and what a classically bad piccie.
the alp have no idea how their pr machine has stalled

http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2013/04/15/1226621/098690-gonski.jpg

Quote:

..... The federal government's announcement that it will fund the Gonski school reforms through a cut of $2.3 billion to universities is one of the most bizarre announcements in recent times........ .......... David Gonski made a similar point in his statement over the weekend. ''I fervently believe in and will continue to advocate that increases be made in funding the university sector,'' he said.....................

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/raiding-tertiary-to-pay-secondary-makes-no-sense-20130415-2hw1i.html

quite similar to how they botched the tax reform a few years ago.
'member the one we paid for but were banned from reading ?

wonder who funded the hats and placards???

The media took the picture - typical

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 16^th, 2013 at 10:48am:

The media took the picture - typical SOB

Go away troll.

cods wrote on Apr 16^th, 2013 at 10:45am:

wonder who funded the hats and placards???

our taxes.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 16^th, 2013 at 12:40pm:

cods wrote on Apr 16th, 2013 at 10:45am: wonder who funded the hats and placards??? our taxes.

ohhhh you guessed... bugger.

Backdrop looks like the govt.
What are the kids doing out of school ?
Who are the other retarded leftardian adults there ?
is it immoral to rope kids into a political stunt ?

It so sucks

Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 16^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:

Backdrop looks like the govt. What are the kids doing out of school ? Who are the other retarded leftardian adults there ? is it immoral to rope kids into a political stunt ? It so sucks

Good to see kids smiling.  They have no idea what's in store when Pyne gets in.  What's his policy? Oh that right, to call Gonski a cronski and not have any alternative.  No surprises, the poodle cross chuahaha only knows how to bark.

alevine, it was "conski" actually, as in a con-job. And you seem to be the only puppy who's barking.
I suppose things will improve when you're off mother's milk.

bogarde73 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2013 at 1:39pm:

alevine, it was "conski" actually, as in a con-job. And you seem to be the only puppy who's barking. I suppose things will improve when you're off mother's milk.

Oh I'm not barking. I'm commenting on all the noise from Pyne, without a single discussion on actual policy. Conski, cronksi, it's the same crap from the poodle chihiuaha.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8lHSxLa_xv8/T7A4M0uo5uI/AAAAAAAAFyg/-Uc0JSYH15g/s1600/Poodle_Chihuahua_mix_Nene_IMG_5522blog.jpg
"CONSKI CONSKI BARK BARK BARK"

cods wrote on Apr 16^th, 2013 at 10:45am:

wonder who funded the hats and placards???

------------



What should be done with 97,898 Workchoices mousepads?

The Howard Government’s controversial Workchoices legislation is dead, but there’s a lingering reminder: 97,898 Workchoices mouse pads!

And now the Rudd Government is after your ideas for what can be done with the thousands of mousepads created by the Howard Government.

The Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Julia Gillard, has told Parliament that the previous government spent $121 million on Workchoices propaganda, and there are still 97, 898 mousepads in storage.

:D :D :D

PM Abbott will hopefully make good use of them.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 16^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:

1. Backdrop looks like the govt. 2. What are the kids doing out of school ? 3. Who are the other retarded leftardian adults there ? 4. is it immoral to rope kids into a political stunt ? It so sucks

1. Get it right...Parliament House.
2. School excursion?
3. Ignore stupid question.
4. Does this apply to Abbott frightening kids in a pre-school photo-op??

:)

Team Froggie wrote on Apr 16^th, 2013 at 3:18pm:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 16th, 2013 at 12:51pm: 1. Backdrop looks like the govt. 2. What are the kids doing out of school ? 3. Who are the other retarded leftardian adults there ? 4. is it immoral to rope kids into a political stunt ? It so sucks 1. Get it right...Parliament House. 2. School excursion? 3. Ignore stupid question. 4. Does this apply to Abbott frightening kids in a pre-school photo-op?? :)

What gives them the ridht to use a school exchusion group to hold there placards.

I am shaw these kids parents wouldn't aprove.

I don't give a Gonski

FriYAY wrote on Apr 16^th, 2013 at 12:04pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 16th, 2013 at 10:48am: The media took the picture - typical SOB Go away troll.

Seems you are the one trolling here

SOB

Sprintcyclist

Just ignoring the detail on Gone-Ski.

I find it odd that the ALP can turn a traditional area of strength into a negative.

Moving money around from one area of education to another ?

The problem for the ALP they have squandered all this money for no real gain or even political gain.

Running around claiming they have economic credentials then announcing politically motivated big policies that seem to add up to nothing ........ I can not recall a government not only so incompetent but so politically stupid.

