voluntary student unionism? good or bad? (2 Viewers)

[Not-That-Bright]

Does the student union seriously subsidise beer? Like... wtf they use our money to make beer cheaper for people that choose to drink beer?

 

[Xayma]

Its likeif the government made a volentary tax to improve education in public schools...i don't think everyone would contribute.

ok poor example.

Ok I was hoping you avoided that.

But it can't be compared to voluntary tax.

Unless union fees are spread evenly throughout the year, and are on a sliding scale of who can afford to pay what.

Does the student union seriously subsidise beer? Like... wtf they use our money to make beer cheaper for people that choose to drink beer?

At USYD it is, along with all other alcoholic drinks.

 

[transcendent]

Oh well. If it happens I don't mind. Means there will be more of a challenge if I decide to take over a society. Would be like running a business.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Yea, i have a feeling that the uni will prop up helpers, make o week run by the uni & release their own student diaries.

I must say tho, just going to UWS for a week I can see why some may be upset with the government, like in comparison to what i experienced checking out macq for example, the facilities are rather poor.. and it is overcrowded, considering how many people uws should be servicing (western sydney) in comparison with macq (another sydney uni )
ie; one of my lectures has 411 people in a room designed for 400. One of my tut's is so crowded that we almost have to get rid of desks, this was a shock to me as i come from what i now understand WAS a well off private school.

HOWEVER, the truth is maybe not all these people should be at uni? maybe uws SHOULD cut some programs?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

alot of the teachers at uws seem pretty pissed about just about anything, they're pissed that uws is getting a med school one of them said "do we REALLY need another med school", because he was upset that a subject he used to teach which screened full length films had been cut..

Asquithian, my comm. tuts are never over 25 either, but the rooms are about the size of my bedroom.

 

[Generator]

It's a sad shift that will change the atmopshere of campus. I Guess I'll be able to say one day universities had newpapers (x3) that were better quality than the daily tele, security guards, a intro week called 'o week', student diaries, information centers, Yellow shirt helpers.

Haha it is always a laugh when the groups running for the Honi Soit post claim that the publication must reclaim the credibility that it once held and that their team is the one that will see to this change... Maybe this year the successful group may actually achieve that goal. I'm not holding my breath, though.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

For some people in this thread that is a priority over all things.

I, for one, was only kidding

I agree that making things optional will not work. There's just no incentive for people to pay. However, stripping the fee down to necessities, one fee that everyone pays, is the most viable choice I think. Of course, our opinions on necessities will differ.

 

[christ_ine]

Yea, i have a feeling that the uni will prop up helpers, make o week run by the uni & release their own student diaries.

I must say tho, just going to UWS for a week I can see why some may be upset with the government, like in comparison to what i experienced checking out macq for example, the facilities are rather poor.. and it is overcrowded, considering how many people uws should be servicing (western sydney) in comparison with macq (another sydney uni )
ie; one of my lectures has 411 people in a room designed for 400. One of my tut's is so crowded that we almost have to get rid of desks, this was a shock to me as i come from what i now understand WAS a well off private school.

HOWEVER, the truth is maybe not all these people should be at uni? maybe uws SHOULD cut some programs?

Well, who are you to say what person deserves to be at uni and what person doesn't?

.. and I doubt UWS needs to cut more places that it already has.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Oh really? so you think that 411 people should be allowed to pick up communications even tho the biggest lecture theatre holds..... what's that? 400!

It's not about 'deserving' to be at uni, it's a question of wether they SHOULD be at uni.
Maybe I shouldn't be at uni? Maybe they should cut the UWS Law program?

 

[christ_ine]

Oh really? so you think that 411 people should be allowed to pick up communications even tho the biggest lecture theatre holds..... what's that? 400!

It's not about 'deserving' to be at uni, it's a question of wether they SHOULD be at uni.
Maybe I shouldn't be at uni? Maybe they should cut the UWS Law program?

You should probably take into consideration the number of students that don't attend lectures after the first few weeks.

Define "should" be at uni.

That, and I doubt anyone that's questioning whether they should be at university or not isn't exactly in the right mind to talk about UWS cutting places.

 

[poloktim]

Unortunately many students are simply stupid and/or have no idea and will only start complaining once its gone.

