Secondly, once again, your argument is utterly unsubstantiated. I've brought up concrete data, all you've done is keep saying you were there and you know you're right

You haven't proven anything but regurgitated a cherry-picked link.

Lockstep wrote: »

You're dead right that my claims on Galway are anecdotal but neither am I saying that mine have some sort of precedence over your own anecdotes

Why bother telling them in the first place? They're pointless otherwise.

Lockstep wrote: »

They're two different experiences and while I have serious doubts about yours, there's nothing I can do to prove or disprove them

Oh ffs. I don't care if you have "serious doubts" about my circumstances when a student. Telling me they were different to nowadays despite not even of an age to know what was going on is not really going to move mountains for your point of woe.

Lockstep wrote: »

However, your claims about the 80s have been shown to be bogus as I have provided sources that refute them

Not one is bupkis. My point is that times were as tough if not tougher for student

Lockstep wrote: »

Otherwise it goes down the line of 'I lived in the UK on the 12th of August 1994 and the Queen used to vomit on pennies and throw them at children. Whaddya mean there's evidence that the Queen wasn't in the country at the time. I HAVE EXPERIENCED THIS AND I KNOW IT'S TRUE!"

You're waffling now.

Lockstep wrote: »

It might have been very recent but it is not comparable. The Great Depression was very recent to someone living in 1950s America but it was in no way similar or comparable. I have already shown sources to show
1-A much higher debt problem nowadays
2-Higher emigration nowadays
3-Brain drain nowadays
This isn't moral relativism. It's refuting your claims and being met with "Yeah well I have no proof or sources but you weren't there!"

Nothing of a sort.
If you want to prove that emigration differs now to the late '80s, early '90s you'll have to prove it. The net figures tell it all.
You kept bringing up unemployment. Now its "debt problem" and only skilled-workers but not the unemployment? Make up your mind.
Subjective. Monocular. Out-of-kilter.

Lockstep wrote: »

Most students already pay for third level education (except for those on grant) Even if you're on the full, non-adjacent grant it works out at around €95 a week. That ain't much to live on, especially when rent is at least €50 a week.

And the country owes them the tippage on that figure, does it? Don't be silly.

Lockstep · 15-11-2011 01:19PM

JustinDee wrote: »

See? Places not necessarily run to your template of apparent guile-of-industry and success.

If they are doing so, it's not a good business model and certainly not something I've ever seen in my time in the sector.
This is clashing anecdotes but as I've already outlined, it's not a good or logical business model to have such inflexible staff.
The hospitality sector is struggling enough these days without such inflexible working practices.

JustinDee wrote: »

The "tendency"? What "tendency"? Did you actually go through the CSO website at all? This is where the figures come from.

What are you talking about? I clearly stated that there are more emigrating than in the 80s (although you don't see 5 or 6k for such a small island as a significant figure) and pointed out the tendency for emigrants to be our most highly skilled (as noted in the Irish Times article)

JustinDee wrote: »

I'm not portraying you as anything. I'm saying you were no more than 4 years old in 1988, if you are in your early twenties.

You referred to me as "Kiddo". If you're going to get so patronising then please take a rest before responding to me. We're both adults and I don't see why you feel the need to bring in such petty insults.

JustinDee wrote: »

You haven't proven anything but regurgitated a cherry-picked link.

I've provided that our debt is far higher, that emigration is higher and that we have brain drain.
Those aren't cherry picked links, those are sources by reputable newspapers.
Once again, you're unable to source your own arguments and have done nothing to refute mine.

JustinDee wrote: »

Why bother telling them in the first place? They're pointless otherwise.

Because your claims are utterly at odds with my own. Now, this isn't going to change anyone else's opinions (they can't be expected to take anecdotes as gospel) but it does mean I'm highly sceptical of your anecdotes and that your claims on the economic state being comparable to the 80s are utter hogwash as I have sourced information that disprove this, something you have been unable to refute.

JustinDee wrote: »

Oh ffs. I don't care if you have "serious doubts" about my circumstances when a student. Telling me they were different to nowadays despite not even of an age to know what was going on is not really going to move mountains for your point of woe.

