Update me on VSU (1 Viewer)

[Xayma]

Zero. It's like the GST.

It wouldn't be nearly as complicated to roll back like the GST would be. WA has done it before. The only issue would be ALOT of pissed of students (sound familiar?).

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I would have no problem with a national referendum on the issue (rather than that it's.. not really that big a deal), however I think a university referendum is a stupid idea because current university students aren't the only people whom this affects and it's fair enough to say the message at university campuses has been rather one sided.

 

[walrusbear]

Personal attacks have nothing to do with it. If you want to discuss ideology don't bring up personal attacks. Both sides can bitch about this and that who and who this and that but it has nothing to do with ideology.

Who is right and wrong who did something unfair etc is about ethics.
------

I (we?) are trying to get to you understand where you stand ideologically. Since people keep saying this is an ideological reform.

It is VERY CLEAR from your ideal type that you are a economic left and a conservative socially. Your reforms and ideal type for USU relfects your social conservatism. This is the arm on which you agree with the current Liberal government. However you do not agree with their economic ideology which supports VSU.

Remember you can break up ideologies. The Liberal party has a conservative social policy (the arm on which you agree) and a Free market, Smithian economic policy geared to increasing economic activity (which you do not agree with)

Essentially you would support USU if it contained different and more conservative values. Essentially what you demonstrated in your ideal type.

yeah my major issue is that there is a pretend 'middle stance' that doesn't really exist
or is at least contradicted by other comments made

for instance, your notion of both sides has characterised the VSU side as somewhat rational ("i completely understand why some students would think otherwise") and the pro-USU as violent and misguided (your sensational blog posting, "just because i'm not resorting to personal attacks on students", which implies that i and other supporters of USU do).
so stop pretending to be moderate

like most people here you want a modified version of what we have
fine
so please cease with the silly characterisations of the 'ideological' nuts

EDIT: this is directed at Phan, btw

 

[Phanatical]

The "Middle Way" ideology addresses many of the issues that pro-VSU students have about the Union. Not all of them, of course, but enough so that opposing the membership of the student unions is no longer worth the time and effort.

Yes, I have an economically left ideology - and I believe that everybody should pitch in to make our university a better place. But I am also aware of the fact that $540 is an incredibly high fee to demand off students. I support reducing this fee, amalgamating some services (to reduce administrative costs), and making it deferable for up to a year. This will ease the squeeze on students, and address many of the flaws in the USYD model of USU. But as for the "choice" of whether to be part of a Union or not - I don't think this would be an issue if the Union wasn't actually called a "Union". Fuck trade unions - of course we should have a choice to join a workplace union. But a student "union" is not supposed to be like a trade union - but rather, the joining of the two goals that those before us intended for their students - a academic understanding, and a communal understanding, teaching people how to be better members of our society.

I understand the sentiments of pro-VSU students, because I too wish to see change at our university. Like pro-VSU students, I am immensely dissatisfied with what our student organisations represent, and my work is driven by the same desire to rid the student body of the corrupt element. But for me to say I understand pro-VSU sentiment does NOT mean I agree with it. I don't. But I respect their point of view, because many of the pro-VSU student leaders have demonstrated that their stance is what they believe to be best for their fellow students. The implication that you and other posters have made that anybody who doesn't agree with maintaining the status quo is "contradictory", or "nuts" is completely wrong.

There have been Many in this thread who have directed personal insults against me for my beliefs. But I assure you, what happens in this thread is a drop in the proverbial ocean compared to the sort of heckling I get when I am on main campus.

 

[Phanatical]

You're an idiot.

My policies speak for themselves. They represent a belief that student organisations should represent student interests first and foremost. As SRC President, I believe I will have accomplished my goal when I can meet with the Socialist camp leader, the Labor faction leader, the Liberal faction leader, leaders of clubs and societies, students from other campuses and others - and feel that I have done my absolute best to represent each and every one of them. The Middle Way proposal is a NON-PARTISAN policy.

 

[Phanatical]

"The Quah Report" is a name given to my articles by my former classmates back when I was in year 10, and it was a glorified gossip column. I've been writing this damn thing for the last five years, and not only does it give me a mouthpiece for my viewpoints, it's also helped me develop my writing skills.

My personal profile was provided by a friend of mine.


EDIT: An actual entry from Five years ago to the day. Note that this is the writing of a 15 year old me, but hey - it's a good trip down memory lane.