*slaps head* I get it now! Many students are stupid because they don't agree with you. Of course. How could I have been so blind? "This is my opinion, but if you disagree with me, then you are wrong."

Why can't we all just get along, stop being selfish and be thankful that because we pay for someone elses interests they are supporting ours.

Because we don't get much back. In fact, last year the SRC hassled a great deal of students, with all sorts of issues. They weren't letting people know their agenda (like the nice people do every Tuesday, politely), they were telling people to accept what they say because only fuckheads don't agree. One such thing was athiesm, another well, it could be argued that the head of the Queer Collective at uni had decided the two groups of people were "homosexuals" and "homophobics." If you weren't one, you were the other, and depending on what you were labelled as, you were treated differently. This happened to everyone.

I can see why many students at my uni wouldn't want to pay the unionism fees. We might find it silly to pay money to those who constantly tell us we're fucked. If you're a Christian you're a member of the Axis of Evil, if you're not gay, you're a member of the Axis of Evil. If you drive a fucking car, or got to uni in any manner that didn't involve walking, pushbike, skateboarding, rollerscating/blading or on a scooter, then you're a member of the Axis of Evil.

Want us to get along? Stop acting like a shit telling us how bad we are for having a certain religious belief. Stop being a fucking dickhead and respect people's religious beliefs.

Also, last year, UOW SRC spending on the Disabled was cut. They decided money should be given to the political groups in the SRC to tell us that we're all fucked. So much for helping those who need it, eh?

How about since they're requesting our money, they perform a decent service with it, instead of fucking us about?

 

[Phanatical]

Hear Hear! You're absolutely right!

If you're not of the right religious persuasion, you're evil and you don't deserve representation.

If you're a member of the wrong political party, or if you're not a member at all, you're evil and you don't deserve representation.

If you're of the wrong sexual orientation or gender, then you're oppressive and closed-minded and you deserve to burn.

If you're not both dirty and a hippie, you don't deserve representation.

Our student organisations are so determined to help everybody, that they help nobody. At USYD they completely screw over my campus, though they're happy to take our fucking money. I say Fuck That. Fuck the SRC. Fuck the Union. Fuck the National Union of Students and their mentality that anybody who isn't a dirty treehugging aborigine-wannabe lesbian who shaves their head but not their legs, doesn't deserve any representation.

 

[Xayma]

Well make an argument. Don't cower away like you can't justify a single thing you do. Make an argument. Don't get all indignant when I disagree. Justify. And when I come back with a counter your argument don't act like your ideals are the most right totally infallible argument on the face of the planet.

So far all I've got is that people don't want to pay for the queers to have a place and for sports fees but to have the important service of cheap beer. Phanatical comes on with his usual garb about radical feminists which he continues to take seriously, for some reason, and advance the same old argument that makes feminists even more angry because its a shit argument anyways.

I'm sure If he spend two weeks in a feminist class of somekind and took off his blinkers he would be able to argue them down (which is actually not hard to do if you know their own arguments) without looking like a pig and a closet homosexual. Which is, sorry Phanatical, your general problem. I can dig the whole male rights thing but as long as its not as poorly argued as the radical feminist view.

The only decent point I've heard for VSU is neo saying that union fees inhibit poorer people getting to uni because you can't defer them. Thats It. Otherwise it's all been people winging about having to pay for queers and sports assoiciations they don't use even though those people subsidise their interests as well.

In some cases, like at uow, there is a problem. At some the problem doesnt merit the throwing away of the system.

I never mentioned getting cheap beer or anything, it personally doesn't bother me paying $4.50 instead of $4 for spirits. Considering that is still cheaper than most outside the place, I said it isn't right having money being spent on political campaigns that directly oppose peoples viewpoints, and have fuck all to do with university.

Also that those poorer students which a fair bit of this is suppose to help, cant afford the subsidised food which the USU advocated state helps, they can't afford the time to join clubs and socities because they have to work to survive.