I don't need to have been alive then to know what was going on. That's what sources and evidence is for. Something you've been unable to produce which makes it clear you either know you're in the wrong or are unable to find anything to back up your subjective opinions.

JustinDee wrote: »

Not one is bupkis. My point is that times were as tough if not tougher for student

You claimed that the country was in a comparable economic state, something I disproved by showing nowadays is both different (higher debt, emigration and brain drain) and worse.
Times might have been tough for students but not tougher and certainly not comparable to nowadays.
Even if it was, your entire argument relies on "I found a job then so everyone can". Inductive and foolish reasoning.

JustinDee wrote: »

You're waffling now.

Hey pot, you're black.
It clearly shows the problems in your logic: that because you believe something to be true, no matter the opposing evidence, it MUST be true.

JustinDee wrote: »

Nothing of a sort.
If you want to prove that emigration differs now to the late '80s, early '90s you'll have to prove it. The net figures tell it all.
You kept bringing up unemployment. Now its "debt problem" and only skilled-workers but not the unemployment? Make up your mind.
Subjective. Monocular. Out-of-kilter.

source on emigration.
Where on earth have I said that it's not unemployment that's an issue? I'm pointing out different factors: unemployment peaked in 1985 at over 17% whereas nowadays we also have horrendous debt levels and emigration (including some of our most skilled workers)
Nowhere have I said that unemployment is worse now than it was in the 80s but your argument keeps going back to one point: that just because you found a job, everyone should be able to. Do you genuinely not see the problem here?
Nice attempt at a strawman though.

JustinDee wrote: »

And the country owes them the tippage onthat figure, does it? Don't be silly.

They're hardly being paid excessive amounts now are they? Opposition to cutting such vital schemes such as the grant (which benefits low income families) is not 'melodramatic outrage'.
Don't be silly.

Lockstep · 15-11-2011 01:25PM

Godge wrote: »

But we are talking about how difficult it is to get a job.

Of your three points, number 1 is irrelevant and numbers 2 and 3, while unfortunate and unacceptable should make it easier rather than harder to get a job.

The important fact, as provided by JustinDee, is that unemployment was higher in the 80s.

Look, I have said this to you before, I am not aware of any student that wants a part-time job not being in a position to get a part-time job. Living in Dublin 15, an area of high unemployment, with lots of students that go to Maynooth (hours from anywhere according to you), that is a good anecdote.

The average unemployment rate for the 80s is at 14%. Some years it was higher (peakin in 1985) other years it was lower (1980). Even if we only cherrypick the dates when unemployment was double digits, the average is still 15%.
So no, if we're going to refer to the 80s, then unemployent levels are roughly comparable alongside massive debt (which impacts on students and their families as they are more likely to have debts to repay as well as the crowding out effect and need to service debt) and further strains on the economy with high emigration and brain drain. These don't make it easier to get a job.

You're unaware of any students who can't find a part time job if they want one? Strangely, my own experience is the opposite but once again, this is going back to anecdotes. I searched for a job myself and got lucky. Not everyone is in the same boat.

ocli64 · 15-11-2011 11:10PM

This whole argument is ridiculous as it totally varies from case to case. I know plenty of students who have been able to get promotional work and the occasional more steady employment, yet in my own course due to a work load of 30 hours a week plus assignments it simply wouldnt be feasible for me to get a job, leaving aside the fact that nowhere would want to hire someone with such restrictive hours anyway.

Because of this I rely solely on my parents and whatever summer work I can get to fund my studies. At the end of the day what difference does it make in my life if the unemployment rate was higher in previous years when this has no effect on my situation.

It is pointless arguing that things were worse before and yes, most likely things will get better but the fact of the matter is that the €5000 at least that it already costs for me to attend college and live away from home every year is by no means "free education" and is still a struggle regardless of how other people have been effected in the past or abroad.

JustinDee · 16-11-2011 09:33AM

Lockstep wrote: »

If they are doing so, it's not a good business model and certainly not something I've ever seen in my time in the sector.
This is clashing anecdotes but as I've already outlined, it's not a good or logical business model to have such inflexible staff.
The hospitality sector is struggling enough these days without such inflexible working practices.

