Quebec student strike

jacee · April 30, 2012

These jack-ass, head-up their ass, entitled studens (who pay less than any other place in Canada for tuition), have a miss-directed protest on thier own hands. Dont protest the "establishment", put the focus on the greedy teachers and heads! The wages for the insructors and EA's is waaay out of line and they hold the campus hostage internally every negotiation period.. Even these idiotic student should be able to understand the "trickle down effect".

Let the cops open up on them with Rubber bullets... Help them understand how "every action has an equal and opposite reaction"...

Crap, I held a full-time job to pay my way through a private school; what kind of lazy slack-tards are we raising now-adays?? Teachers??? "Environmental studdies associates"? Theologists??? Rubber bullet time....

Have you considered anger management?

It's intended to help people like you before you start mowing people down.

jacee · April 30, 2012

Even if it is not continual, is there no limit to how much time or for how long you support free education? kindergarten to age 30? 50? 80?

I have no problem at all with postgrad degrees, but I see no reason to provide free education so somebody can bump their salary a few grand. Even if they pay their own measly tuition to get a postgrad degree, I am still subsidizing that in a very major way. The tuition paid is a fraction of what is costs each of us as taxpayers. There is no pressing need to compeltely trivialize it by making it free.

Making it free makes it clear how important education is ... so important that we minimize the barriers for ALL students.

I have no problem with childrens education, but there are (nominally) no children at universities. At some point, you have to take responsibility for your livelihood, including the investment that is an education. I freely admit I don't expect you to understand the concept of personal repsonsibility.

Ya I'm one of those 'irresponsible' people who went back to school to get a graduate degree so I could raise a family, worked long and hard and retired with a pension. What a parasite, eh! <_<

fellowtraveller · April 30, 2012

Making it free makes it clear how important education is ... so important that we minimize the barriers for ALL students.

what barriers?

Low income university studentys in Quebec paid nothing beofre this strike, low income students pay nothing after this strike.

Explain the barriers.

Use bullets or numbered points to illustrate the injustice there.

Ya I'm one of those 'irresponsible' people who went back to school to get a graduate degree so I could raise a family, worked long and hard and retired with a pension. What a parasite, eh!

Loed at from something other than your own selfish viewpoint, you got an undergraduate degree at a cost of approximately $30K per year, of which around $25K per year was subisisized by working men and women. You then went back and spent a souple nore years and another $50k or so to get a subsidized postgrad degree to the tune of another $50K of cold hard cash squeezed from the brow of the working man.

The purpose of your use of public money was to get more money for yourself.

You think of ypourself as a a generous, progressive and altruistic man for having done that.

Did I miss anything in your lifetime of contributiuon to the greater good?

Did you risk any money to generate employment/jobs for others?

Did you create any pensions or opportunies for others?

jacee · April 30, 2012

what barriers?

Low income university studentys in Quebec paid nothing beofre this strike, low income students pay nothing after this strike.

Explain the barriers.

Use bullets or numbered points to illustrate the injustice there.

Loed at from something other than your own selfish viewpoint, you got an undergraduate degree at a cost of approximately $30K per year, of which around $25K per year was subisisized by working men and women. You then went back and spent a souple nore years and another $50k or so to get a subsidized postgrad degree to the tune of another $50K of cold hard cash squeezed from the brow of the working man.

The purpose of your use of public money was to get more money for yourself.

You think of ypourself as a a generous, progressive and altruistic man for having done that.

Did I miss anything in your lifetime of contributiuon to the greater good?

Did you risk any money to generate employment/jobs for others?

Did you create any pensions or opportunies for others?

Generous, progressive and altruistic ... maybe. But if you check my profile you'll see that I think of myself as a woman.

And you, of course, are a shining beacon of humanity. :lol:

Edited May 1, 2012 by jacee

Fletch 27 · May 1, 2012

I want free Internet! I want to "blog" for free! I don't want to work for anything in my life! I'm entitled! Regardless of the companies that spent millions on the fiber or wifi installs, regardless of the wages of my instructors! " I am canadian! Hear my stupidity!"

August1991 · May 1, 2012

I'm starting a new thread because the stupid titles on the other ones bug me.

You win.

Evening Star · May 1, 2012

put the focus on the greedy teachers and heads! The wages for the insructors and EA's is waaay out of line and they hold the campus hostage internally every negotiation period.. Even these idiotic student should be able to understand the "trickle down effect".

??

I don't know what an EA is but do you have any concept of what wages for contract instructors (who are increasingly doing much of the teaching) are like? Any at all?

Now, university administrators on the other hand...