RightSadFred wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:22am:

Sprintcyclist Just ignoring the detail on Gone-Ski. I find it odd that the ALP can turn a traditional area of strength into a negative. Moving money around from one area of education to another ? The problem for the ALP they have squandered all this money for no real gain or even political gain. Running around claiming they have economic credentials then announcing politically motivated big policies that seem to add up to nothing ........ I can not recall a government not only so incompetent but so politically stupid.

I get the real feeling now is, she knows shes gone... and this is her way of trashing the place before we dump her..

a bit like the kid that gets sent home from the party for being naughty... he throws up all over the place before he leaves.

One of the big problems with Gillard's insane gouging of university funding is the changes to how students pay for their degrees. A large part of the funding for the Gonski farce is supposed to come from HECS debt repayments. However, that's money that they can only predict will be taken in as revenue. It's not a guaranteed and stable source of revenue because students don't need to repay their HECS debt until they reach a certain level of pay. At present the nation-wide HECS debt stands at about $22bn. This is going to create a massive black hole in Gillard's Gonski (or should it be Con-ski???) plans...

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 8:34pm:

One of the big problems with Gillard's insane gouging of university funding is the changes to how students pay for their degrees. A large part of the funding for the Gonski farce is supposed to come from HECS debt repayments. However, that's money that they can only predict will be taken in as revenue. It's not a guaranteed and stable source of revenue because students don't need to repay their HECS debt until they reach a certain level of pay. At present the nation-wide HECS debt stands at about $22bn. This is going to create a massive black hole in Gillard's Gonski (or should it be Con-ski???) plans...

How much is meant to come from hecs repayments?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 8:42pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:34pm: One of the big problems with Gillard's insane gouging of university funding is the changes to how students pay for their degrees. A large part of the funding for the Gonski farce is supposed to come from HECS debt repayments. However, that's money that they can only predict will be taken in as revenue. It's not a guaranteed and stable source of revenue because students don't need to repay their HECS debt until they reach a certain level of pay. At present the nation-wide HECS debt stands at about $22bn. This is going to create a massive black hole in Gillard's Gonski (or should it be Con-ski???) plans... How much is meant to come from hecs repayments?

I can't remember. I was talking to a friend of my wife's today. My wife is a high school head teacher of english and history and her friend is an executive-level manager in the NSW Dept of Education who's worked in the system more than 30 years. He's the one who told me about this. In a nutshell, he said it's more or less the same as the mining tax. The government has gone and planned how to spend what they expect to get from it, but in the end they got nothing at all from the mining tax. Could be the same with the HECS thing too.

dingo2 wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 3:09am:

Team Froggie wrote on Apr 16th, 2013 at 3:18pm: Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 16th, 2013 at 12:51pm: 1. Backdrop looks like the govt. 2. What are the kids doing out of school ? 3. Who are the other retarded leftardian adults there ? 4. is it immoral to rope kids into a political stunt ? It so sucks 1. Get it right...Parliament House. 2. School excursion? 3. Ignore stupid question. 4. Does this apply to Abbott frightening kids in a pre-school photo-op?? :) What gives them the ridht to use a school exchusion group to hold there placards. I am shaw these kids parents wouldn't aprove. I don't give a Gonski

you used to wag a lot didn't you?

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 8:58pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:42pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:34pm: One of the big problems with Gillard's insane gouging of university funding is the changes to how students pay for their degrees. A large part of the funding for the Gonski farce is supposed to come from HECS debt repayments. However, that's money that they can only predict will be taken in as revenue. It's not a guaranteed and stable source of revenue because students don't need to repay their HECS debt until they reach a certain level of pay. At present the nation-wide HECS debt stands at about $22bn. This is going to create a massive black hole in Gillard's Gonski (or should it be Con-ski???) plans... How much is meant to come from hecs repayments? I can't remember. I was talking to a friend of my wife's today. My wife is a high school head teacher of english and history and her friend is an executive-level manager in the NSW Dept of Education who's worked in the system more than 30 years. He's the one who told me about this. In a nutshell, he said it's more or less the same as the mining tax. The government has gone and planned how to spend what they expect to get from it, but in the end they got nothing at all from the mining tax. Could be the same with the HECS thing too.

right, but HECS is fully funded under the budget, right? So then the $22B hecs debt is actually the debt owed to the government by the students. Surely you're not suggesting every student will become unemployable under a Tony government? or that their incomes are going to be below $49,000?  And if that's the case, surely repayments will be made to the government as part of tax collection, and this money can be re-invested into school funding?

