Do you support fiscal cut backs for the federal budget? (1 Viewer)

[isildurrrr1]

In terms of education even here you see a lot of immigrants who go to university but remember that those places aren't generally bought through academic effort but through a hell of a lot of money through international feeso

Yeah because there's no academic standards in assessing overseas students right? You do realize there's no such thing as "international fees" in America, only in-state/out of state and most of the top uni's are private anyway so citizenship does not matter at all. All the truly top uni's have SO MUCH funding most of it comes from donations and endowment rather than tuition. I'm just sick of this bullshit that "hurrr intl' have money therefore placements." Somebody obviously doesn't understand how university admission works at all. Even if they do get in, getting a degree is another thing unless you're going to come up with BS that intl students are marked easier because they pay more.

 

[isildurrrr1]

They are still stimulating the economy and it does take time for money to circulate to get the desired effect but indeed it does work.

The japs have been doing it for 20 years. They don't call their economy the lost decade for no reason.

 

[SylviaB]

They are still stimulating the economy and it does take time for money to circulate to get the desired effect but indeed it does work.

Japan went into the economic doldrums in the1990s. They’ve been trying that fiscal stimulus thing ever since: they’ve driven that national debt up to 200% of GDP in doing so. They’ve also done it in the approved manner, by building infrastructure. There’s hardly a stream in the entire country without its own bullet train station.

And now we’ve got “Abenomics”. Which is essentially a series of unconventional monetary policies. That is, getting around the fact that interest rates are already pretty much at zero and have been for the past couple of decades.


So let me get this right, the australian economy was boosted essentially instantly by Rudd's policies, but two decades or so isn't enough for Japan's policies to kick in?

 

[puremorning]

The japs have been doing it for 20 years. They don't call their economy the lost decade for no reason.

yup

 

[newcastle2012]

Yeah because there's no academic standards in assessing overseas students right? You do realize there's no such thing as "international fees" in America, only in-state/out of state and most of the top uni's are private anyway so citizenship does not matter at all. All the truly top uni's have SO MUCH funding most of it comes from donations and endowment rather than tuition. I'm just sick of this bullshit that "hurrr intl' have money therefore placements." Somebody obviously doesn't understand how university admission works at all. Even if they do get in, getting a degree is another thing unless you're going to come up with BS that intl students are marked easier because they pay more.

There are academic standards but even here in Australia if you have the money you can compensate for lack of intelligence e.g. commonwealth supported and non supported.

Anyway you obviously haven't understood today's society if you have the money you can get in and Universities put aside places for international students. In terms of getting a degree the ATAR for a course does not represent how hard or how high the quality of a course is but based purely on supply and demand (look it up UAC should have it) so getting in is the hardest part and getting a degree is easier even if you fail parts of the course the uni will just charge you money and you redo that part till it is satisfactory they don't care who gets a degree as long as they get their money.

 

[newcastle2012]

Japan went into the economic doldrums in the1990s. They’ve been trying that fiscal stimulus thing ever since: they’ve driven that national debt up to 200% of GDP in doing so. They’ve also done it in the approved manner, by building infrastructure. There’s hardly a stream in the entire country without its own bullet train station.

And now we’ve got “Abenomics”. Which is essentially a series of unconventional monetary policies. That is, getting around the fact that interest rates are already pretty much at zero and have been for the past couple of decades.


So let me get this right, the australian economy was boosted essentially instantly by Rudd's policies, but two decades or so isn't enough for Japan's policies to kick in?

Read this particularly the history part
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Decade_(Japan)
it shows the banks were investing in unprofitable and debt ridden firms therefore providing a black hole for the money as it wouldn't circulate but instead be sent overseas in payment of debts and such while Keynesian economics works if the money is circulated domestically providing demand for goods but sending it overseas does nothing therefore providing very little in no effect whatsoever and when people see firms falling left and right it hurt consumer confidence to the point it ended up in a negative spiral as people were spoked they put it into the banks, banks were losing the money in unprofitable firms therefore reducing the money available for circulation an effective opposite of what Keynesian economics says to do and what Australia implemented. In Australia's case however the money was circulated domestically as people saw it as "free money" with the cash splash meaning they brought consumption forward stimulating the economy.

