Dear Mr English, I don't want a tax cut

[MikeL]

Just a quick question it is related , what happened in the early 1990s that suddenly made tertiary education user pays ?

Stephen

two things happened:
First, an ideologically driven shift in the perception of tertiary education, from what economists term a "public good" to a "private good". That is, the purpose and benefits of education were seen as mainly personal rather than societal. This is part of the swing away from the political approach of the 1930s to 1970s (in which social justice, equality and the role of the state were prominent) back to a more individualistic approach in which the role of the state is reduced and the emphasis is on private enterprise and private profits.
Second, the right question (How do we lift the overall standard of education of our people?) was given the wrong answer: send them all to university. The huge increase in numbers studying at teritiary level means that the tax-payer funded university education that I received, as part of a small minority in those days that thought, weirdly, that spending three or four years in an ivory tower learning useless things was actually not such a bad idea, became too expensive. The inevitable consequence of BAs and BComs for everyone is that the degrees are dumbed down and honest trades for which School Cert used to be adequate are now despised by everyone except those canny individuals who realise that they're better off than the misguided young men and women who delay their entry into the workforce by three or four years and then find that their qualification doesn't guarantee them a well-paying job but simply saddles them with a horrendous debt that will be a millstone around their necks for much of the rest of their lives.
Smart, eh?

[Robert Taylor]

Sorry... Maybe I should start a blog.



Spot on. I was saying to someone the other day that it would be OK to have an honest conversation about the "tough stuff" we might have to face, as long as it was honest, non-ideological, and acknowledged past successes and failures... Pigs might fly, though.

Anyway, I've strayed way too far off the tax topic so maybe I should leave with a recent parting quote from Nouriel Roubini (who was predicting trouble in the US quite a while before it happened): "From here on I see things getting worse.... What needs to be done is clear. We need to raise taxes and cut spending. Otherwise we're going to get a fiscal train wreck," he said. "It's going to take years of sacrifices." Maybe worth a think.

Ive got to say that both yourself and Winston 001 have hit the nail on the head.

Many nations need tough solutions but the politicians are loathe to spell it out honestly as they would then be unelectable. The recent UK elections being a case in point, that nation is a basklet case but no-one wants the pain to sort it out

Another point to ponder on....irrespective of what side of the political fence you are on we are all ( effectively ) hypocrites. We all want cheap goods such as the clothes we wear on our backs, that condones that they are made by sweatshop workers that work for rates and conditions we would personally not tolerate.

Personally I embrace capitalism allied with conservative politics, but with a sense of fair play. Also where it is doing something productive rather than brazenly speculative.

[MikeL]

Personally I embrace capitalism allied with conservative politics, but with a sense of fair play.

Since capitalism is the ultimate pyramid scheme, the concept of "capitalism with a sense of fair play" might strike some people as an oxymoron. Still, it's an interesting idea. Some country should try it one of these days.

[Ocean1]

two things happened:

Uncannily accurate!

Extract from your post doctoral thesis perchance?

[Winston001]

First, an ideologically driven shift in the perception of tertiary education, from what economists term a "public good" to a "private good". That is, the purpose and benefits of education were seen as mainly personal rather than societal.

Good post and I've trimmed it simply to highlight central issues. The basic reason university fees were introduced (but only to the extent of 25%) was that after the 1987 recession, suddenly a lot of students and their parents decided tertiary education was the best step to the future. The govt faced huge costs and ultimately 4 million people could not fund it.

Also, apprentices worked and paid their own way through studies, while tertiary students got a free ride. Hardly fair.

Second, the right question (How do we lift the overall standard of education of our people?) was given the wrong answer: send them all to university.

The huge increase in numbers studying at tertiary level meant that the tax-payer funded university education.....became too expensive. The inevitable consequence of BAs and BComs for everyone is that the degrees are dumbed down and honest trades for which School Cert used to be adequate are now despised....

Spot on.

Incidentally I am a firm believer in education for knowledge, not a meal ticket. When I was at varsity in the 70s people still thought that way. Doing a degree in Philosophy, Political Studies, Anthropology, Latin, or Phenomenology of Religion was an intellectual pursuit without any thought of needing a job at the end. Because usually a job of some type turned up, often secondary teaching.

We need widely educated people in our society. Thinkers. High minded thinking is so often absent from debate in NZ.

[Ocean1]

High minded thinking is so often absent from debate in NZ.

Oh no it's not!

[Robert Taylor]

The govt faced huge costs and ultimately 4 million people could not fund it.

