HECS/CSP fees for all (1 Viewer)

[Tuna]

Should we make everyone pay fully for their university education, in terms, they can pay it for it in instalments once they start working? For international students shouldn't there be higher fees?

Is it right to abolish Domestic-Fee, that is, if you don't get into a course with the required cut-off you either repeat or do another course?

 

[withoutaface]

I think that current HECS rates should be jacked up to the full price of education.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

For international students shouldn't there be higher fees?

They do pay higher fees.

 

[Tuna]

They do pay higher fees.

Higher compared to local. However, shouldn't they be paying higher than the rate they are currently paying?

 

[Raginsheep]

Y? Universities need the money that international students bring in due to the lack of funding from the federal government, private sponsorship and also from research. Its only going to get harder as Asian universities are upgraded to a standard where it becomes more attractive to stay at home.

 

[Tuna]

Not really, a degree overseas from Aus or USA or UK etc. will worth more, i.e, more pay once they go to there homeland and work. Moreover, it will give them a chance to apply as permanent residence in countries.

If the system changes then everyone is paying full amount for their education thus we don't need money from international student that much.

 

[Scanorama]

It should be free for local students who have the enough marks to get into the course.

 

[Tuna]

It should be free for local students who have the enough marks to get into the course.

This is suicide. Education is not free. Everyone should be paying full for their university degrees.

 

[Rafy]

It should be free for local students who have the enough marks to get into the course.

Whitlam did that. It was a disaster.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Higher compared to local. However, shouldn't they be paying higher than the rate they are currently paying?

Are you aware of how much more they are already paying though?

Local non-fee paying students pay less than $8,000 per year for a law degree at USYD.

International students must pay $21,840 per year for the same degree. (Source)

 

[loquasagacious]

International fees are determined by the market therefore they are sufficient/optimum.

To suggest that HECS should cover the entire cost of a degree ignores the social marginal benefit that is accrued when someone gets a degree. eg it is beneficial to society (at this point) for us to have more nurses and teachers - to encourage people to study in these fields (and thus achieve a socially optimal outcome) we should even lower the ammount they pay. Whereas on the other hand we have alot of lawyers so perhaps should increase the ammount they pay.

Basically there are two many issues at play for us to make blanket statements that everyone should pay more. I believe that in general the ammount we contribute does need to go up however there are key exceptions. I believe that the universities themselves should have complete control of the pricing structures they use.

I would propose us contributing say 75% of the cost the government the remainder, with scholarships covering fees available. Exceptions might be areas of 'national importance' etc where the govt might contribute 50% or even 75% in order to ensure a desirable number of grads in that field.

The total cost should always be determined by the market and should be the same for domestic and international students.

 

[Tuna]

The problem with the current system is that once students are graduated with very good degrees they go overseas, thus, the amount of HECS/CSP that the government contributed will go to waste.

 

[Tuna]

Are you aware of how much more they are already paying though?

Local non-fee paying students pay less than $8,000 per year for a law degree at USYD.

International students must pay $21,840 per year for the same degree. (Source)

I am aware but you're the one who is feeling pitty for them. Most international students will go back home and work. Some will apply for permanent residency.

Why wouldn't we raise higher costs if they want to use other eductional systems which are not theirs?

 

[withoutaface]

International fees are determined by the market therefore they are sufficient/optimum.

To suggest that HECS should cover the entire cost of a degree ignores the social marginal benefit that is accrued when someone gets a degree. eg it is beneficial to society (at this point) for us to have more nurses and teachers - to encourage people to study in these fields (and thus achieve a socially optimal outcome) we should even lower the ammount they pay. Whereas on the other hand we have alot of lawyers so perhaps should increase the ammount they pay.

Basically there are two many issues at play for us to make blanket statements that everyone should pay more. I believe that in general the ammount we contribute does need to go up however there are key exceptions. I believe that the universities themselves should have complete control of the pricing structures they use.

I would propose us contributing say 75% of the cost the government the remainder, with scholarships covering fees available. Exceptions might be areas of 'national importance' etc where the govt might contribute 50% or even 75% in order to ensure a desirable number of grads in that field.

The total cost should always be determined by the market and should be the same for domestic and international students.

Teaching and nursing should perhaps be encouraged, but other fields the degree holder will essentially earn back the cost of the degree in salary and then some. I'll post a proper rebuttal later when I don't feel sick.

 

[Tuna]

Are you kidding me? All education from from day-care/preschool, all the way through to university education should be absolutely free or heavily subsidised by the government; look at it as an investment. Students who are undertaking their first university course shouldn't expect to have to pay a cent, as they havent even got their roots firmly set yet. If it wasn't for hecs, many people wouldn't be able to go through to university; a society without educated people or university graduates, now that's suicide.

Didn't I say to pay in installments once they start working?

 

[leetom]

If a HECS student graduates and promptly decides to go abroad, does he/she still have to pay HECS out of the income they earn in a foreign country?

 

[withoutaface]

Are you kidding me? All education from from day-care/preschool, all the way through to university education should be absolutely free or heavily subsidised by the government; look at it as an investment. Students who are undertaking their first university course shouldn't expect to have to pay a cent, as they havent even got their roots firmly set yet. If it wasn't for hecs, many people wouldn't be able to go through to university; a society without educated people or university graduates, now that's suicide.

People will go to university anyway, regardless of how high HECS is (well, within acceptable limits), so why subsidise something when there is no need?

 

[MoonlightSonata]

I am aware but you're the one who is feeling pitty for them. Most international students will go back home and work. Some will apply for permanent residency.

Why wouldn't we raise higher costs if they want to use other eductional systems which are not theirs?

As I said, we already have raised the costs.

The fees are substantially higher (more than double). How do we come to a suitable amount?

 

[nwatts]

It should be free or subsidised (The basic oppurtunity should be there; people could still pay for better if they wanted it).

I agree. And I also think many masters courses should be HECS eligible, especially stuff like psych, which is needed for practicing psychologists. A lot of masters courses are far more vocational than undergraduate degrees, and lead into work very easily. It seems stupid to me for these courses, which throw students into the workforce relatively quickly, to be only available to those who can afford it (which essentially means that their necessity of work is less, too).

I think it's a responsibility the government has to its nation to provide free or subsidised education. I don't know a lot about economics, but surely the long-term benefits of having a higher educated nation would outweigh those of withholding money from the education sector?

 

[Enlightened_One]

I agree. And I also think many masters courses should be HECS eligible, especially stuff like psych, which is needed for practicing psychologists. A lot of masters courses are far more vocational than undergraduate degrees, and lead into work very easily. It seems stupid to me for these courses, which throw students into the workforce relatively quickly, to be only available to those who can afford it (which essentially means that their necessity of work is less, too).

I think it's a responsibility the government has to its nation to provide free or subsidised education. I don't know a lot about economics, but surely the long-term benefits of having a higher educated nation would outweigh those of withholding money from the education sector?

If the government further funded universities then their would be less of a reason for full fee paying students to buy their way into uni.