What are you talking about? I clearly stated that there are more emigrating than in the 80s (although you don't see 5 or 6k for such a small island as a significant figure) and pointed out the tendency for emigrants to be our most highly skilled (as noted in the Irish Times article)

You referred to me as "Kiddo". If you're going to get so patronising then please take a rest before responding to me. We're both adults and I don't see why you feel the need to bring in such petty insults.

I've provided that our debt is far higher, that emigration is higher and that we have brain drain.
Those aren't cherry picked links, those are sources by reputable newspapers.
Once again, you're unable to source your own arguments and have done nothing to refute mine.

Because your claims are utterly at odds with my own. Now, this isn't going to change anyone else's opinions (they can't be expected to take anecdotes as gospel) but it does mean I'm highly sceptical of your anecdotes and that your claims on the economic state being comparable to the 80s are utter hogwash as I have sourced information that disprove this, something you have been unable to refute.

I don't need to have been alive then to know what was going on. That's what sources and evidence is for. Something you've been unable to produce which makes it clear you either know you're in the wrong or are unable to find anything to back up your subjective opinions.

You claimed that the country was in a comparable economic state, something I disproved by showing nowadays is both different (higher debt, emigration and brain drain) and worse.
Times might have been tough for students but not tougher and certainly not comparable to nowadays.
Even if it was, your entire argument relies on "I found a job then so everyone can". Inductive and foolish reasoning.

Hey pot, you're black.
It clearly shows the problems in your logic: that because you believe something to be true, no matter the opposing evidence, it MUST be true.

[URL="[URL]http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/ireland-business-blog-with-lisa-ocarroll/2011/jan/20/ireland-emigration-australia"]source[/URL] on emigration. [/URL]
Where on earth have I said that it's not unemployment that's an issue? I'm pointing out different factors: unemployment peaked in 1985 at over 17% whereas nowadays we also have horrendous debt levels and emigration (including some of our most skilled workers)
Nowhere have I said that unemployment is worse now than it was in the 80s but your argument keeps going back to one point: that just because you found a job, everyone should be able to. Do you genuinely not see the problem here?
Nice attempt at a strawman though.

They're hardly being paid excessive amounts now are they? Opposition to cutting such vital schemes such as the grant (which benefits low income families) is not 'melodramatic outrage'.
Don't be silly.

In essence, what you're saying by way of incessant repitition is that the high unemployment was different to the high unemployment now (even though it was higher), destitution (since all we're reading about in this thread is 'destitution' and woe etc) in the 80s is nothing like destitution now yet despite getting through it I know nothing of it. Migration to N.America, Oceania etc is also made out to be like a sentence with transport on a coffin ship. Migration is easier because it is cheaper (yes, even in relative terms). Making out like it is a banishment is just weak. As for your linked piece: "The Irish usually go to Sydney, not Melbourne" - That line alone is completely incorrect supposition from someone who hasn't even lived there long enough to speculate so. And "like Famine remittance"?? Oh ffs.

Your 'sources' and 'proof' are opinion pieces. Not fact and laced with convenient topic-aligned and pro-agendaic anecdotes. Much like the thread. Your line of 'proof' is far-too narrow to be considered anything else but cherry-picked.

As for work, the poster in troubled times in Maynooth will be pleased to know that there is a position in a barber shop on Sallins road available for cleaning up and prepping (experience not necessary - she has said it has been difficult getting anyone to apply in the first place), sign on the door for bar work in the newer pub on Main St (I can't remember its name: O'Neills or something). Even Tesco are still hiring. There is also work in a store on Leixlip Main St. Happy job-hunting.

I know what the 80s and early 90s were like as I was caught up in it. It, like now, was difficult but not the end of the world as the dramatisers would have us believe.

Third-level education is a choice. Not an obligation of the State to provide all corners of.

the groutch · 16-11-2011 10:06AM

will be interesting to see how the Gardai handle this, after their assault of innocent peaceful protesters last time

caseyann · 16-11-2011 08:25PM

When people believe in something it is never stupid or pointless.And if it means ending up in debt before they are even out of college or out of college league ever.Then they should be marching and so should the older generations of this country in solidarity with them.