Edited May 1, 2012 by Evening Star

Boges · May 1, 2012

The paradox of saying that post secondary education is a net benefit to society and the individual yet saying that making the student pay for the education will burden them with debt hasn't really been addressed by anyone.

If the education is a net benefit to the student, then students should feel no problem paying the price.

Of course we all know many students are getting an education that gives them no tangible advantage in the working world.

g_bambino · May 1, 2012

I doubt if that's what's going through their minds at all.

Obviously it is, at some level.

Perhaps, they'll often also just become more determined or desperate the longer they're ignored...

Disagreeing and ignoring aren't synonyms.

[ed.: sp]

Edited May 2, 2012 by g_bambino

g_bambino · May 1, 2012

"oppression! Police state!" is quite appropriate when police try to provoke trouble and use the actions of a few as an excuse to brutalize innocent protesters and shut down LEGAL political protest.

What's legal about walking out into traffic, or deciding who does and does not access someone else's property, or ignoring court orders to allow non-protesting students into the classes they want to attend?

[ed.: +]

Edited May 1, 2012 by g_bambino

dre · May 2, 2012

The reality is that students are paying more for an education that will do increasingly less for them. Tuition costs are increasing faster than the rate of inflation. They are paying more, and taking on more debt, but their economic prospects are diminishing.

Nobody should be suprised that this generation is frustrated, and its going to get a lot worse before it gets better.

Spiderfish · May 2, 2012

Or do you just have huge personal resentment of anyone who is better educated than you?

Obviously "better educated" and "higher intelligence" don't correlate, if you take the actions of the students as a measure. These students claim to be the 99% fighting against the 1%, but clearly the ones being most affected by this bullshit is the average citizen who just wants to go to work, school, or carry on with whatever business they have, but can't because of these hooligans.

I trust you never need the services of any "postgrad parasites" like a doctor, lawyer, scientist-consultant - engineer, geologist, etc?

It's the doctors, lawyers, and scientists who are trying to be allowed to attend classes, which is being hijacked and taken away from bullies and thugs calling themselves peaceful student protesters.

g_bambino · May 2, 2012

The reality is that students are paying more for an education that will do increasingly less for them.

Then they should seriously consider what degree, if any, will be worth it.

bleeding heart · May 2, 2012

What else would I do on a Saturday?

I'm not saying I know everything about finance... but I have a degree in the field, a professional designation, and I work in the industry. I'm sure that is a lot more than punked and most of his fellow dippers.

But you have no degree in political science, are not designated in any way, and do not work in the field of politics...and yet you are convinced of your expertise on such matters.

If you really believe that some sort of accredited designations are required for you to speak on any subject...you wouldn't be making fun of "dippers," now, would you? You'd remain, as a matter of principle, a total agnostic, and allow your educated betters to debate without your input.

Or is it that only the world of finance and economics are of a Holy nature, sacraments to be discussed only by the trained Priesthood, where every other subject is fair game? (Aside from Shakespeare and Aristotle, that is, the two subjects you've deemed beyond your ken.)

Edited May 2, 2012 by bleeding heart

Bonam · May 2, 2012

The reality is that students are paying more for an education that will do increasingly less for them. Tuition costs are increasing faster than the rate of inflation. They are paying more, and taking on more debt, but their economic prospects are diminishing.

All depends on the degree. The economic prospects for people with useful degrees are brighter than ever. If people choose to waste their 4 years (and potentially 4-6 years of post-grad work) of college on a slack degree so they can drink and party without a care in the world while accruing mountains of debt, it's no one's fault but their own.

Speaking of strikes, I just saw, in person, the Occupy Seattle hooligans yesterday. Watched from a little distance away as they randomly surrounded cars, brainlessly yelled at police. Didn't see them breaking windows of random stores but they did that too. Funny thing is there is absolutely no trace of a cause or purpose, it's just a bunch of random people that are bored feeling like they can do something different, that they normally wouldn't be able to get away with, because they are part of a crowd. But the net effect was like a wave of zombies. No thinking, no reasoning, just randomly walking around and periodically attacking/damaging something that crosses their field of vision.

Seeing what I saw yesterday, protesters will forever be linked to zombies in my mind.

jacee · May 2, 2012

Obviously "better educated" and "higher intelligence" don't correlate, if you take the actions of the students as a measure. These students claim to be the 99% fighting against the 1%, but clearly the ones being most affected by this bullshit is the average citizen who just wants to go to work, school, or carry on with whatever business they have, but can't because of these hooligans.

It's the doctors, lawyers, and scientists who are trying to be allowed to attend classes, which is being hijacked and taken away from bullies and thugs calling themselves peaceful student protesters.