Oh, and the difference between the mining tax and HECS is that the mining tax is a crap design by Swan, trying to save the remnants of a once good policy, simply because he has no idea how to sell.  HECs on the other hand has been part of the system for decades and yearly brings in revenue for the government. They have data to allow them to measure expectations,even in the event of Tony stuffing things up so badly that every student is either earning $12 an hour in a professional position, or is simply unemployable because no more jobs exist.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:05pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:58pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:42pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:34pm: One of the big problems with Gillard's insane gouging of university funding is the changes to how students pay for their degrees. A large part of the funding for the Gonski farce is supposed to come from HECS debt repayments. However, that's money that they can only predict will be taken in as revenue. It's not a guaranteed and stable source of revenue because students don't need to repay their HECS debt until they reach a certain level of pay. At present the nation-wide HECS debt stands at about $22bn. This is going to create a massive black hole in Gillard's Gonski (or should it be Con-ski???) plans... How much is meant to come from hecs repayments? I can't remember. I was talking to a friend of my wife's today. My wife is a high school head teacher of english and history and her friend is an executive-level manager in the NSW Dept of Education who's worked in the system more than 30 years. He's the one who told me about this. In a nutshell, he said it's more or less the same as the mining tax. The government has gone and planned how to spend what they expect to get from it, but in the end they got nothing at all from the mining tax. Could be the same with the HECS thing too. right, but HECS is fully funded under the budget, right? So then the $22B hecs debt is actually the debt owed to the government by the students. Surely you're not suggesting every student will become unemployable under a Tony government? or that their incomes are going to be below $49,000?  And if that's the case, surely repayments will be made to the government as part of tax collection, and this money can be re-invested into school funding?

No, what I'm saying is that not every student will begin repaying their debt as soon as they finish their degree because not all will come out with a job earning the required amount for repayments to be made. That will make it nigh on impossible to budget this element of Gillard's plan. It's rorbbing Peter to pay Paul and crossing your fingers and hoping you find enough money at Peter's place.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:08pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:58pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:42pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:34pm: One of the big problems with Gillard's insane gouging of university funding is the changes to how students pay for their degrees. A large part of the funding for the Gonski farce is supposed to come from HECS debt repayments. However, that's money that they can only predict will be taken in as revenue. It's not a guaranteed and stable source of revenue because students don't need to repay their HECS debt until they reach a certain level of pay. At present the nation-wide HECS debt stands at about $22bn. This is going to create a massive black hole in Gillard's Gonski (or should it be Con-ski???) plans... How much is meant to come from hecs repayments? I can't remember. I was talking to a friend of my wife's today. My wife is a high school head teacher of english and history and her friend is an executive-level manager in the NSW Dept of Education who's worked in the system more than 30 years. He's the one who told me about this. In a nutshell, he said it's more or less the same as the mining tax. The government has gone and planned how to spend what they expect to get from it, but in the end they got nothing at all from the mining tax. Could be the same with the HECS thing too. right, but HECS is fully funded under the budget, right? So then the $22B hecs debt is actually the debt owed to the government by the students. Surely you're not suggesting every student will become unemployable under a Tony government? or that their incomes are going to be below $49,000?  And if that's the case, surely repayments will be made to the government as part of tax collection, and this money can be re-invested into school funding? No, what I'm saying is that not every student will begin repaying their debt as soon as they finish their degree because not all will come out with a job earning the required amount for repayments to be made. That will make it nigh on impossible to budget this element of Gillard's plan. It's rorbbing Peter to pay Paul and crossing your fingers and hoping you find enough money at Peter's place.

Oh you missed this part I added in just after you quoted:

Oh, and the difference between the mining tax and HECS is that the mining tax is a crap design by Swan, trying to save the remnants of a once good policy, simply because he has no idea how to sell.  HECs on the other hand has been part of the system for decades and yearly brings in revenue for the government. They have data to allow them to measure expectations,even in the event of Tony stuffing things up so badly that every student is either earning $12 an hour in a professional position, or is simply unemployable because no more jobs exist.



It's not the same as robbing Peter to pay Paul.  Peter's borrowed that money so Peter isn't being robbed from, but rather he is paying it back. So the government has decided to re-invest Peter's repayment to help Paul. And they know they can pay Paul because there are many Peters ,from decades of this program running, who are returning their borrowings to the Government.

