Tuition Fees

[takeanumber]

So, the basis of August's thesis is:

Social mobility doesn't exist in the US, Britain, or France.

It's because of state funding that causes the immobility.

Therefore, we should have private schools.

So that way, it reinforces the immobility.

The way for an elitist idiot spawn brat to get into University is to be, well, born.

But, for somebody who is born into a poor family, they have to be BRILLIANT in order to qualify for charity.

Which, isn't equal opportunity at all.

It creates permanent inequality.

Which is the goal of every Tory: Burn the Ladder out of Selfishness and the masses be damned.

Well, that's certainly not a very liberal Democratic, nor Canadian ideal. My ancestors came here to get away from feudalism. My ancestors fought in 1833-1837 to prevent such a backslide. My family fought in the first and second world wars, in part for the chicks, in part to prevent a German style of feudalism.

So August, I'm not really surprised by your response.

Keep on whittling away at that ladder.

[Stoker]

But, for somebody who is born into a poor family, they have to be BRILLIANT in order to qualify for charity.

.........or just apply for a student loan and work in the summer

[kimmy]

An education is the key to your earning level as you can work as hard and be as smart as you want and will still have trouble just getting into the 30-40K bracket without an education, never mind above it.

An expensive university education is not the only option if you want to earn money. Apprenticing in a skilled trade puts you on a career path that will earn you an excellent salary with skills that are very portable. Two year technical diplomas are another route to a career that costs much less than a university degree. Or, many universities have co-op programs, where every 2nd term is a work-term at a degree-related placement. It takes longer to complete, but students already have valuable work experience by the time they graduate. I know someone who did his degree by co-op, and he needed a student loan only during his first year. After that, he was able to earn enough during co-op placements to finish his degree without taking out any additional loans. Or, the Canadian Forces provide the chance to learn a trade during your service, I believe, although I personally have not much interest in joining the army. Or, there's the route that I am on- choose an entry level job that provides training and the chance to learn transferable skills.

-kimmy

[Stoker]

Good post kimmy, to add to that, there is also the route that I'm on (which is a combo of the above)........

......Get a skilled trade that allows you to earn decent money, and rotate working between the trade and taking time of to go to school..........I've been doing this on again off again for almost six years.......and only once had to take a student loan (as well as a small bank loan to top it up) for a semester.........this route does take (alot) longer, but in the end I'll have a minimum of a BA (plan on more) and a trade that I can fall back on if need be.......

I'm hardly from a "rich family" and even though I like to think it, I'm not even close to "BRILLIANT"........

And might I add...........if one thinks the "rich" a burning the "ladder to sucess"............build your own bloody ladder

[maplesyrup]

But, for somebody who is born into a poor family, they have to be BRILLIANT in order to qualify for charity.

.........or just apply for a student loan and work in the summer

Sometimes when someone is from a poor family, it means that a 17 year old is the only breadwinner in the household. I know a lad in that predicament right now and I am encouraging him to go back to school at the end of the summer. It is not going to be easy for him to do.

Wealthy, affluent, or non-poor people often make it all sound so easy. It isn't.

[Stoker]

Sometimes when someone is from a poor family, it means that a 17 year old is the only breadwinner in the household. I know a lad in that predicament right now and I am encouraging him to go back to school at the end of the summer. It is not going to be easy for him to do.

I moved out the summer before my grade 12 year.......I manged working and going to high school, so if the drive is there, anybody else certainly could.

Like the Sam Roberts song goes: "there's no road that ain't a hard road to travel on"..........and Life is very much how you live it

[playfullfellow]

Yeah yeah, I know I am centrist but I like it that way. I like to look at things from every angle before I make up my mind as to where I stand.

I have been reading the posts and there have been some genuinely interesting interesting ideas floated around. I like the idea of seeing more trades developed in high school. I went to school where there was a big emphasis put on learning a trade in school. The majority of students took shop class and learned the basics of a trade. Why can we not let the students who don't wish to attend college or university start to earn a certificate while they are still in high school? If someone has developed the basics for a trade during high school, at least they can get into a better paying job than macdonalds once they leave school. This way they also do not have to be in an apprenticeship program for as long to get to the next pay level or getting their journeyman papers.

