Youth Allowance Eligibility (1 Viewer)

[aussie-boy]

You are all missing the point.

The more you give people money to make something "affordable" the more it drives the price up because they have more purchasing power to bid with, so it actually makes it less affordable.

That's why college tuition compared to average incomes is so much higher now than it was before all these government programs.

This stuff is economics 101.

But no, all you idiots think we need more government programs to solve a problem created by government programs.

But we are talking about public universities, where the profit motive is absent.
All extra money is put straight back into degree programs/research.

Before HECS, "college tuition" (are you American?) was free - I'm doubtful that the real cost of education provision has changed however; the only apparent difference being that the taxpayer footed the whole bill rather than 2/3 as they do now.

 

[loquasagacious]

But we are talking about public universities, where the profit motive is absent.
All extra money is put straight back into degree programs/research.

Before HECS, "college tuition" (are you American?) was free - I'm doubtful that the real cost of education provision has changed however; the only apparent difference being that the taxpayer footed the whole bill rather than 2/3 as they do now.

Who says universities should be public? Also before university was 'free' there were fees.

 

[loquasagacious]

We had this discussion way back on page one, I agreed a phase out would be best:



You still haven't explained why creating a whole new system is better than phasing out the existing system.

Just because you call it "market driven" doesn't mean its any better than the current system. You sound like a fucking politician.

Touché. Also sometimes I slip into sounding like a politician it is a side effect of my statist job.

Though your proposition covers a phase-out of HECS not a phase out of YA. I assume that similarly the max amount paid would fall as a percentage of the current. 100%>75%>etc. While all this is happening should the minimum wage be phased out concurrently?

Also I am curious as to how long you think it would take to phase out YA/HECS?

 

[loquasagacious]

Well then we must have a guarantee of tax cuts for the highest income bracket (which we will hopefully be in post-uni) as well as near interest-free loans if we are to accept Ms Gillard's proposed changes.

Gillard isn't proposing anything near as radical as the ideas being tossed around in this thread. Also I highly doubt that you would get any such guarantees from a party which is ideologically committed to the tax and spend welfare state.

 

[moll.]

You are all missing the point.

The more you give people money to make something "affordable" the more it drives the price up because they have more purchasing power to bid with, so it actually makes it less affordable.

That's why college tuition compared to average incomes is so much higher now than it was before all these government programs.

This stuff is economics 101.

But no, all you idiots think we need more government programs to solve a problem created by government programs.

Aussie is right. Most Australian universities are not-for-profit public institutions, which makes this premise questionable at best.
Also, admission to uni and desire to go isn't based solely upon affordability and purchasing power. You seem to have forgotten that it is based mostly upon ATAR/UAI. Which means that any higher demand for the same or similar amount of positions, would drive up the entrance criteria, not necessarily, if at all, the uni and tuition fees.

Also, a comparison of systems overseas show that college fees have risen in most all countries, even when it uses your beloved free-market system, such as in America:

...college costs are rising at the same time that state appropriations for aid are shrinking... From 2002 to 2004 alone, tuition rates at public schools increased by just over 14 percent, largely due to dwindling state funding. A more moderate increase of 6 percent occurred over the same period for private schools. Between 1982 and 2007, college tuition and fees rose three times as fast as median family income, in constant dollars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_education_in_the_United_States#cite_note-bfp081207-36

 

[John McCain]

Whatever bro, I'm no expert on suicide methods. The point is there are lots of methods you could use that the government doesn't effectively control

I am an expert on this subject. There are no methods that aren't risky or involve suffering- well there are a couple, darvon cocktail etc., but the medications involved are virtually impossible to acquire. I also have moral issues about leaving a mess.

Just take a few packets of paracetamol and wash it down with a bottle of vodka, you'll drift into a pleasant sleep, FOREVER.

Or slit your wrists and then lie in a bathtub of warm water, as the blood seaps out you'll peacefully drift off into the abyss.