The only reason HECs repayments may dramatically fall is if Tony stuffs things up to such a degree that our unemployment sky rockets. Are you suggesting this?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:12pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:08pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:58pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:42pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:34pm: One of the big problems with Gillard's insane gouging of university funding is the changes to how students pay for their degrees. A large part of the funding for the Gonski farce is supposed to come from HECS debt repayments. However, that's money that they can only predict will be taken in as revenue. It's not a guaranteed and stable source of revenue because students don't need to repay their HECS debt until they reach a certain level of pay. At present the nation-wide HECS debt stands at about $22bn. This is going to create a massive black hole in Gillard's Gonski (or should it be Con-ski???) plans... How much is meant to come from hecs repayments? I can't remember. I was talking to a friend of my wife's today. My wife is a high school head teacher of english and history and her friend is an executive-level manager in the NSW Dept of Education who's worked in the system more than 30 years. He's the one who told me about this. In a nutshell, he said it's more or less the same as the mining tax. The government has gone and planned how to spend what they expect to get from it, but in the end they got nothing at all from the mining tax. Could be the same with the HECS thing too. right, but HECS is fully funded under the budget, right? So then the $22B hecs debt is actually the debt owed to the government by the students. Surely you're not suggesting every student will become unemployable under a Tony government? or that their incomes are going to be below $49,000?  And if that's the case, surely repayments will be made to the government as part of tax collection, and this money can be re-invested into school funding? No, what I'm saying is that not every student will begin repaying their debt as soon as they finish their degree because not all will come out with a job earning the required amount for repayments to be made. That will make it nigh on impossible to budget this element of Gillard's plan. It's rorbbing Peter to pay Paul and crossing your fingers and hoping you find enough money at Peter's place. Oh you missed this part I added in just after you quoted: Oh, and the difference between the mining tax and HECS is that the mining tax is a crap design by Swan, trying to save the remnants of a once good policy, simply because he has no idea how to sell.  HECs on the other hand has been part of the system for decades and yearly brings in revenue for the government. They have data to allow them to measure expectations,even in the event of Tony stuffing things up so badly that every student is either earning $12 an hour in a professional position, or is simply unemployable because no more jobs exist. It's not the same as robbing Peter to pay Paul.  Peter's borrowed that money so Peter isn't being robbed from, but rather he is paying it back. So the government has decided to re-invest Peter's repayment to help Paul. And they know they can pay Paul because there are many Peters ,from decades of this program running, who are returning their borrowings to the Government. The only reason HECs repayments may dramatically fall is if Tony stuffs things up to such a degree that our unemployment sky rockets. Are you suggesting this?

No. Again, I'm saying that it's akin to the problems with the mining tax. Swan has budgeted for such-and-such in revenue from that tax and has gone and spent the money he budgeted for despite it not being there yet. Since then, there has been zero revenue, as we all know. A similar situation is possible with HECS, as it is impossible to know how many students will repay their HECS debt at any time and by how much.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:20pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:12pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:08pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:58pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:42pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:34pm: One of the big problems with Gillard's insane gouging of university funding is the changes to how students pay for their degrees. A large part of the funding for the Gonski farce is supposed to come from HECS debt repayments. However, that's money that they can only predict will be taken in as revenue. It's not a guaranteed and stable source of revenue because students don't need to repay their HECS debt until they reach a certain level of pay. At present the nation-wide HECS debt stands at about $22bn. This is going to create a massive black hole in Gillard's Gonski (or should it be Con-ski???) plans... How much is meant to come from hecs repayments? I can't remember. I was talking to a friend of my wife's today. My wife is a high school head teacher of english and history and her friend is an executive-level manager in the NSW Dept of Education who's worked in the system more than 30 years. He's the one who told me about this. In a nutshell, he said it's more or less the same as the mining tax. The government has gone and planned how to spend what they expect to get from it, but in the end they got nothing at all from the mining tax. Could be the same with the HECS thing too. right, but HECS is fully funded under the budget, right? So then the $22B hecs debt is actually the debt owed to the government by the students. Surely you're not suggesting every student will become unemployable under a Tony government? or that their incomes are going to be below $49,000?  And if that's the case, surely repayments will be made to the government as part of tax collection, and this money can be re-invested into school funding? No, what I'm saying is that not every student will begin repaying their debt as soon as they finish their degree because not all will come out with a job earning the required amount for repayments to be made. That will make it nigh on impossible to budget this element of Gillard's plan. It's rorbbing Peter to pay Paul and crossing your fingers and hoping you find enough money at Peter's place. Oh you missed this part I added in just after you quoted: Oh, and the difference between the mining tax and HECS is that the mining tax is a crap design by Swan, trying to save the remnants of a once good policy, simply because he has no idea how to sell.  HECs on the other hand has been part of the system for decades and yearly brings in revenue for the government. They have data to allow them to measure expectations,even in the event of Tony stuffing things up so badly that every student is either earning $12 an hour in a professional position, or is simply unemployable because no more jobs exist. It's not the same as robbing Peter to pay Paul.  Peter's borrowed that money so Peter isn't being robbed from, but rather he is paying it back. So the government has decided to re-invest Peter's repayment to help Paul. And they know they can pay Paul because there are many Peters ,from decades of this program running, who are returning their borrowings to the Government. The only reason HECs repayments may dramatically fall is if Tony stuffs things up to such a degree that our unemployment sky rockets. Are you suggesting this? No. Again, I'm saying that it's akin to the problems with the mining tax. Swan has budgeted for such-and-such in revenue from that tax and has gone and spent the money he budgeted for despite it not being there yet. Since then, there has been zero revenue, as we all know. A similar situation is possible with HECS, as it is impossible to know how many students will repay their HECS debt at any time and by how much.

See above. 