There has been some comparison with Germany here but has anyone looked at what they have done in Denmark? They have made every type of labour job an apprenticeship type program. You want to be a waitress, well you learn as you earn. To make better wages, you have to keep increasing your level of skill. Even a waitress or waiter ( not to be sexist) learn about business management, money skills and many other skills dependant on their ambition levels. It has absolutely nothing to do with their social status. People pay no fees for this but the theory is that people start earning wages and paying taxes right away thus putting money back into the cofers plus you get properly trained people with skills. College and University is free but the grade standards are pretty tough. The system weeds out the not so smarts pretty quick so it is the best qualyfied kids who get to continue on. As far as I can remember, there is also a limit of how many years you can be in University unless you are doing research or upgrading. The ysytem is not perfect but everyone gets the same chance based on their skills and not on their social standing. It is expensive but Denmark has produced some very smart ideas and in many areas are world leaders in research and developement.

[takeanumber]

Loans only allow you to take out a maximum of 40 grand for an undergrad.

So clearly, 14 grand tuition won't allow somebody who is poor.

Moreover, summer work is by definition, low paying. (There are exceptions..but as a rule, it is low paying.)

So, how is somebody supposed to save 4 grand to make up the shortfall (excluding books) when they only earned 4 grand for the summer (gross)?

It's amazing how long advice and short on reality some people are. "Oh, it's so easy, because when I was going to university, tuition was 800 bux, but that was a lot of money way back in 1980 (not it wasn't) and I worked part time waiting tables, and I graduated without debt."

Must have been nice. But tuition fees and books are a hell of a lot more expensive these days. Back then, the student picked up 10 percent of the cost. Today, they pick up 30 percent.

[Cartman]

I gotta reassert a point I made earlier. Too many people are in university because they can afford it, not because they have the requisite abilities. Universities more than readily accept students even if they do not have the necessary skills because they subsidize the schools. At the UofT, some intro classes have 1500 students. Profs rarely deal with students b/c they leave them to the TA's. Some of these classes have 8 TA's!! Think about how much $$ is made here!!

Unfortunately, university acceptance is not based so much upon merit but rather $$ until graduate school. Anyone can now get into university and a BA, BSc mean nothing today sorry to tell you.

I actually agree with Kimmy (this rarely happens Kimmy...sorry ) that university is not for everyone. Trades offer much for many. Today though, a lot of kids are getting screwed b/c they think that university is the right thing to do.

[Stoker]

So, how is somebody supposed to save 4 grand to make up the shortfall (excluding books) when they only earned 4 grand for the summer (gross)?

Go to school one year, then work the next

Even then, many people still manage with student loans and a summer job

  I gotta reassert a point I made earlier. Too many people are in university because they can afford it, not because they have the requisite abilities. Universities more than readily accept students even if they do not have the necessary skills because they subsidize the schools. At the UofT, some intro classes have 1500 students. Profs rarely deal with students b/c they leave them to the TA's. Some of these classes have 8 TA's!! Think about how much $$ is made here!!

And whats wrong if a person can afford it? If I could afford to purchase a Chevy Avalanche, I most likely would, even if it wouldn't be an ideal choice to cart tools around in.........Are you saying that "they" should be aloud to force me to buy an old BC Hydro van from auction, even if that wasn't my first choice?

And if so, how is me buying a old van going to help the poor purchase an old van also?

Unfortunately, university acceptance is not based so much upon merit but rather $$ until graduate school. Anyone can now get into university and a BA, BSc mean nothing today sorry to tell you.

And even if a BA doesn't mean "nothing these days", isn't that a prerequisite for going towards a Masters etc? Are you saying that people just shouldn't bother?

[Cartman]

No, I am saying that simply having the $$ but not the ability pulls everyone down. I do think too many teens believe that university is the only option when it is not.

Many kids without the ability drop out after spending $$. As well, these students inevitably pull down standards thereby making the degrees almost worthless. They also find out that they need much higher grades to get into the MA programs.

University attendance should be based on ability rather than $$. IMO, it is the other way around and is messing up the system for everyone.