I feel like i am watching a bad re run of something every day in Ireland now.

Just edited to say thank god someone in country has balls unlike the older generations.Shows who has the balls in this country(Students and pensioners),all in between are sheep.

Denerick · 16-11-2011 08:44PM

caseyann wrote: »

When people believe in something it is never stupid or pointless.

A nice sentiment, but meaningless when you think about it. Clearly rapists and paedophiles believe in rape and paedophilia; are their opinions stupid or pointless?

caseyann · 16-11-2011 08:50PM

Denerick wrote: »

A nice sentiment, but meaningless when you think about it. Clearly rapists and paedophiles believe in rape and paedophilia; are their opinions stupid or pointless?

Not even close to same thing.:rolleyes:

16-11-2011 09:08PM

How many people complaining on this this thread availed of free fees? Would you be willing to pay a retrospective graduate tax?

southsiderosie · 16-11-2011 10:54PM

caseyann wrote: »

When people believe in something it is never stupid or pointless.

I distinctly remember that around the time when the **** was really hitting the fan, there was more public outrage over the Henri handball than they was over Fianna Fail essentially socializing the debt of private banks. I would call protesting a decision made about a football game while the country is sinking into a financial black hole due to the decisions of its political leadership both stupid and pointless.

caseyann wrote: »

And if it means ending up in debt before they are even out of college or out of college league ever.Then they should be marching and so should the older generations of this country in solidarity with them.

College graduates make far more money over the course of their lifetime than non-college graduates. If students are not willing to invest in their own future, why should the rest of us? Because even when fees are introduced (and it is definitely a when, not an if), the full cost of that education will not be passed onto students; taxpayers will still be partially subsidizing it.

caseyann wrote: »

I feel like i am watching a bad re run of something every day in Ireland now.

Just edited to say thank god someone in country has balls unlike the older generations.Shows who has the balls in this country(Students and pensioners),all in between are sheep.

It doesn't take balls to defend the status quo. It takes balls to put forward proposals that would stand a chance of both protecting access to education while acknowledging the fiscal restraints placed on this and many future governments. Nobody here is asking how Ireland as a society can move forward; it is simply about protecting individual pieces of the pie.

caseyann · 16-11-2011 10:58PM

southsiderosie wrote: »

I distinctly remember that around the time when the **** was really hitting the fan, there was more public outrage over the Henri handball than they was over Fianna Fail essentially socializing the debt of private banks. I would call protesting a decision made about a football game while the country is sinking into a financial black hole due to the decisions of its political leadership both stupid and pointless.

College graduates make far more money over the course of their lifetime than non-college graduates. If students are not willing to invest in their own future, why should the rest of us? Because even when fees are introduced (and it is definitely a when, not an if), the full cost of that education will not be passed onto students; taxpayers will still be partially subsidizing it.

It doesn't take balls to defend the status quo. It takes balls to put forward proposals that would stand a chance of both protecting access to education while acknowledging the fiscal restraints placed on this and many future governments. Nobody here is asking how Ireland as a society can move forward; it is simply about protecting individual pieces of the pie.

You dont even live here and you arent Irish.
So whats you business.You worry about USA and leave Irish to worry about Ireland.

southsiderosie · 16-11-2011 11:12PM

caseyann wrote: »

You dont even live here and you arent Irish.
So whats you business.You worry about USA and leave Irish to worry about Ireland.

ALERT THE MODS!!! IT'S AN AMERICAN INTERLOPER!!! :pac:

But seriously...what the fcuk?

caseyann · 16-11-2011 11:14PM

southsiderosie wrote: »

ALERT THE MODS!!! IT'S AN AMERICAN INTERLOPER!!! :pac:

But seriously...what the fcuk?

It doesnt effect you so why you getting involved?
I dont get involved in American sites and tell them not to march or not voice their rights.
So why you jumping all over my post like i said something outrageous?

On top of that have you seen how many people are applying for the jobs and the mediocre pay you expect them to use to pay the fees for college.
Question what did you do in Ireland when here?

HavingCrack · 16-11-2011 11:21PM

caseyann wrote: »

It doesnt effect you so why you getting involved?
I dont get involved in American sites and tell them not to march or not voice their rights.
So why you jumping all over my post like i said something outrageous?