The modelling on HECs is a lot more sophisticated than the modelling on the mining tax in its first year and during a time of dropping resource prices. So, what you're suggesting is that under Tony things will become so dire that HECs models become redundant.

gonski = jew?

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:24pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:20pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:12pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:08pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:58pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:42pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:34pm: One of the big problems with Gillard's insane gouging of university funding is the changes to how students pay for their degrees. A large part of the funding for the Gonski farce is supposed to come from HECS debt repayments. However, that's money that they can only predict will be taken in as revenue. It's not a guaranteed and stable source of revenue because students don't need to repay their HECS debt until they reach a certain level of pay. At present the nation-wide HECS debt stands at about $22bn. This is going to create a massive black hole in Gillard's Gonski (or should it be Con-ski???) plans... How much is meant to come from hecs repayments? I can't remember. I was talking to a friend of my wife's today. My wife is a high school head teacher of english and history and her friend is an executive-level manager in the NSW Dept of Education who's worked in the system more than 30 years. He's the one who told me about this. In a nutshell, he said it's more or less the same as the mining tax. The government has gone and planned how to spend what they expect to get from it, but in the end they got nothing at all from the mining tax. Could be the same with the HECS thing too. right, but HECS is fully funded under the budget, right? So then the $22B hecs debt is actually the debt owed to the government by the students. Surely you're not suggesting every student will become unemployable under a Tony government? or that their incomes are going to be below $49,000?  And if that's the case, surely repayments will be made to the government as part of tax collection, and this money can be re-invested into school funding? No, what I'm saying is that not every student will begin repaying their debt as soon as they finish their degree because not all will come out with a job earning the required amount for repayments to be made. That will make it nigh on impossible to budget this element of Gillard's plan. It's rorbbing Peter to pay Paul and crossing your fingers and hoping you find enough money at Peter's place. Oh you missed this part I added in just after you quoted: Oh, and the difference between the mining tax and HECS is that the mining tax is a crap design by Swan, trying to save the remnants of a once good policy, simply because he has no idea how to sell.  HECs on the other hand has been part of the system for decades and yearly brings in revenue for the government. They have data to allow them to measure expectations,even in the event of Tony stuffing things up so badly that every student is either earning $12 an hour in a professional position, or is simply unemployable because no more jobs exist. It's not the same as robbing Peter to pay Paul.  Peter's borrowed that money so Peter isn't being robbed from, but rather he is paying it back. So the government has decided to re-invest Peter's repayment to help Paul. And they know they can pay Paul because there are many Peters ,from decades of this program running, who are returning their borrowings to the Government. The only reason HECs repayments may dramatically fall is if Tony stuffs things up to such a degree that our unemployment sky rockets. Are you suggesting this? No. Again, I'm saying that it's akin to the problems with the mining tax. Swan has budgeted for such-and-such in revenue from that tax and has gone and spent the money he budgeted for despite it not being there yet. Since then, there has been zero revenue, as we all know. A similar situation is possible with HECS, as it is impossible to know how many students will repay their HECS debt at any time and by how much. See above.  The modelling on HECs is a lot more sophisticated than the modelling on the mining tax in its first year and during a time of dropping resource prices. So, what you're suggesting is that under Tony things will become so dire that HECs models become redundant.

Again, no! I'm simply saying it is impossible for anyone to forecast what the government will receive in terms of HECS repayments in any given year and to rely on it so heavily in this Gonski plan is a recipie for disaster. You simply cannot predict how many ex-students will get jobs, when they will get them or how much they will be able to repay.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:45pm:

Again, no! I'm simply saying it is impossible for anyone to forecast what the government will receive in terms of HECS repayments in any given year and to rely on it so heavily in this Gonski plan is a recipie for disaster. You simply cannot predict how many ex-students will get jobs, when they will get them or how much they will be able to repay.

Armchair, are we really doing this? It's called MODELLING.  HECs has been around for DECADES.  There is very SOLID DATA that allows analysts to do fairly good predictions.  Your suggestion that it's impossible is utter crap. And it's very easy to predict how many students will get jobs - unless your suggesting another economic tsunami is heading our way that noone can see, and one that Tony won't be able to control? What you're suggesting is SUCH a CHANGE in ECONOMIC CONDITIONS that MAKE THE MODELS REDUNDANT.  Are you scared about Tony's PMship?? 