Japan's problem however was across the board with the asset bubble bursting not affecting one area but many of the economy remember the GFC was caused by sub-prime mortgage loans in property and when that failed it had a flow on effect to the rest of the world but when consumers are shocked to the point they severely limit discretionary spending (which in Japan still hasn't recovered particularly in luxury goods) it severely severely limits the effectiveness of this as people are more willing to save than spend contracting the economy.

I will simplify it all down Australia invests $10 in the economy and as such the economy increases in value by $100 but Japan invests $10, $4 are lost to unprofitable firms and as the consumers aren't spending it only realizes $36.

Get a year 12 economics book and it should explain everything that I have said please research before posting tho.

 

[SylviaB]

it shows the banks were

If a policy doesn't do what its supposed to do, that means its a bad policy.

Say the government wants to maximise tax revenue, and it says everyone has to give their entire income to the government. This leads to people running away or hiding their incomes, and as a result tax revenue falls. Do we say "Well the policy was fine, but everyone else stuffed it all up"?

 

[isildurrrr1]

There are academic standards but even here in Australia if you have the money you can compensate for lack of intelligence e.g. commonwealth supported and non supported.

Anyway you obviously haven't understood today's society if you have the money you can get in and Universities put aside places for international students. In terms of getting a degree the ATAR for a course does not represent how hard or how high the quality of a course is but based purely on supply and demand (look it up UAC should have it) so getting in is the hardest part and getting a degree is easier even if you fail parts of the course the uni will just charge you money and you redo that part till it is satisfactory they don't care who gets a degree as long as they get their money.

There's a certain amount of placements for CSP, intl and domestic full fee, it's not like a free for all that the uni's go "lol who has more money!!!!" Uni's get subsidized by the gov for CSP anyway, they're getting paid practically the same amount regardless of status. How many people do you know is a full fee domestic? Yeah sure rich people can buy their kids into uni, but it doesn't mean shit if they fail their degree. My point is, getting into uni is one thing but getting adequate marks is another. Most int'l students bust their ass more than local students anyway, it's mostly got to do with the "immigrant" effect.

 

[newcastle2012]

If a policy doesn't do what its supposed to do, that means its a bad policy.

Say the government wants to maximise tax revenue, and it says everyone has to give their entire income to the government. This leads to people running away or hiding their incomes, and as a result tax revenue falls. Do we say "Well the policy was fine, but everyone else stuffed it all up"?

Policy isn't just what it does but how it does it as well and at the moment Japan has the right policy but isn't utilizing it properly. Anyway people Russia in the earlier half of the 20th century thought communism was great but it didn't end up being implemented the way they expected leading to terrible consequences.

Anyway isildurrrr1 do you seriously think that Uni's get the same amount of money for each? Have you not seen how much more they charge international students? try looking at law at Sydney and you didn't see what I said getting into uni at times is the hardest part (law at Sydney) but once they are in they can't be kicked out of the Uni and just simply repeat subjects till they pass you can't fail in today's age people either drop out or complete the degree. I agree that international students however do try a lot harder but when you deny local students a position in uni for a rich international student who doesn't have the intelligence for a degree then I think something is wrong.

 

[isildurrrr1]

Policy isn't just what it does but how it does it as well and at the moment Japan has the right policy but isn't utilizing it properly. Anyway people Russia in the earlier half of the 20th century thought communism was great but it didn't end up being implemented the way they expected leading to terrible consequences.

Anyway isildurrrr1 do you seriously think that Uni's get the same amount of money for each? Have you not seen how much more they charge international students? try looking at law at Sydney and you didn't see what I said getting into uni at times is the hardest part (law at Sydney) but once they are in they can't be kicked out of the Uni and just simply repeat subjects till they pass you can't fail in today's age people either drop out or complete the degree. I agree that international students however do try a lot harder but when you deny local students a position in uni for a rich international student who doesn't have the intelligence for a degree then I think something is wrong.

They charge more because they are not SUBSIDIZED. Uni students put in X amount of money, commonwealth foots in the rest of the bill, that's how CSP works, uni's aren't getting less money per student payment from a domestic vs intl, the taxpayer just foots in the bill. And Australia is doing quite well in education, with it being our number 2 export behind resource, it's a 15 billion dollar a year EXPORT.