On top of that have you seen how many people are applying for the jobs and the mediocre pay you expect them to use to pay the fees for college.
Question what did you do in Ireland when here?

This won't end well....

southsiderosie · 16-11-2011 11:21PM

caseyann wrote: »

It doesnt effect you so why you getting involved?
I dont get involved in American sites and tell them not to march or not voice their rights.
So why you jumping all over my post like i said something outrageous?

On top of that have you seen how many people are applying for the jobs and the medicocre pay you expect them to use to pay the fees for college.
Question what did you do in Ireland when here?

Because it is outrageous.

In case you didn't notice, the politics forum is neither limited to Irish nationals nor constrained to Irish political discussion.

In addition, attacking the poster, rather than the content of the post is against both the ethos of this forum, and the website in general. If you don't like what I have to say, then engage with the content of the post - which has nothing to do with where I was born, or what passport I hold.

Suryavarman · 16-11-2011 11:56PM

caseyann wrote: »

You dont even live here and you arent Irish.
So whats you business.You worry about USA and leave Irish to worry about Ireland.

So what if shes from America? Is she not allowed to have an opinion because of that? Maybe that's a good thing as she might be able to give an opinion based on the facts instead of being based on emotions.

Lockstep · 16-11-2011 11:59PM

Casey, Rosie is a longterm and respected member of the site. Attacking her for her nationality isn't on, nor are contributions any less valuable because of it. We welcome any and all contributors from anyone, regardless of what country they are from. Please don't do this again.

Lockstep · 17-11-2011 12:12AM

JustinDee wrote: »

In essence, what you're saying by way of incessant repitition is that the high unemployment was different to the high unemployment now (even though it was higher), destitution (since all we're reading about in this thread is 'destitution' and woe etc) in the 80s is nothing like destitution now yet despite getting through it I know nothing of it. Migration to N.America, Oceania etc is also made out to be like a sentence with transport on a coffin ship. Migration is easier because it is cheaper (yes, even in relative terms). Making out like it is a banishment is just weak. As for your linked piece: "The Irish usually go to Sydney, not Melbourne" - That line alone is completely incorrect supposition from someone who hasn't even lived there long enough to speculate so. And "like Famine remittance"?? Oh ffs.

Slightly higher unemployment (1%) combined with far higher debt and brain drain which is possibly about to rise. Your argument ultimately rests on the concept that 'my personal experiences can be universalised.'
My family had to emigrate when I was a wee child. It wasn't pretty and not something I'd wish for anyone.

Seeing as you only seem to selectively read articles, from the same one:

Today it was predicted that emigration in Ireland this year will be worse than the 1980s.
The Economic and Social Research Institute predicts 100,000 Irish will be emigrating in the next two years – 50,000 this year and 50,000 in 2012.

It means more Irish people will emigrate this year than 1989, when emigration last peaked and 44,000 left Ireland.

JustinDee wrote: »

Your 'sources' and 'proof' are opinion pieces. Not fact and laced with convenient topic-aligned and pro-agendaic anecdotes. Much like the thread. Your line of 'proof' is far-too narrow to be considered anything else but cherry-picked.

These 'opinion pieces' are from business and economics correspondents from respected and mainstream newspapers like the Irish Times and the Guardian. Feel free to disregard them if they don't fit into your preformed opinons though

JustinDee wrote: »

As for work, the poster in troubled times in Maynooth will be pleased to know that there is a position in a barber shop on Sallins road available for cleaning up and prepping (experience not necessary - she has said it has been difficult getting anyone to apply in the first place), sign on the door for bar work in the newer pub on Main St (I can't remember its name: O'Neills or something). Even Tesco are still hiring. There is also work in a store on Leixlip Main St. Happy job-hunting.

That's great. I never claimed that no jobs were being created.Moreso that it's very difficult to get a job (given double digit employment) but a few jobs going in Maynooth isn't going to significantly reduce unemployment.
Delighted that a few extra people can find work now, shame that so many others won't be so fortunate though.