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:45pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:24pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:20pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:12pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:08pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:05pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:58pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:42pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 8:34pm: One of the big problems with Gillard's insane gouging of university funding is the changes to how students pay for their degrees. A large part of the funding for the Gonski farce is supposed to come from HECS debt repayments. However, that's money that they can only predict will be taken in as revenue. It's not a guaranteed and stable source of revenue because students don't need to repay their HECS debt until they reach a certain level of pay. At present the nation-wide HECS debt stands at about $22bn. This is going to create a massive black hole in Gillard's Gonski (or should it be Con-ski???) plans... How much is meant to come from hecs repayments? I can't remember. I was talking to a friend of my wife's today. My wife is a high school head teacher of english and history and her friend is an executive-level manager in the NSW Dept of Education who's worked in the system more than 30 years. He's the one who told me about this. In a nutshell, he said it's more or less the same as the mining tax. The government has gone and planned how to spend what they expect to get from it, but in the end they got nothing at all from the mining tax. Could be the same with the HECS thing too. right, but HECS is fully funded under the budget, right? So then the $22B hecs debt is actually the debt owed to the government by the students. Surely you're not suggesting every student will become unemployable under a Tony government? or that their incomes are going to be below $49,000?  And if that's the case, surely repayments will be made to the government as part of tax collection, and this money can be re-invested into school funding? No, what I'm saying is that not every student will begin repaying their debt as soon as they finish their degree because not all will come out with a job earning the required amount for repayments to be made. That will make it nigh on impossible to budget this element of Gillard's plan. It's rorbbing Peter to pay Paul and crossing your fingers and hoping you find enough money at Peter's place. Oh you missed this part I added in just after you quoted: Oh, and the difference between the mining tax and HECS is that the mining tax is a crap design by Swan, trying to save the remnants of a once good policy, simply because he has no idea how to sell.  HECs on the other hand has been part of the system for decades and yearly brings in revenue for the government. They have data to allow them to measure expectations,even in the event of Tony stuffing things up so badly that every student is either earning $12 an hour in a professional position, or is simply unemployable because no more jobs exist. It's not the same as robbing Peter to pay Paul.  Peter's borrowed that money so Peter isn't being robbed from, but rather he is paying it back. So the government has decided to re-invest Peter's repayment to help Paul. And they know they can pay Paul because there are many Peters ,from decades of this program running, who are returning their borrowings to the Government. The only reason HECs repayments may dramatically fall is if Tony stuffs things up to such a degree that our unemployment sky rockets. Are you suggesting this? No. Again, I'm saying that it's akin to the problems with the mining tax. Swan has budgeted for such-and-such in revenue from that tax and has gone and spent the money he budgeted for despite it not being there yet. Since then, there has been zero revenue, as we all know. A similar situation is possible with HECS, as it is impossible to know how many students will repay their HECS debt at any time and by how much. See above.  The modelling on HECs is a lot more sophisticated than the modelling on the mining tax in its first year and during a time of dropping resource prices. So, what you're suggesting is that under Tony things will become so dire that HECs models become redundant. Again, no! I'm simply saying it is impossible for anyone to forecast what the government will receive in terms of HECS repayments in any given year and to rely on it so heavily in this Gonski plan is a recipie for disaster. You simply cannot predict how many ex-students will get jobs, when they will get them or how much they will be able to repay.

I think they can get bloody close as a %% . What are the stats, about 80% of uni gradutes find full time employment within 12 months of completion. ...

sure, some may start on less than the 49k but all in all the numbers will be close, those that don't within 12 months will find it within the next 12  ... the mining tax on the other hand is a prediction of future profits based on furture prices and future sales ... not even close to the same thing and for you to try and say they are similar just shows how much you don't understand.

JC Denton wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:32pm:

gonski = jew?

Good point, Imperium.

Thoughts?

Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 16^th, 2013 at 10:23am:

and what a classically bad piccie. the alp have no idea how their pr machine has stalled http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2013/04/15/1226621/098690-gonski.jpg

Brandon? Jaidyn - Jaidyn???- Sam?

How low has the working class sunk!

Mattyfisk wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:51pm:

JC Denton wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:32pm: gonski = jew? Good point, Imperium. Thoughts?

Gillard = Welsh.

Gillard = australian

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 18^th, 2013 at 5:14am:

Gillard = australian SOB

Gillard = Opposition Leader, come September!  :)

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 18^th, 2013 at 6:29am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 18th, 2013 at 5:14am: Gillard = australian SOB Gillard = Opposition Leader, come September!  :)

Perhaps. Hopefully abbott will have stood down by then though.

SOB

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 18^th, 2013 at 6:29am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 18th, 2013 at 5:14am: Gillard = australian SOB Gillard = Opposition Leader, come September!  :)

gillard= gone by sept...

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:47pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:45pm: Again, no! I'm simply saying it is impossible for anyone to forecast what the government will receive in terms of HECS repayments in any given year and to rely on it so heavily in this Gonski plan is a recipie for disaster. You simply cannot predict how many ex-students will get jobs, when they will get them or how much they will be able to repay. Armchair, are we really doing this? It's called MODELLING.  HECs has been around for DECADES.  There is very SOLID DATA that allows analysts to do fairly good predictions.  Your suggestion that it's impossible is utter crap. And it's very easy to predict how many students will get jobs - unless your suggesting another economic tsunami is heading our way that noone can see, and one that Tony won't be able to control? What you're suggesting is SUCH a CHANGE in ECONOMIC CONDITIONS that MAKE THE MODELS REDUNDANT.  Are you scared about Tony's PMship??