Heck that not only applies to funding tertiary education. So many people expect the government to fund this and the government to fund that. But they forget where the money comes from in the first place and how we have such a disorted ratio of dependents to taxpayers.
More user pays.



Spot on.

Incidentally I am a firm believer in education for knowledge, not a meal ticket. When I was at varsity in the 70s people still thought that way. Doing a degree in Philosophy, Political Studies, Anthropology, Latin, or Phenomenology of Religion was an intellectual pursuit without any thought of needing a job at the end. Because usually a job of some type turned up, often secondary teaching.

We need widely educated people in our society. Thinkers. High minded thinking is so often absent from debate in NZ.[/QUOTE]

[Brian d marge]

Cant find evidence of the government of the late eighty faced with a large educational bill ( the way the reporting changed around that time )

I can find large restructurings, with people returning to education but numbers at polytec overall rose steadily from 79 to 84 with peaks of up to 100 000 and the way the government looked at the educational model but No sudden increase in 18 year olds suddenly wanting to go to uni
we have gone a little off topic , but it is related to the orginal question that is do we continue with this lasse faire user pays policy , which as I posted before has ( i think caused to many problems in NZ )

or do we return to the egalitarian society where (yes) you pay for the drop kick ( remembering that they are only a small part of society ) is it at all possible ?

I dont mind paying tax as long as it isnt spend on silk underpants , overseas trips and drop-kicks that really should be in institution

BTW where did they go, oh yes the police do it now

Stephen

sorry for half arsed reply I am in between things and can only grab a few min at a time

[avgas]

We need widely educated people in our society. Thinkers. High minded thinking is so often absent from debate in NZ.

Completely agree with this. 100%

[avgas]

Oh no it's not!

Ok, care to elaborate?
Or were you just one of those "NO!" children?

[Winston001]

oh no it's not!

Oh yes it is!

[mashman]

The govt faced huge costs and ultimately 4 million people could not fund it.

hardly surprising since the "workers" have been subsidising business for decades...

[Winston001]

Ok, care to elaborate?
Or were you just one of those "NO!" children?

It's Monty Python, from the Argument Clinic....

[Winston001]

hardly surprising since the "workers" have been subsidising business for decades...

??? If that's correct, surely the "workers" would all go into business themselves and get their hands on the subsidies.

[Brian d marge]

working on a reply hang on

Yes. Tiswas me who brought Germany into the conversation but not for the reasons which led to your reply

As I am on my way to a meeting and am on this train for awhile I will make my views clearer

The United States of walmart BP ltd is not interested in you or me or NZ but in making a profit or returning on investment

which means the decisions it makes tend to be Unsustainable in an environmentally humanistic way

example food

food and it's production is bordering on evil ( NZ is quite good but not perfect example, run off in to a large river in NZ has made it quite polluted,
Fish stocks near collapse ( blue-fin). All so we can get cheap cod and the japan here can get their sushi

just been talking to a friend of mind and she works in the investment industry and she was telling me the numbers that she invests their clients are from all over but she suspect a lot of it is oil money they are big and her company has teams of specialists looking for a return i doubt they look at the environmental issues when making the decisions

I don't think it's sustainable

how does this apply to NZ. From memory when the Chicago Market introduced a new method of trading caused money to move in and out of countries needed to be attractive towards investors or the money would flow out and was helped by the. Computer

NZ is doing very well in this respect , open government stable currency little red tape and a dependence on investment lessens the strength of the government and the power transfers to the investor

after all if the money stops what ever that money is funding stops to

and if the profit isn't attractive the investment is withdrawn

yes it's a two way street some larger NZ companies are investing overseas but is that money coming back to NZ. ( maybe but it's has't made a dent on our balance of payments)

On saying that I am not saying that foreign investment is bad but a 51% controlling interest tends not to have the local community in mind when money is involved

personally I make my coin overseas but I shop in NZ ( I know the communication is terrible but I feel the business is trust-able and the quality tends to be good

the reason I mentioned Germany is because NZ is being destroyed by these overseas interests and some people are not interested in protecting a valuable asset

I find it strange that Maori whose very culture involves the land is willing to let so much be foreign owned ( I am assuming controlling interest)

the younger generation just needs to say enough. NZ for NZ by NZ

the never had it so good generation is moving into retirement and will soon be gone, with that voting block gone people can start to rebuild to what it one was

Dont get me wrong this isn't an all or nothing winner takes all certainly some areas have to be trimmed and other expanded and successive government have done quite well

but the influences brought to bear on NZ have produced a society which I don't really want to be a part of ( yes Japan is similar but the higher standard of living and the culture is just more palatable )

Stephen

hope this is ok hard to do the answer justice