JustinDee wrote: »

I know what the 80s and early 90s were like as I was caught up in it. It, like now, was difficult but not the end of the world as the dramatisers would have us believe.

Third-level education is a choice. Not an obligation of the State to provide all corners of.

It's not the end of the world for sure: we don't live in SOmalia or Iraq but it is very tough on students. I'm glad you got through it but not everyone was in the same boat, as our high emigration levels at the time showed. As we have nowadays.

caseyann · 17-11-2011 01:03AM

Suryavarman wrote: »

So what if shes from America? Is she not allowed to have an opinion because of that? Maybe that's a good thing as she might be able to give an opinion based on the facts instead of being based on emotions.

So what if she is from USA please have you seen the state of their education standards over there and the amount of school drop outs,and students who are in debt up to their eyeballs before they even have a job and paying for half their lives?

Lockstep wrote: »

Casey, Rosie is a longterm and respected member of the site. Attacking her for her nationality isn't on, nor are contributions any less valuable because of it. We welcome any and all contributors from anyone, regardless of what country they are from. Please don't do this again.

Sorry lockstep wasnt meant to be an attack was an observation.Dont feel anyone has a right to be telling me how my future children should be living and accepting things.
I wont be changing my mind on that but i wont mention again and wont partake in this thread again.
Thanks Casey.

skafish · 17-11-2011 02:01AM

I agree that the abolition of fees was a bad idea. People don't, as a rule, appreciate somthing they haven't worked or paid for. I spent 4 years in college in the 1980s, and paid my own way, working part time during the year and full time during my holidays.
The free college system over the last number of years has resulted in some people spending time in college who have not the ability, the skills or the interest to complete the courses the sign up for.

avalon68 · 17-11-2011 03:06AM

caseyann wrote: »

So what if she is from USA please have you seen the state of their education standards over there and the amount of school drop outs,and students who are in debt up to their eyeballs before they even have a job and paying for half their lives?

Have you? I find their standards to be far higher than ours having worked here for the last few years! And I have yet to hear one of my students complain about paying fees or being in debt. They are investing in their future. As for dropouts - there are plenty of them in Ireland too - except here they arent costing the taxpayer a fortune......they pay their own fees.

RubyRoss · 17-11-2011 03:51AM

skafish wrote: »

I agree that the abolition of fees was a bad idea. People don't, as a rule, appreciate somthing they haven't worked or paid for. I spent 4 years in college in the 1980s, and paid my own way, working part time during the year and full time during my holidays.
The free college system over the last number of years has resulted in some people spending time in college who have not the ability, the skills or the interest to complete the courses the sign up for.

The 'we had more respect in my day' line is a bit unfair - there have always been people in college with neither the ability nor the skills - or even a clue what they want they do with their lives.

Any population with a large number in third level - and we have a lot of third level institutions for the size of the country - will have a number of unfit students. Instead of brining back fees, how about scaling back the number of institutions. For example, does Kerry really need Tralee IT when there are four colleges two hours away in Limerick and Cork? The whole sector is bloated. The students should really be protesting the salaries of the university heads, the fact that the undergrad is largely dismissed as a preamble for an MA, and the questionable structure of courses.

I find their standards to be far higher than ours having worked here for the last few years! And I have yet to hear one of my students complain about paying fees or being in debt. They are investing in their future. As for dropouts - there are plenty of them in Ireland too - except here they arent costing the taxpayer a fortune......they pay their own fees.

But America is a very big country with considerable variance in third level -the Ivy League, like Oxbridge, colleges exist almost separate from third level in the rest of those countries. Also, according to an MSNBC doc I saw, the loans system in the US is toxic.

Paying for college is all well and good when just having an Oxbrige/Ivy league degree will go along way to securing a job; the same value doesn't apply to most third level qualifications.

avalon68 · 17-11-2011 04:08AM

RubyRoss wrote: »

Paying for college is all well and good when just having an Oxbrige/Ivy league degree will go along way to securing a job; the same value doesn't apply to most third level qualifications.