Uni student owes taxpayers $400,000, amid $22 billion in HECS debts and student loans

THE biggest university loans debt in Australian history has been revealed, with one unlucky student now owing taxpayers $400,000.

New figures reveal students owe the federal government $22 billion in university loans and HECS fees for degrees. Queenslanders owe $4.4 billion.

While there's no real interest rate applied to the loans, the debts are indexed to reflect inflation and must be paid back through the tax system when students' earnings reach $47,000 a year.

A big increase in the number of students entering university this year is set to drive up that figure, with the Gillard Government removing the cap on places.

This will ensure any student with the marks can secure a place and increase the $22 billion debt in degree fees.

Discounts for students who pay HECS fees upfront have also been slashed as a cost-saving measure by the Gillard Government.

Treasurer Wayne Swan lowered the HECS-HELP discount on January 1, from 20 per cent to 10 per cent for up-front student contribution payments of $500 or more.

While the average university debt has risen to $14,400, Australian and overseas students who have completed multiple degrees or failed subjects have run up much higher degree fees.

The Sunday Mail has also obtained a top 10 list of individual HELP debts in Australia which reveal some students owe more than $100,000.

The highest HECS-HELP debt owed by an individual student is $400,000, with the No.2 spot held by a graduate who now owes the Government $272,000. Debts in the top 10 list of individual degree debts range from $169,673 to $400,705.

National Union of Students education officer Rosa Sottile said the rising debts were a turn-off for students from poor families, but she conceded more students were attending university than ever before.

"HECS has been dramatically increased since it was first introduced," she said.

"Students are really affected by debt. It's a turn-off for low-income students who may be more debt-averse than wealthier families.





death by debt.even before you enter the great world of business and commerce...

Well I agree cods, you showed me.  The government can never obtain funds from HECS debt repayments because this one student owes so much.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 18^th, 2013 at 5:14am:

Gillard = australian SOB

Gillard = SOB


SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 18^th, 2013 at 7:12am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 18th, 2013 at 6:29am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 18th, 2013 at 5:14am: Gillard = australian SOB Gillard = Opposition Leader, come September!  :) Perhaps. Hopefully abbott will have stood down by then though. SOB

SOB = Richo


SOB

cods wrote on Apr 18^th, 2013 at 7:49am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 18th, 2013 at 6:29am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 18th, 2013 at 5:14am: Gillard = australian SOB Gillard = Opposition Leader, come September!  :) gillard= gone by sept...

Highly unlikely unless the government collapses like Whitlam did. None of her cabinet wants the job now.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 18^th, 2013 at 7:12am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 18th, 2013 at 6:29am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 18th, 2013 at 5:14am: Gillard = australian SOB Gillard = Opposition Leader, come September!  :) Perhaps. Hopefully abbott will have stood down by then though. SOB

There's more chance of Margaret Thatcher running for Labour at the next British election than there is of Abbott standing down, standing aside or being pushed out.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17^th, 2013 at 9:47pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:45pm: Again, no! I'm simply saying it is impossible for anyone to forecast what the government will receive in terms of HECS repayments in any given year and to rely on it so heavily in this Gonski plan is a recipie for disaster. You simply cannot predict how many ex-students will get jobs, when they will get them or how much they will be able to repay. Armchair, are we really doing this? It's called MODELLING.  HECs has been around for DECADES.  There is very SOLID DATA that allows analysts to do fairly good predictions.  Your suggestion that it's impossible is utter crap. And it's very easy to predict how many students will get jobs - unless your suggesting another economic tsunami is heading our way that noone can see, and one that Tony won't be able to control? What you're suggesting is SUCH a CHANGE in ECONOMIC CONDITIONS that MAKE THE MODELS REDUNDANT.  Are you scared about Tony's PMship??