Or just jump of a nice high cliff, totally painless.

Paracetamol is the most excruciating and stupid way to die.
It's virtually impossible to kill yourself by cutting your wrists.
People have survived falling out of airplanes.

m8 i can get you a unregistered rifle if u want

I wouldn't feel safe with anything less than a 12 gauge

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

Touché. Also sometimes I slip into sounding like a politician it is a side effect of my statist job.

Though your proposition covers a phase-out of HECS not a phase out of YA. I assume that similarly the max amount paid would fall as a percentage of the current. 100%>75%>etc. While all this is happening should the minimum wage be phased out concurrently?

Also I am curious as to how long you think it would take to phase out YA/HECS?

I would advocate phasing out YA (and indeed all welfare) in exactly the same way. Reduce the payments gradually, by say 1% per fortnight.

As for the minimum wage, there is no reason whatsoever for a gradual phase out. I'd scrap all industrial relations laws ASAP.

It wouldn't take long for the changes to be felt as employers increasingly hire more unskilled people at lower wages (people who are currently excluded entirely from the employment market and forced to rely on welfare). The phase out would only need to take a few years tops. Although most of the benefits would probably be felt within months.

The only welfare which would have to be phased out very gradually would be the aged pension. It is not the fault of old people that they were promised socially security, and those currently on the pension should be paid the full amount (including indexing) until they die.

Those who are approaching retirement should be paid a percentage of the current benefits, depending on their age at the time the abolition of the pension is announced, down to an age of about 30.

Those who are 30 or less should be made aware that they will not receive any pension, so they can adjust their savings plans now.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

I am an expert on this subject. There are no methods that aren't risky or involve suffering- well there are a couple, darvon cocktail etc., but the medications involved are virtually impossible to acquire. I also have moral issues about leaving a mess.


Paracetamol is the most excruciating and stupid way to die.
It's virtually impossible to kill yourself by cutting your wrists.
People have survived falling out of airplanes.


I wouldn't feel safe with anything less than a 12 gauge

Stop being a pussy.

If your life is so shit, a bit of pain during suicide process should not be all that great a concern.

 

[John McCain]

The consequences of a botched suicide attempt are more than 'a bit of pain'.

 

[David Spade]

its ok they are the most common mate
it would take your head off tbh

$600 will get you a 357 pistol

 

[mcflystargirl]

I would advocate phasing out YA (and indeed all welfare) in exactly the same way. Reduce the payments gradually, by say 1% per fortnight.

As for the minimum wage, there is no reason whatsoever for a gradual phase out. I'd scrap all industrial relations laws ASAP.

It wouldn't take long for the changes to be felt as employers increasingly hire more unskilled people at lower wages (people who are currently excluded entirely from the employment market and forced to rely on welfare). The phase out would only need to take a few years tops. Although most of the benefits would probably be felt within months.

The only welfare which would have to be phased out very gradually would be the aged pension. It is not the fault of old people that they were promised socially security, and those currently on the pension should be paid the full amount (including indexing) until they die.

Those who are approaching retirement should be paid a percentage of the current benefits, depending on their age at the time the abolition of the pension is announced, down to an age of about 30.

Those who are 30 or less should be made aware that they will not receive any pension, so they can adjust their savings plans now.

if we were to phase out all welfare what would happen to those not in work or those that work but are not earning enough to support themselves or family without any welfare these people would simply go in to massive amounts of debt. The aged pension should exist, these people have normally worked there whole life they deserve it.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

The consequences of a botched suicide attempt are more than 'a bit of pain'.

Yeah, so is the pain of your life if you're considering suicide, so just get it over and done with already.

 

[chicky_pie]

The views expressed are my own and do not represent in any way the opinions/plans of my employer and have not been informed by any data/information which is outside of the public domain.