[Stoker]

No, I am saying that simply having the $$ but not the ability pulls everyone down. I do think too many teens believe that university is the only option when it is not.

Many kids without the ability drop out after spending $$. As well, these students inevitably pull down standards thereby making the degrees almost worthless. They also find out that they need much higher grades to get into the MA programs.

University attendance should be based on ability rather than $$. IMO, it is the other way around and is messing up the system for everyone.

So if tougher standards are made to get into University, thus reducing the attendance of people that can afford University, thus do to the lower revenue generated by these "rich students" the Universities are forced to increase the cost of tuition, I fail to see how this will help the poor get a post secondary education?

[Cartman]

Better state funding should be provided for far fewer students who possess the ability to perform well. Why should we heavily subsidize students who lack such abilities? For some, alternative skills and institutions should be considered. University is not for everyone.

I do not think that allowing wealthy students who lack the ability to properly do the work is helpful. It is also not fair for them to subsidize others. By granting degrees too easily, universities have made them less valuable and that is very unfortunate. A BA/BSc should mean something.

I am happy that universities are reviewing how profs. (currently and historically) grade their students . Those who are becoming too lenient are increasingly being questioned about their evaluation methods. It is about time.

[Stoker]

Better state funding should be provided for far fewer students who possess the ability to perform well. Why should we heavily subsidize students who lack such abilities? For some, alternative skills and institutions should be considered. University is not for everyone.

In all likelyhood, the parents of the "mediocre rich kid", pay taxes that in turn, pay for the subsidized schools/students. Are you saying that if a "mediocre rich kid" and his or her parents want an education, even if the student has "mediocre grades", they shouldn't be allowed it?

Perhaps one solution would be (like Healthcare) to have private Universities that recieve no "state funding". With that said, how's this going to help the poor students? You're doing nothing for them, and alienating those students that can afford University.

I do not think that allowing wealthy students who lack the ability to properly do the work is helpful. It is also not fair for them to subsidize others. By granting degrees too easily, universities have made them less valuable and that is very unfortunate. A BA/BSc should mean something.

Why is it not fair? And if a BA/BS is not "worth something", whats to stop the students from going further (if they have the resoures)?

I am happy that universities are reviewing how profs. (currently and historically) grade their students  . Those who are becoming too lenient are increasingly being questioned about their evaluation methods. It is about time.

Sounds good to me........but how's that going to help the poor?

[maplesyrup]

I think we need to focus on undergrads here as when one gets into post-grad work there are usually things like TA opportunities which skewer the results.

How much approximately is undergraduate tuition these days in Canada? I thought a course was about $600 each times 5 equals $3000 per year. Maybe a bit more, no?

[Stoker]

How much approximately is undergraduate tuition these days in Canada? I thought a course was about $600 each times 5 equals $3000 per year. Maybe a bit more, no?

Thats closer to a semester.

[willy]

Cartman, to enter UBC this year a student will need 90% average coming out of high school. The fact that a student with 75% could perform at the university level but can't get in bothers me.

Today the cost and standards are much higher. Today more people value a university education.

In the 1960s you could get into many universities in Canada with 60% average coming out of high school.

I don't accept your premise that the cost has restricted access to talented students but the greater demand for seats sure has limited many able students.

The shame from a social mobility stand point is poor kids do worse in grade school but can reach their potential in university. The high admission standard may be a larger barrier than that of high tuition.

[takeanumber]

In all likelyhood, the parents of the "mediocre rich kid", pay taxes that in turn, pay for the subsidized schools/students. Are you saying that if a "mediocre rich kid" and his or her parents want an education, even if the student has "mediocre grades", they shouldn't be allowed it?

Just because your rich and pay taxes doesn't mean your entitled to take a seat away from somebody else who has more merit.

The rich pay taxes to give back to those who have enabled them to succeed in society. (roads, an educated, well fed, healthy workforce contributes in a large way to the rich.)

The fact that the rich pay taxes does NOT entitle them to preferential treatment in the courts, schools and hospitals.

If you want Dickens, move to the US or Britain.

This is Canada. We have higher standards.

[maplesyrup]

This is Canada. We have higher standards.