You mean the same modelling methods used to calculate the amount of revenue the mining tax was supposed to collect? You mean the same modelling methods used in years gone by prior to Gillard stripping more than $11bn from education in under 12 months? Those billions of dollars she just took out of universities, changes to HECS and no more discounts for early payments, etc will almost certainly see some students either pull out of university degrees and/or not sign up to university because it will be unaffordable for them. This is all bound to have a negative effect on the modelling you so preciously tout. Honestly, I'm almost surprised you can't see this. Gillard has form in this area of mismanagement - her and Swan have made failing to realise budget forecasts an into an art form.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 18^th, 2013 at 6:40pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:47pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:45pm: Again, no! I'm simply saying it is impossible for anyone to forecast what the government will receive in terms of HECS repayments in any given year and to rely on it so heavily in this Gonski plan is a recipie for disaster. You simply cannot predict how many ex-students will get jobs, when they will get them or how much they will be able to repay. Armchair, are we really doing this? It's called MODELLING.  HECs has been around for DECADES.  There is very SOLID DATA that allows analysts to do fairly good predictions.  Your suggestion that it's impossible is utter crap. And it's very easy to predict how many students will get jobs - unless your suggesting another economic tsunami is heading our way that noone can see, and one that Tony won't be able to control? What you're suggesting is SUCH a CHANGE in ECONOMIC CONDITIONS that MAKE THE MODELS REDUNDANT.  Are you scared about Tony's PMship??  You mean the same modelling methods used to calculate the amount of revenue the mining tax was supposed to collect? You mean the same modelling methods used in years gone by prior to Gillard stripping more than $11bn from education in under 12 months? Those billions of dollars she just took out of universities, changes to HECS and no more discounts for early payments, etc will almost certainly see some students either pull out of university degrees and/or not sign up to university because it will be unaffordable for them. This is all bound to have a negative effect on the modelling you so preciously tout. Honestly, I'm almost surprised you can't see this. Gillard has form in this area of mismanagement - her and Swan have made failing to realise budget forecasts an into an art form.

I stopped reading after the first sentence as I knew there was no more need.  ONCE AGAIN. HECS is decades old. There is decades and decades of data that gives people a very good understanding of how much HECS repayments are expected depending on the economic conditions.

AS for the mining Tax, it was the first year, and calculated returns without the assumptions of the state government raising royalties and with higher commodity prices. 

There will be VAST differences between the models.

--EDIT: I dumbly continued to read.  Can I just point out that for students the only real factor of affordability relies on LIVING conditions whilst at uni. And the only real decision for students who wish to go to university but come from low socio-economic backgrounds is whether or not they can afford to study for 3 years and try to find a place to rent (and pay for it), weekly food, petrol, etc. etc. etc.   The ACTUAL cost of a university degree is ABSORBED into HECS while you study and so regardless of any discounts to early repayments or what not, that won't stop a student from studying. Why would it? It simply becomes an additional tax burden in your future - HECS plays very little bearing on your decision while you're deciding on whether to go to uni or not.   Hence why Howard  increased it three folds and no one complained. 

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 18^th, 2013 at 6:50pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 18th, 2013 at 6:40pm: sir prince duke alevine wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:47pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 17th, 2013 at 9:45pm: Again, no! I'm simply saying it is impossible for anyone to forecast what the government will receive in terms of HECS repayments in any given year and to rely on it so heavily in this Gonski plan is a recipie for disaster. You simply cannot predict how many ex-students will get jobs, when they will get them or how much they will be able to repay. Armchair, are we really doing this? It's called MODELLING.  HECs has been around for DECADES.  There is very SOLID DATA that allows analysts to do fairly good predictions.  Your suggestion that it's impossible is utter crap. And it's very easy to predict how many students will get jobs - unless your suggesting another economic tsunami is heading our way that noone can see, and one that Tony won't be able to control? What you're suggesting is SUCH a CHANGE in ECONOMIC CONDITIONS that MAKE THE MODELS REDUNDANT.  Are you scared about Tony's PMship??  You mean the same modelling methods used to calculate the amount of revenue the mining tax was supposed to collect? You mean the same modelling methods used in years gone by prior to Gillard stripping more than $11bn from education in under 12 months? Those billions of dollars she just took out of universities, changes to HECS and no more discounts for early payments, etc will almost certainly see some students either pull out of university degrees and/or not sign up to university because it will be unaffordable for them. This is all bound to have a negative effect on the modelling you so preciously tout. Honestly, I'm almost surprised you can't see this. Gillard has form in this area of mismanagement - her and Swan have made failing to realise budget forecasts an into an art form. I stopped reading after the first sentence as I knew there was no more need.  ONCE AGAIN. HECS is decades old. There is decades and decades of data that gives people a very good understanding of how much HECS repayments are expected depending on the economic conditions. AS for the mining Tax, it was the first year, and calculated returns without the assumptions of the state government raising royalties and with higher commodity prices.  There will be VAST differences between the models. --EDIT: I dumbly continued to read.  Can I just point out that for students the only real factor of affordability relies on LIVING conditions whilst at uni. And the only real decision for students who wish to go to university but come from low socio-economic backgrounds is whether or not they can afford to study for 3 years and try to find a place to rent (and pay for it), weekly food, petrol, etc. etc. etc.   The ACTUAL cost of a university degree is ABSORBED into HECS while you study and so regardless of any discounts to early repayments or what not, that won't stop a student from studying. Why would it? It simply becomes an additional tax burden in your future - HECS plays very little bearing on your decision while you're deciding on whether to go to uni or not.   Hence why Howard  increased it three folds and no one complained.

Yep, the HECS scheme is old. I was once a student who utilised it. Yet those models are from prior to Gillard cutting billions in funding.