And you obviously haven't been in uni, lol people can't just "fail and repeat subjects till pass," ever heard of academic probation? Uni's will EXPEL YOU if you don't keep up your marks. Have fun being that drop kick that gets a 50 WAM, see how far that gets you when your cohort is getting 65+ WAM. And no, Uni's don't "sacrifice domestic students" in place of accepting an international student, they always have SEPARATE placements.

https://my.unsw.edu.au/student/academiclife/assessment/AcademicStandingExplanation.html

Your Academic Standing is EXCLUSION (Semester 2 only)

The University has serious concerns about your ability to complete your Program.

You have previously reached an Academic Standing level of Suspension which is why your Academic Standing level is now Exclusion.

You are excluded from the University for two academic years and you must re-apply for re-admission at the end of the exclusion period. See Admissions information.

You think a uni would want to keep a shitty under-performing student?

 

[hayleyemma96]

This is a load of shit.

Need I remind you of the front page of the Daily Telegraph re: you have the chance to kick this mob out.
Nice to see we had an impartial media during the election. There was hype about irresponsibility and a budget emergency when in fact, there was not.
I guarantee the majority people voted based on what they were told by News Limited. Everyone I have spoken to has said they voted liberal because "labor for us into debt and debt is bad" when in fact the debt was neither unsustainable nor bad


Hayley

 

[hayleyemma96]

Domination/monopolization=/=dictatorship

Hence the use of the word "almost". Never said it was but he controls 80% of the media in Australia


Hayley

 

[hayleyemma96]

Exactly the highly liberal media is epitomised through that article. Those topics they try and disprove are true I mean for an example this one. They say that government spending doesn't stimulate an economy. This is dis proven through looking at Germany prior to WW2, Keynesian economics, Australia during the GFC ("cash splash"), Construction of the Harbour Bridge and other major works financed by the government. This all shows that government spending does indeed stimulate an economy. That article is seriously the most biased thing I have ever seen and clearly the person who wrote it had absolutely no clue of how economics works in the slightest.

I agree. While the Stimulus Package worked in the short-term, it left long-term negative effects
Completely agree about the biased article. The use of words such as "left-wing indoctrination" highlight that. Wouldn't trust it


Hayley

 

[nerdasdasd]

Need I remind you of the front page of the Daily Telegraph re: you have the chance to kick this mob out.
Nice to see we had an impartial media during the election. There was hype about irresponsibility and a budget emergency when in fact, there was not.
I guarantee the majority people voted based on what they were told by News Limited. Everyone I have spoken to has said they voted liberal because "labor for us into debt and debt is bad" when in fact the debt was neither unsustainable nor bad


Hayley

+1, it's the ability for the government to make the repayments and the cost of borrowing that is bad. If the australia can pay the debt back, then it is fine (Howard government), also if the interest rate is too high ... then the debt (net debt) keeps going higher and higher (look at Greece).

 

[hayleyemma96]

+1, it's the ability for the government to make the repayments and the cost of borrowing that is bad. If the australia can pay the debt back, then it is fine (Howard government), also if the interest rate is too high ... then the debt (net debt) keeps going higher and higher (look at Greece).

I agree with that but I'm saying that the majority was focused on the fact that debt existed rather than the ability of the govt to make repayments.
Didn't help that a few major policies and programs failed unfortunately e.g mining tax, insulation scheme, BER etc.
The LNP was able to capitalise on these mistakes. People tend to focus on the negatives rather than positives.
Wish Shorten and the ALP would step up their game as the opposition. Plenty of things to oppose.


Hayley

 

[nerdasdasd]

I agree with that but I'm saying that the majority was focused on the fact that debt existed rather than the ability of the govt to make repayments.
Didn't help that a few major policies and programs failed unfortunately e.g mining tax, insulation scheme, BER etc.
The LNP was able to capitalise on these mistakes. People tend to focus on the negatives rather than positives.
Wish Shorten and the ALP would step up their game as the opposition. Plenty of things to oppose.


Hayley

XD. Yes Hayley. Hence why it's called the opposition .

I know you were trying to say that

 

[SylviaB]

Policy isn't just what it does but how it does it as well and at the moment Japan has the right policy but isn't utilizing it properly.

You said the banks aren't doing the "right" thing. That this wasn't anticipated by policymakers is on them, not the banks.

Anyway people Russia in the earlier half of the 20th century thought communism was great but it didn't end up being implemented the way they expected leading to terrible consequences.

It had nothing to with "how it was implemented", it was always bound to fail because it makes no economic sense.

 

[hayleyemma96]

Bump


Hayley

 

[puremorning]

Hayley

Hayley