23 August, 2000:

Eighth Day of the Olympics. This swimming thing is confusing me. Everyone is so excited about seeing eight people swimming in a pool. If humankind were intended to swim, we wouldn't live above ground and we'd be able to breathe underwater.

Why I hate the Olympics:

1) The Olympic Games are now just an excuse for commercialism and advertising, allowing the rich to become richer while knocking those who can't afford sponsorship out of the running.

2) I hate the ceremonies. They don't focus on talent, they only focus on how cute you look. To be a singer in the modern era, you have to look good. Singing is optional, and I think Ric Birch knew that, especially that last part.

3) The Slogans make me Sick! 'Cuba Cuba Cuba! Oi Oi Oi!'

4) If people were meant to swim, we'd have webbed feet, we would live under the water, and we'd be able to breathe in the water.

 

[Sarah]

Remember you can break up ideologies. The Liberal party has a conservative social policy (the arm on which you agree) and a Free market, Smithian economic policy geared to increasing economic activity (which you do not agree with)

Essentially you would support USU if it contained different and more conservative values. Essentially what you demonstrated in your ideal type.

Actually, Adam Smith's main ideas are mainly geared towards overall economic development.

I think the Liberal party espouse certain ideas of Adam Smith (a Classical Political Economist) but moreso Mercantalist (e.g trade deficit, CAD is bad, we must export more than import) and Neo-classical economic ideas.

As to Student unions, they should be focusing on how to make themselves relevant if/when VSU comes in

 

[Not-That-Bright]

a guy on 702 this arvo was talking about his book "the end of globalism", it sounded really interesting... tho i found quite a few of his ideas and his examples (such as using argentina as a model of ecnomic success) to be a bit strange.

 

[Sarah]

What does he mean. The end of 'globalism'?

Globalisation is sometimes seen as 'end game' or the 'end of history' when it comes the the fulfillment of Smithian ideas.

The 'End of History'- wasn't that Fukiyama?

Perhaps what that author meant was a shift toward local communities and sustainable development and lifestyle

 

[Not-That-Bright]

What does he mean. The end of 'globalism'?

Globalisation is sometimes seen as 'end game' or the 'end of history' when it comes the the fulfillment of Smithian ideas.

here u go, have a read.
http://afr.com/articles/2004/02/19/1077072774981.html
it'll probably be up on
http://www.abc.net.au/sydney/richardglover/
tomorrow.

A more condensed version;
http://www.theage.com.au/news/revie...m/2005/08/12/1123353484883.html?oneclick=true

 

[walrusbear]

The 'End of History'- wasn't that Fukiyama?

Perhaps what that author meant was a shift toward local communities and sustainable development and lifestyle

that was about espousing late capitalism and 'liberal democracy' as the final stage of social development wasn't it?

 

[Sarah]

that was about espousing late capitalism and 'liberal democracy' as the final stage of social development wasn't it?

I think so. I can't be certain though. Asqy would probably know.

The only reason I recall Fukiyama was because my politics lecture in first yr mentioned how his (Fukiyama's) text had been criticised

 

[walrusbear]

he's a neoliberal thinker
his premise was that we should all embrace free markets etc. because it's the final stage of social development. i think anyway

he also signed this piece of shit:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

 

[withoutaface]

Beazley leads on students
Samantha Maiden
August 24, 2005
KIM Beazley has backed the right of university students to choose whether to join a student union under a historic policy shift designed to outmanoeuvre warring Coalition MPs, and protect sporting clubs and services on campus.

The landmark decision signals the Labor Party has abandoned its long-held philosophical commitment to compulsory student unionism after a 30-year-battle between conservatives and the Left on campus.

However, Education Minister Brendan Nelson warned last night that the ALP back-flip was a mirage because the party still supported the idea of forcing students to pay a compulsory student service fee for non-political activities, including sports and childcare.

After backing a compromise deal to amend voluntary student union legislation, Mr Beazley yesterday confirmed for the first time that the ALP would not seek to repeal or overturn the policy of voluntary student unionism if it won the next federal election.

Deputy Leader Jenny Macklin confirmed the policy shift would be taken to voters at the next election.

"It is a change. Students would still be able to belong to a student organisation and vote on who they want to represent them, but that would be organised separately from the amenities fee," she said.

The move, formulated to place pressure on wavering Coalition MPs to back a compromise deal, would ban compulsory fees for political activities but retain a student service fee for childcare, sporting clubs and counselling.

However, it is also set to spark divisions in Coalition ranks, with conservative MPs demanding a hardline voluntary student service model that does not allow universities to charge a compulsory student service fee.