That and the womens office, which although doing some good, also produces a large amount of shit, such as attacking the Howard Government for allowing male-only scholarships to some university courses, maybe if they looked they would notice the statistics that less males get into university, the number of males in teaching etc is decreasing, yet they don't mind about women only scholarships (of which there is alot more of) in areas such as Engineering. This all while preventing males from offering help, seeing what is happening. This is opposed to some women groups (such as women in engineering) which openly welcomes male members.

Paying for others to have services is fine because I contribute little towards that, however, it is often paying for those who have the time and the money to spend on those sort of activities, instead of having to work to survive. (Even if they qualify for full youth allowance, you could not survive on that alone).

Your comparison to tax was awful. Although it is used a fair bit within the VSU vs USU debate by the USU supporters. If it was paid evenly over the year (even if it was split up into two segments) it would be alot easier to pay, instead of needing that, textbooks, other equipment, bonds for rent, telephone charges etc all at the same time.

 

[Enlightened_One]

The only payments that CAN'T be deferred under HECS are union fees. VSU will make it easier, not harder for poor kids to go to university, idiot.

Or do you think Sydney Universities $600 union fee (for example) somehow makes it easier for people from disadvantaged backgrounds to go to university?

Did you read the rest of the post. For the meagre amount of money I pay to the union I get all sorts of things including help with employment, help with classes, help if I consider dropping out, free food, free condoms, a free student newspaper, a radio station and lots more. The total value of all the free stuff I am getting from the union far outdoes the cost I think.
And some things, such as academic and social support are worth more than mere money.

 

[poloktim]

Well make an argument. Don't cower away like you can't justify a single thing you do. Make an argument. Don't get all indignant when I disagree. Justify. And when I come back with a counter your argument don't act like your ideals are the most right totally infallible argument on the face of the planet.

I was getting to my argument. I just wanted to act like a shithead smartarse first. We all know good arguments are made by attacking your opponent. If politics has taught me anything, it's that.

So far all I've got is that people don't want to pay for the queers to have a place and for sports fees but to have the important service of cheap beer. Phanatical comes on with his usual garb about radical feminists which he continues to take seriously, for some reason, and advance the same old argument that makes feminists even more angry because its a shit argument anyways.

I'm sure If he spend two weeks in a feminist class of somekind and took off his blinkers he would be able to argue them down (which is actually not hard to do if you know their own arguments) without looking like a pig and a closet homosexual. Which is, sorry Phanatical, your general problem. I can dig the whole male rights thing but as long as its not as poorly argued as the radical feminist view.

Women have a place here, and it's widely agreed that a women's space is a good idea. While the whole university is a breastfeeding friendly area, there are some people who will still make their objections known. Women are still abused, the Women's Space is a safe haven for them. Though men are also abused and don't have one, but that doesn't warrent the removal of the one for women.

Also, there's a difference between feminism and feminazism. Most of the group of feminists are indeed feminists. Women who only want the push for equality. There are the select few who want women to be above men, and for men to experience inequality, these are feminazis. Feminazis ruin it for everyone since they're extremists as well.

I agree the feminist argument is a shit argument. There are a few women who make themselves look butch, which is entirely their own business. Why should a woman's appearance be brought up in an argument? We've all learnt not to judge a book by its cover. Though I think Phanatical is looking at the women being treated "more" equally than men in some cases. One such case could be maternaty leave, but I think fathers get a paternaty leave now, don't they? If not, then that's something that I think should be changed (as a father has a right to be with his newborn as much as the mother does), but that's another argument. Though women aren't "more" equal than men, since women are the ones fighting for equalit, sometimes it looks that way.

The only decent point I've heard for VSU is neo saying that union fees inhibit poorer people getting to uni because you can't defer them. Thats It. Otherwise it's all been people winging about having to pay for queers and sports assoiciations they don't use even though those people subsidise their interests as well.

I thought if someone could show financial hardship, they could have their CSCs deferred, or even waved. Here, if you've got hardship you apply to the Dean of Students for a small grant. If people had chosen not to pay their money towards the SRC at UOW, then they still had to pay the same amount, but the SRC money went in the pool for a financial hardship grant. There was still money spent on student services (such as clubs and activities, sports association, etc), but the specialised amount that went straight to the SRC could be put somewhere else if you had a serious moral obligation. You paid for all the services that the SRC provides, but you didn't pay anything to them.