I agree with this in part - but I also believe bringing in fees would greatly improve the standards in our universities - when people hand over cash they expect performance, not tired out of date lectures that dont fit the needs of the current working world. While it is a good thing to have education available to everyone, it also has downsides - not everyone can or should go to college. Irish colleges have been pumping out degrees in recent years and standards have dropped a lot (As a tutor I saw this for myself - the number of places increased every year, the points required dropped and the standards really dropped). When teaching you always have to include those at the bottom of the curve so they dont get left behind, but this is at the expense of those at the top of the curve.....thus dropping standards. We should be aiming to turn out grads every bit in demand as oxbridge grads - but the current system prevents this. Its all about quantity, not quality at the moment.

CageWager · 17-11-2011 04:32AM

I benefited from a free degree and if I was still in college I'd be unhappy about having to pay extra (as would any rational person) but looking back on it I can safely say that I would have taken college a lot more seriously if I had to pay for it. I still worked hard and did well in the end but there were plenty of skipped lectures along the way. I think the point being made above of fees increasing standards of both student and lecturer are very valid.

Also when I think of myself and my classmates in college, I doubt many of them would have had to drop out if we had to pay fees. People make it sound like they're going to be pushed out of education for the sake of a few grand but yet everyone heads off on a J1 or interrailing or whatever and the money is never an issue. We should have a system when the genuinely vunerable get a grant and the ones who can pay, do pay. its a similar problem as we're having at the moment with child benefit. its just impossible to means test everyone.

JustinDee · 17-11-2011 10:04AM

Lockstep wrote: »

Slightly higher unemployment (1%) combined with far higher debt and brain drain which is possibly about to rise. Your argument ultimately rests on the concept that 'my personal experiences can be universalised.

Sh*tsville then is no different to sh*tsville nowadays. People struggled then as they do now through third-level. Nothing new. You're going by what you selectively read or see on TV. I'm not.

Lockstep wrote: »

My family had to emigrate when I was a wee child. It wasn't pretty and not something I'd wish for anyone

???
You make it sound like you took off on a caravan of camels through sandstorms.
I myself was born overseas to Irish parents and we moved over here in 1974. I then fecked off in early 90s (following degree without any handouts) then elsewhere in '96 then off again in 2000 and back here in 2005.

Lockstep wrote: »

These 'opinion pieces' are from business and economics correspondents from respected and mainstream newspapers like the Irish Times and the Guardian. Feel free to disregard them if they don't fit into your preformed opinons though

They're still media opinion pieces. Do you take the word of the likes of Mark Steyn, Paul Dacre, David Adams or Miriam Lord as gospel just because they're part of the media?

Lockstep wrote: »

That's great. I never claimed that no jobs were being created.Moreso that it's very difficult to get a job (given double digit employment) but a few jobs going in Maynooth isn't going to significantly reduce unemployment.
Delighted that a few extra people can find work now, shame that so many others won't be so fortunate though

You jumped in on a thread where somebody in college in Maynooth said there was nothing re.employment there which is just far too subjective as was your monocular "this is how a pub works" diatribe.

fliball123 · 17-11-2011 11:11AM

Just looking through this thread..and I do feel sorry for students facing the prospect of having to pay this fee..Having said that why do these students think that this burden should be kept with the already over burdened, beat down tax payer who will be pillaged again in December..This well is dry

The way I see it I have a 1 y.o kid and I want him to go to college I have opened a savings a/c and I put a tenner in every month now with interest there will be a wad of cash waiting for him if he goes to college..but if there are fees involved I would want him to support himself..There is no point handing him cash as he will never learn the value of money. So I would not just give him the cash I would pay it retrospectively depending on his results..

This approach needs to be examined..First off the top say 5% in public schools (important here if someone can afford to send their kid to private then they IMO can afford to pay for college) get free education for the first year and it will continue for the duration as long as thy get top marks..If they slip it will for any reason other than a death to a relative or a serious illness then the tax payer should no longer be footing the bill....So going forward the top 5% every year get free tutition....I put myself through college at night whilst working during the day in Trinity and the amount of drinking and partying going on while sprinting to make my first class was ridiculous..Now I know all students are not like that but thats my experience.. I dont feel as a tax payer we should be paying people to go to college who are not taking it serious..If you put a prize out there for the top 5% then people will really take things serious

More Student Protests Over Fees? Hmph.

Comments