Because only a small proportion of student union fees of up to $500 a year is currently used for political activities, the ALP's compromise plan would also be unlikely to reduce the compulsory fees by more than 15 per cent.

Earlier this month, the ALP announced it would try to amend the legislation to include a compromise plan to put pressure on wavering Nationals MP to defy the Government's hardline approach.

The changes reflect a push by Queensland Nationals senator Barnaby Joyce and university vice-chancellors to ban compulsory fees for political activities but protect sporting clubs and campus services.

Ms Macklin said it would be up to students to decide on their affiliations. "We're saying that students should be able to decide whether or not they join the student union," she told The Australian.

"This is what exists in WA and Victoria now under Labor governments. This is a practical model that we believe will save these services."

Mr Beazley said yesterday: "It's not a policy we agree with but we recognise that everyone has got to give."

Ms Macklin, asked whether the ALP would dump the policy before the next election or overturn the reforms if a Beazley government won office, replied: "No. This is our policy.

"What's been very impressive with the way the student organisations have responded to the current debate, and the reason why they prefer our amendment is they realise ... this is the only way. We're trying to be practical in the face of basically all these services being lost."

However, Dr Nelson said the ALP had been dragged "kicking and screaming" to a position that would still force students to pay compulsory fees.

"You could drive a truck through the loopholes of the Labor Party's position," he said.

"They are still clinging to the socialist view. When you unpack the detail ... you still have a violation of the basic principle that rich and poor students should not pay a flat tax.

"Jenny Macklin is adopting a statement which reflects the Liberal Party's position as a flag of convenience."

National Union of Students president Felix Eldridge said yesterday students had reluctantly embraced the reform plan and urged Nationals to support the proposal.

NUS will announce today a new television advertising campaign urging regional communities to "defend our communities" and lobby Coalition MPs to dump the hardline approach.

The union has joined with internet campaigners GetUp in an email campaign and television advertisements to be launched in Lismore and Townsville.

Campuses with the most students logging on to the GetUp website will have the advertisements screened in their area.

"What the ALP has delivered is a practical response," Mr Eldridge said yesterday. "It's not the National Union of Students' policy because we support a system where students have full control over student resources. It's clearly better by a long shot than the scorched approach that has been proposed by Education Minister Brendan Nelson."

The Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee has applauded Senator Joyce's stance over student unionism.

"The AVCC has been asking for a separate services and amenities fee all along to ensure that the current level of services and amenities on university campuses remain," AVCC chief executive John Mullarvey said.

"The AVCC does not oppose the introduction of voluntary student unionism; however, the loss of a separate compulsory services and amenities fee is a different matter altogether."

AVCC figures reveal less than 15per cent of the $160million collected each year in university fees actually go towards student unions, clubs and societies.

Seems to be an attempt to split the Coalition down the middle and try to push through something similar to the Victorian VSR model.

 

[Generator]

Clever Move by Big Kim.

Or, as someone asked Macklin earlier today, it's yet another example of Beazley's inability to stand firm. That isn't an interpretation that I agree with in this instance, though, however critical I may be off Beazley in general.

 

[Generator]

Hmmm... I stuffed up that post. Eh.

Joyce backs Labor's VSU deal

 

[walrusbear]

felix is right, this is better than nothing

it would be absurd for the liberal party to oppose this

 

[walrusbear]

Hmmm... I stuffed up that post. Eh.

Joyce backs Labor's VSU deal

yeah i had no idea what it meant
what were you talking about

also
what's going on tomorrow?
is it a rally? what does a 'day of action' entail?

 

[Generator]

Heh I was trying to correct the post that Asquithian quoted, even though there was no real need. It was a stupid idea.

I have no idea, and the NUS site (www.unistudent.com) doesn't have much beyond that there is a day of action tomorrow. I didn't even know about it till I walked over the chalk markings earlier today, too.

Even though Felix said that it's better than nothing, he (and all students, of course ) is disappointed at Labor's move - http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2005/s1445299.htm

 

[walrusbear]

Heh I was trying to correct the post that Asquithian quoted, even though there was no real need. It was a stupid idea.

I have no idea, and the NUS site (www.unistudent.com) doesn't have much beyond that there is a day of action tomorrow. I didn't even know about it till I walked over the chalk markings earlier today, too.

Even though Felix said that it's better than nothing, he (and all students, of course ) is disappointed at Labor's move - http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2005/s1445299.htm

what exactly is covered in the labor party plan?
just welfare and sport?