In some cases, like at uow, there is a problem. At some the problem doesnt merit the throwing away of the system.

You should've been there last year. It was a bloody shambles.

Methods may differ. People don't take seriously people like that. The fact that people take them seriously only gves them credibility.

I believe UOW has had some serious problem with their union and queer collectives and what not. I don't know. The university should step in if it's the case.

They tried. All that happened is the university was accused of running things in a homophobic manner. Also, last year the Union was in a shambles, it was factioned to be the president vs. the rest of the SRC. It started when the university refused to give one of it's most well located rooms to be the new Queer Space. They said they'll find somewhere else, but before the uni could there were lock-ins and everything. People had to be arrested.

I think you are being extreme there. OR you have idiots running the union.

I agree with the latter.

I'm sure the christian groups do what they like at your uni.

Then get harassed for being Christian. Though I think you're right the ECU (Evanglical Christian Union) does have a fair bit of power, but that's because they're very helpful. They're always involved with orientation, ask-me, et cetera. They probably do this as a means to gain members, but that doesn't quell the fact that they do it. I think some ECU extremists were responsible for some signs being removed in Sexuality week, but then I'm not sure, since all I heard was "fucking Christians." Rather amusing to hear a group who wants tolerance not be tolerant of others.

I certainly havn't been harassed about my heterosexuality or my male status by rampant feminists? There is more chance of being harassed on the basis of your christianity at unsw.

Actually I got harassed about my Christianity from a rampant feminazi (remember the difference, we don't want to bring feminists down by associating the word with some people) lesbian. Something about my religion blocking what I can really experience, and how I should convert to athiesm. But I think Christian groups are being harassed at every university. People perceive us as well off people who went to private schools. They make stupid assumptions on people without actually knowing anything.
I got harassed for going to a Catholic school (run by the Christian Brothers, not the Catholic Education Office). I was a rich bastard who needs to get a clue and have money put back into the public system. They don't know what my parents went through to send me to Catholic school, they don't know what resources my school actually has (after working in a public school, I can tell you, the one I went to is far better equipped than my school, they had brand new computers, we still had Windows 95 on P1 166 (or something) at the time, and that was in 2002. Fees weren't high, since being a Catholic school, they pushed the ethos of having it as accessible as possible to everyone. Funny how wrong assumptions can be.

Christian groups have extensive power at unsw and usyd. They do what they like.

I'd imagine they do. I think all religious groups would. They do what they like and hide behind the veil of religion. If I was uni admin, I wouldn't touch that with a ten metre pole. (The metric system is better than the Imperial system).

I have no issue with christian groups running within the abmit of the union. s they should be let run.

There are more religions than Christianity. Last year the SRC pushed Athiesm on people. They did something that everyone knows is not a very bright thing to do. Asking people to question their beliefs is one thing. But telling people that their beliefs are a load of shit is another.

If this is true your union sucks. Which is a pity. The members only have themselves to blame.

It does suck. However students voted in someone who seemed more decent for the position last year. From everything I've heard, this union is a little more to the right than last year's. Funding for the political groups who tell us what to think has been cut by a bit, and spending on the people that need the SRC has increased. They might bring hope back to the SRC.

 

[Rorix]

hi every body
so many new faces
yet i feel so strangely dissapointed .......

soooooo, are you PRO CHOICE or are you ANTI CHOICE?
someones probably said this before but im not reading 10 pages of crap just to troll asqy



LIBERAL KREW! WITH SO MANY FLAGS, HOW CAN WE BE WRONG?
http://www.liberals-usyd.org/gallery/o_week_2005_4.jpg

 

[Phanatical]

Ahh, but I believe the correct term is "Pro-Life", not "Anti-Choice". Just like "Pro-Choice" instead of "Anti-Life"

 

[absolution*]

Interesting thread. Good discussion. Keep it up chaps.

 

[absolution*]

Ahh, but I believe the correct term is "Pro-Life", not "Anti-Choice". Just like "Pro-Choice" instead of "Anti-Life"

No shit Sherlock.

 

[Rorix]

He was refering to unions. Not your pet habit topic of abortions and total sexual chastity

Sigh, where did you go off track asqy? Could have been a stand up liberal but you let THEM grab you.