[maplesyrup]

Contrary to the never ending broken record North American capitalist doctrine, the reality is that the rich are dispensible.

There is proably no better example of the truth to this statement than what is currently going on in Venezuela.

It should come as no surprise then that the Bush Administration sees President Chavez as the evil enemy.

Imagine the nerve of that South American Latin leader actually trying to improve the situation for the poor. How despicable!

[maplesyrup]

PFF.....thanks for that post on Denmark.

Europeans in quality of life, in many ways, are miles ahead of North America, and I have heard particularly good things about Denmark. For example, 10% of all new housing in Denmark is Co-Housing where one owns their own unit, but there are common areas for the community to gather to share a meal, a concert, etc.

[Stoker]

Just because your rich and pay taxes doesn't mean your entitled to take a seat away from somebody else who has more merit.

Who said anything about the "rich taking from the poor"? How is a student that can afford to go to school, keeping a "poor" person from attending?

The rich pay taxes to give back to those who have enabled them to succeed in society. (roads, an educated, well fed, healthy workforce contributes in a large way to the rich.)

The fact that the rich pay taxes does NOT entitle them to preferential treatment in the courts, schools and hospitals.

If you want Dickens, move to the US or Britain.

This is Canada. We have higher standards.

The Dickens thing........tis wearing out

As I said above, how is sombody that can afford a post secondary education, taking away from a person that can't?

Contrary to the never ending broken record North American capitalist doctrine, the reality is that the rich are dispensible.

By all means explain further If it wasn't for the rich (and their tax dollars), how are you going to afford to pay for your social programs? Are you fine with making the middle class and the poor......well...... more poor?

Europeans in quality of life, in many ways, are miles ahead of North America, and I have heard particularly good things about Denmark. For example, 10% of all new housing in Denmark is Co-Housing where one owns their own unit, but there are common areas for the community to gather to share a meal, a concert, etc.

Whats holding you back

Need a hand packing your bags?

[caesar]

Europeans in quality of life, in many ways, are miles ahead of North America

Not true according to the experts. Canadian cities are always topping the list as "best city to live"

Canada,The World's Best Country To Live In

Canada - The World's Best Country To Live In. For the sixth year in a row, Canada

ranks first among 175 countries in the United Nation's quality of life survey

[August1991]

Not true according to the experts. Canadian cities are always topping the list as "best city to live"

What experts? How do they measure "best city to live"? What is the criteria?

----

One way to phrase this question of tuition is to ask: "Why should a 45 year old supermarket clerk, with a Grade 12 education, pay taxes (income, GST, PST etc.) to subsidize kids from middle class/rich families to go to university?"

A better question is to ask: "Who should decide how many university graduates Canada should have (and who they should be)?"

[Ordinary Canadians decide how many cars we have and who has which car. The cars cost $20,000 and up.]

Final point: If provincial governments were less or not involved in PSE, we would likely have many more smaller institutions. Such institutions would arguably provide a better environment for true learning.

With State financing, our universities have become bureaucratic behemoths where the student is a pesky intrusion. In short, our universities are Soviet enclaves with Party member/union activists.

[playfullfellow]

With State financing, our universities have become bureaucratic behemoths where the student is a pesky intrusion. In short, our universities are Soviet enclaves with Party member/union activists.

I can see where this sentiment comes from but we must also look at corporate influence in our universities. I have read a few articles in regards to companies like coke and pepsi putting their vending machines in schools at a rather large price. Does this have any influence on the standards of the school? Well, yeah it does, it puts more money in the cofers which in turn is less money that has to be charged in tuition fees but does it influence what is taught at that school? Probably not. PSE schools have been taken over by special interest groups like every other part of our society that are constantly protesting about this and that and taking schools to court over issues. How much does it cost to have a team of lawyers scrutinizing every aspect of a course before it might be offered out of fear of hurting someones feelings? What about all the insurance a school has to carry because they get sued everytime someone gets a booboo or their feelings are hurt. All of this crap adds to the cost of a PSE. If we could do away with this civil liability crap, then we could offer a PSE at true market cost and demand. That is where you get a lot of the bureaucratic bs we see. For sure we see a lot more bureaucratic bs when the government is involved but special interest groups are also culprits.