And that matters why?

Welcome to democracy, where the poor DO have the right to pressure the rest of us so opportunities are available to all.

A little inconvenience is a fair price to pay to live in a free country. If you lose your cool over small inconveniences - or a perception that someone somewhere 'might' be experiencing a little inconvenience, then your problems are more complex and have nothing to do with protests.

bleeding heart · May 2, 2012

I see the word "Hooligans" cropping up a lot--evidence that several here are eagerly repeating the talking points handed to them by the pundits. (Unless there's some sort of Jungian mass-consciousness on display, though surely that's anathema to the those cradling the childish myth of "rugged individualism," as if they are not really the social animal called "primates," but rather a Divine Creation....though that, too, should be problematic for the Randians among us. )

However, it's moot, in a way, because most of the Occupy movement agrees that a small band of destruction-minded folk are trying to ruin it for everybody.

So...some agreement at last!

Spiderfish · May 2, 2012

And that matters why?

Welcome to democracy, where the poor DO have the right to pressure the rest of us so opportunities are available to all.

A little inconvenience is a fair price to pay to live in a free country. If you lose your cool over small inconveniences - or a perception that someone somewhere 'might' be experiencing a little inconvenience, then your problems are more complex and have nothing to do with protests.

It matters because their actions are misdirected at the wrong people. They will have a hard time finding support for their cause by making the people who they feel should pick up their tab suffer.

They say they are fighting for opportunity, but who is forced to pay for their opportunity? They're a bunch of spoiled brats who already have everything handed to them, but it's not enough. They don't just want it all, they want to take opportunity away from the people who have dedicated themselves and actually want to work for it.

If these protesters want everything for free but have nothing to offer (as seems to be the case), they will quickly find out that in the real world, employment isn't automatic. It is attained and retained through hard work and dedication. If you have nothing of substance to offer, you are of no use to an employer. This reality will set in soon enough and all the crying and stomping of feet that they aren't getting their way will be of little consequence.

It's not just the evil banks and hapless public that has to endure the inconveniences and consequences of people exercising their rights in a free country, it goes both ways. Ahhh...freedom.

Spiderfish · May 2, 2012

I see the word "Hooligans" cropping up a lot--evidence that several here are eagerly repeating the talking points handed to them by the pundits.

The word hooligans comes up a lot because that's exactly what they are. You seem to be reading a lot into the use of a word.

capricorn · May 2, 2012

Tuition costs are increasing faster than the rate of inflation. They are paying more, and taking on more debt, but their economic prospects are diminishing.

Do you have a source to back up this claim?

bleeding heart · May 2, 2012

The word hooligans comes up a lot because that's exactly what they are.

The actual people committing destructive acts, sure...not the vast majority who aren't.

I sense a conflation of the two, which suggests a lot of weak little minds screeching the conventional nonsense. Yes? Yes.

You seem to be reading a lot into the use of a word.

Maybe. Or maybe those without an original thought in their heads look to the punditocracy in order to know what to post on political forums.

Both sound plausible, so I remain an agnostic on the matter.

Edited May 2, 2012 by bleeding heart

Spiderfish · May 2, 2012

Maybe. Or maybe those without an original thought in their heads look to the punditocracy in order to know what to post on political forums.

Both sound plausible, so I remain an agnostic on the matter.

What, you can't interpret the meaning of your own comment? Really?

bleeding heart · May 2, 2012

What, you can't interpret the meaning of your own comment? Really?

You're misreading me; odd since it's straightforward:

I suggested a possible reason for the glut of a particular word being used; you suggested an alternate explanation (my reading too much into it); and I responded candidly that you might be correct, or that I might be.

It was a speculative (and throwaway) comment in the first place, so I'm happy to concede the elementary proposition that I could have been mistaken.

It has nothing to do with my inability "to interpret the meaning" of my what I said (a bizarre formulation, actually).

Edited May 2, 2012 by bleeding heart

Spiderfish · May 2, 2012

You're misreading me; odd since it's straightforward:

I suggested a possible reason for the glut of a particular word being used; you suggested an alternate explanation (my reading too much into it); and I responded candidly that you might be correct, or that I might be.

It was a speculative (and throwaway) comment in the first place, so I'm happy to concede the elementary proposition that I could have been mistaken.

It has nothing to do with my inability "to interpret the meaning" of my what I said (a bizarre formulation, actually).

Since you framed one side of the argument with conjecture, I assumed you would hold to that conjecture. The "bizarre formulation" I can see is your enthusiastic willingness to concede your point, indicating either extreme fence-sitting, or more likely, the obvious attempt to make your point indirectly through false-conjecture.