I have voted no because while I think YA should exist in some form the form which I envisage is so different to it's current form as to be a completely new payment model. But before we jump to my conclusion some background:

• As you would know I am not a massive fan of taxation/welfare (the transfer system) in general. Insofar as it does exist I think that it should be flat not progressive and definitely not regressive.
• Youth Allowance and HECS are extremely regressive forms of welfare because they are recieved by people who will later go on to be the middle and upper classes however are paid for by everyone. The checkout operator at coles is subsidising your university education and lifestyle.
• YA/HECS do help disadvantaged people attend university and bootstrap however they also encourage over-consumption of education. I like the former and don't like the latter.

So for me the challenge is how to have a system which helps the disadvantaged to better themselves but is not regressive and does not encourage over-consumption. My ideas are still in a nascent stage but a rough overview is:

• YA abolished in it's current form
• HECS abolished in it's current form
• A new system called Higher-Education-Loan-Allowance (HELA-cool ) is established
• Universities are free to charge whatever fees they want
• HELA to provide a loan to students. The loan could cover fees (or a proportion thereof) and also pay a living allowance (a max living allowance figure would be set and students could elect to recieve any amount up to the max)
• The interest rate would be available in a similar way to a mortgage (fixed, variable, etc)
• Neither the interest or the principal would be payable until graduation. And the repayment term would be 10 years
• Parents, employers, etc could contract to pay for part of the fees (under whatever arrangement/conditions they want) which would reduce the amount the student would be loaning
• Existing HECS supported students would be grandfathered

The funding itself would work as follows:

• The HELA loans would initially be made by a government run (but corporatised) HELA-Fund,
• Other financial institutions would be free to compete
• The HELA fund would initially be primarily funded by the Government however would seek private investment primarily from institutional investors like pension/super funds.
• The HELA fund could also raise capital by selling bonds
• Over-time the HELA fund would transistion to privatisation

WTF HELA? What are you? An Arab?

 

[Oliver04]

I lived the 'practical realities' of my argument for my first two years at uni. The first year without YA and without support from my parents I lived on around $250 p/w

Rent: 120
Food: 50
Utilities: 50
Incidentals/Entertainment: 40

And being honest there was room to make cuts even in that. I could have gone without ADSL and a car. And the incidentals/entertainment could have been cut a bit.

I worked a couple of shifts a week at a supermarket and did some cash in hand tutoring together that pretty much covered my costs. I had worked full-time over the summer break before uni so I had money saved up to cover big purchases and give me a buffer if I didn't work for a week here or there.

When I became eligible for YA I crunched the numbers and was able to reduce my working hours slightly while still having an increase in my income. On YA+work I was on easy street.

As for your complaint that YA is insufficient, I don't really see a problem. Though of course I don't see any reason that YA should be sufficient, I see no reason why you shouldn't need to work. Cry me a river that YA might not pay enough to support entertainment....

$350 a fortnight rather, even I'm getting tongue tied.

 

[jennyfromdabloc]

$350 a fortnight rather, even I'm getting tongue tied.

That figure is irrelevant. Stop bringing it up.

You can make way more than $350 a fortnight working a shitty job.

 

[lil-chilean]

youth allowence should be given to everyone.shouldn't matter if your living in the north shore or the western suburbs .everyone should have equal right to it .however it should be given to thoses who pretty much come to school everyday .not to those who don't care and are only there becasue of their parents

 

[moll.]

Fair enough.
But would you kindly explain where all this money is going to come from? Thin air, mayhaps?

 

[loquasagacious]

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money [to spend]." - Thatcher

 

[aussie-boy]

Fair enough.
But would you kindly explain where all this money is going to come from? Thin air, mayhaps?

Get rid of means testing; replace it with an inheritance tax for YA recipients
If you want to claim financial independence from parents, you shouldn't be able to do it half-heartedly

 

[SylviaB]

.not to those who don't care and are only there becasue of their parents

lol lucky we have an objective way of measuring this