Uni's Dumb Down for Foreign Cash (1 Viewer)

[Korn]

We don't have the SAS. They are a British unit.

How aren't aerial denial planes useful? Considering they are expected to last many years it is impossible to tell of the circumstances of the future and guage their usefulness.

The USA can't magically appear within 4 hours to help us. Plus if Australia is invaded I think the USA might be having a little trouble of their own. What country would be stupid enough to invade Australia if the USA wasn't already tied up?

Also what makes you so sure we couldn't stop them. Again, land troops must make it shore. To land the number required would be a huge undertaking.

Was i thinking of SES?
Why woulkd anyone invade Australia?
How liveable is our country really? only inhabited on the coast very sparse and inhospitable in the centre

 

[Xayma]

Was i thinking of SES?
Why woulkd anyone invade Australia?
How liveable is our country really? only inhabited on the coast very sparse and inhospitable in the centre

No you were thinking of the SASR. A single regiment. Also not the only commando regiment.

Australia would be invaded to take us out from helping others, not necessairly for resources.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

No we have the SASR. Not the SAS. Two different organisations. Also note that they are only a regiment. Not going to do much damage in anything but covert operations which requires a main army for support.

ohhh ok, yea we have the SASR sorry.

 

[Rorix]

Yes. If the trend to increase full-fee paying places continues, however, selection from the HSC will be greatly diminished and placed on a relatively equal footing with ability to pay. This eliminates merit as the sole criteria, which it is meant to be.

No, probably not. But that's not what I'm arguing for. I think there should be a greater emphasis placed on public funding for education so that full fee-paying places do not become a significant (or even, foreseeably, dominant) sector of higher education.

It is illogical for you to support some fee paying places, but then complain the system is not merit based if the amount of fee paying places increases.

The system either is or isn't merit based. If you think that there should be a degree of non-merit to consider when considering fee paying places (i.e. for a sustainable system) then the question is one of degree and not merit or non-merit.

Yes, but I don't entirely see how they are relevant to this. You can't send people who don't get into university because "their" spot was taken up by a full fee-paying person, despite the fact they may have been brighter than the full fee-paying person, to TAFE and say everything's fine. TAFE and univsersity cater to different areas of training, and universities need more funding irrespective of how much funding is given to TAFEs; ie. you can't compensate underfunded unis with more TAFE funding because they don't provide the same training.

I was referring to the right for [paid] education in the sense that is relevant to the issue at hand, is that right soley for university or can tertiary colleges be considered equivelant. Not that I am asserting that this is true, I have no position on the truth of the statement, but merely demonstrating it is more complex than some are pretending it to be.

Same with the remaining issues.

 

[Plebeian]

It is illogical for you to support some fee paying places, but then complain the system is not merit based if the amount of fee paying places increases.

The system either is or isn't merit based. If you think that there should be a degree of non-merit to consider when considering fee paying places (i.e. for a sustainable system) then the question is one of degree and not merit or non-merit.

OK. I know what you're getting at here ... what I'm trying to say is that if too many full-fee places exist (imo, 35% is far too many), then the system in general becomes non-merit based. I would consider a system with ~10-15% full-fee places to be sufficiently a merit-based one (I realise this may contradict what I said earlier, I concede that it wasn't clear enough).

I was referring to the right for [paid] education in the sense that is relevant to the issue at hand, is that right soley for university or can tertiary colleges be considered equivelant. Not that I am asserting that this is true, I have no position on the truth of the statement, but merely demonstrating it is more complex than some are pretending it to be.

People have a right to attend university if they are intelligent enough. We cannot reduce public university places so much that you must be either very bright or wealthy enough to afford a full-fee place to get in, or you have to go to TAFE.

 

[Demandred]

I think the government is focusing on the shortage of trade workers. I just watched the budged about 7000+ extra apprenticeships are being introduced alont with 28 TAFE institutions. Nothing for the universities, perhaps we have 'too much' skilled workers and not enough trade workers? (mind the terminology).

 

[Generator]

28 new year 11-12 technical colleges, not TAFEs (similar institutions, yet a federal rather than a state operation). Given the recent Nelson reforms, I would say that the government thought that there was no great need for anything new in the realm of university funding.

 

[Korn]

28 new year 11-12 technical colleges, not TAFEs (similar institutions, yet a federal rather than a state operation). Given the recent Nelson reforms, I would say that the government thought that there was no great need for anything new in the realm of university funding.

I would say that there is still a large shortage in skilled workers, such as teachers, nurses, doctors, Accountants, Pharmacists, Engineers

 

[monique66]

I just realised that all this stuff has been in the papers before the budget was announced. I'm thinking something was leaked and the media tried to excert some pressure on the govt before they released the budget. Funny that...

 

[Generator]

I would say that there is still a large shortage in skilled workers, such as teachers, nurses, doctors, Accountants, Pharmacists, Engineers

Ah, most of which are being dealt with at the current time (in a way that the government sees fit, of course).

 

[Korn]

Ah, most of which are being dealt with at the current time (in a way that the government sees fit, of course).

How about lowering the HECs like they did for nurses and teachers AND maybe increasing the funded places

 

[transcendent]

Like we need more accountants yeah the lowering of HECS for Nursing did wonders at USyd. They scrapped it.

 

[Korn]

Like we need more accountants yeah the lowering of HECS for Nursing did wonders at USyd. They scrapped it.

We have a national shortage, so does the US

 

[Iron]

I heard tell today that Australia has as many law students at the moment as the actual field itself. Surely that's not true. Maybe we just creep into business, politics and comedy

 

[pete_mate]

Techie, I question what you mean by conventional air power. In the case of an invasion against Australia, enemy troops must land. The JSF serves well as a CAP aircraft. Not as good as the F22 in that field however, the JSF is multirole. The AP3-C orion is a great assest in anti-maritime warfare.

what is JSF and CAP? so your saying with a good airforce they cant even land on our shores? meaning airforce is more important than army and navy

surely they'd have the same if not more fighter jets that'd kill ours? what has indonesia got?

 

[Xayma]

It is no more important then the army or navy, however, it is often more costly.

JSF=Joint Strike Fighter, the main plane being discussed.
CAP=Combat Air Patrols.

There is more to fighter jets then numbers. In many wars the kill:loss ratio can be approaching and occasionaly pass 10:1. Any technological advantage helps.