How fair is the student protest?

[TimG]

I'm just fascinated to watch "free market" advocates suddenly claim there's a moral purpose behind profit-making...for the sake of the payer, not the payee...which is in direct contradiction to all capitalist and free market theory.

Holy Strawman Batman! Where did I say anything about profit? I said that there needs to be a price. That does not imply profit. When it comes to price it is entirely a question of proper management of a scarce resource. i.e.

If you have a resource where demands exceeds supply. Do you:

1) Give it away for free.

2) Set up a government committee to decide who gets the resource;

3) Reduce demand for the resource by setting a price.

1) means the resource would be used up by first comers and everyone else would get scraps.

2) Puts too much power in the hands of governments, is frequently unfair and leads to corruption.

3) Is the most moral because it allow individuals to make the choice for themselves.

People who truly cannot afford the price can have direct government support so that is not an argument for making tuition free.

Edited May 21, 2012 by TimG

[dre]

These broad left vs right generalizations are nothing more than the hall mark of idiots and hacks. Without exception the folks making them, and the people who use terms like "the left", and "the right" and all the various synonyms are not only the lowest quality voters in Canada, but the lowest quality posters here on MLW.

We need to figure out a way to exclude these people from the debate, and treat them like the fringe retards they are, but the problem is they speak the loudest, so often this relatively small segments at the extreme ends of the political spectrum tend to drown everyone else out.

Edited May 21, 2012 by dre

[bleeding heart]

These broad left vs right generalizations are nothing more than the hall mark of idiots and hacks. Without exception the folks making them, and the people who use terms like "the left", and "the right" and all the various synonyms are not only the lowest quality voters in Canada, but the lowest quality posters here on MLW.

We need to figure out a way to exclude these people from the debate, and treat them like the fringe retards they are, but the problem is the speak the loudest, so often this relatively small segments at the extreme ends of the political spectrum tend to drown everyone else out.

I agree, except that it's not even necessarily that they're from the extreme ends of the spectrum (which suggests that the self-proclaimed "centre" is sober, wise, and just...and I assure that this is a farcical view). It's simply bad debating tactics, nothing more.

[Wild Bill]

These broad left vs right generalizations are nothing more than the hall mark of idiots and hacks. Without exception the folks making them, and the people who use terms like "the left", and "the right" and all the various synonyms are not only the lowest quality voters in Canada, but the lowest quality posters here on MLW.

We need to figure out a way to exclude these people from the debate, and treat them like the fringe retards they are, but the problem is they speak the loudest, so often this relatively small segments at the extreme ends of the political spectrum tend to drown everyone else out.

At the risk of making another generalization, my good Dr. Dre, now you are sounding a bit elitist!

[dre]

I agree, except that it's not even necessarily that they're from the extreme ends of the spectrum (which suggests that the self-proclaimed "centre" is sober, wise, and just...and I assure that this is a farcical view). It's simply bad debating tactics, nothing more.

I wouldnt say the "center" is always wise and just but I definately see most of this type of speech coming from the political fringes. Iv seen the term "culture warrior" used to describe these folks, but really they are just ideologs. Its "identity politics" or what have you.

They talk that way because they THINK that way. They fully believe that folks at the other end of the spectrum are their enemies in a transcending struggle against the (insert left/right pejorative here), who clearly are bent on the destruction of our very way of life.

Im not shittin ya! Thats really what they think! And if you really believed that OF COURSE you would denigrate whoever "them" is. Ya cant just let them destroy our way of life right?

Edited May 21, 2012 by dre

[dre]

At the risk of making another generalization, my good Dr. Dre, now you are sounding a bit elitist!

I dont know if branding political hacks and culture warriors as what they - by definition - actually ARE... is elitist.

[bleeding heart]

I wouldnt say the "center" is always wise and just but I definately see most of this type of speech coming from the political fringes. Iv seen the term "culture warrior" used to describe these folks, but really they are just ideologs. Its "identity politics" or what have you.

In discussions I've had about murderous Western behaviour, the self-proclaimed "centre" has tended to be the most virulent, the most angry at having their countries and identities "insulted" (ie via observable facts). The same ones who know every bit of minutiae about Parliament and (conventional) history narratives, and are quite intelligent about moderation in so many respects, are the most bloodthirsty when it comes to rhetoric and rage, at least when it comes to the international scene, in which Western states flit about trying to Do Good, surrounded by unreasoning evil everywhere.

So I can only conclude that the "centre" is as full of extremists and insulters as are people on any other point on the spectrum.

[dre]

In discussions I've had about murderous Western behaviour, the self-proclaimed "centre" has tended to be the most virulent, the most angry at having their countries and identities "insulted" (ie via observable facts). The same ones who know every bit of minutiae about Parliament and (conventional) history narratives, and are quite intelligent about moderation in so many respects, are the most bloodthirsty when it comes to rhetoric and rage, at least when it comes to the international scene, in which Western states flit about trying to Do Good, surrounded by unreasoning evil everywhere.

So I can only conclude that the "centre" is as full of extremists and insulters as are people on any other point on the spectrum.

Yeah, just gonna have to agree to disagree there. In my observation most of the vitriol youre alluding to ALSO comes from political ideologs, and its driven by the same kind of obsession with identity.

Edited May 21, 2012 by dre

[Wild Bill]

I dont know if branding political hacks and culture warriors as what they - by definition - actually ARE... is elitist.

I guess its hard to get perspective on ourselves sometimes. We just can't turn around fast enough!

Doctor, YOU made the definitions! You accept this description of people as true and valid yourself. Others may disagree.

We are all entitled to our opinions. I took from your post that you had stepped outside of that realm and defined your opinions as facts.

Hence my elitist comparison. Perhaps a better term more in keeping with my own "definition" of the Canadian Left being more of a faith than a philosophy would be "righteousness".

[jacee]

Bullying? I call it teasing. My brain went through the same stage, of course!

I find it ironic in the extreme that you choose to simply make a flat statement to me, couched in a haughty and condescending manner, WHILE NOT SAYING A SINGLE WORD TOWARDS AGREEING WITH OR REBUTTING MY PREMISE!

You must be young. You could not have picked a better way to prove what I had written than if you had planned it deliberately!

I'm old and I know bullying when I see it.

[dre]

I guess its hard to get perspective on ourselves sometimes. We just can't turn around fast enough!

Doctor, YOU made the definitions! You accept this description of people as true and valid yourself. Others may disagree.

We are all entitled to our opinions. I took from your post that you had stepped outside of that realm and defined your opinions as facts.

Hence my elitist comparison. Perhaps a better term more in keeping with my own "definition" of the Canadian Left being more of a faith than a philosophy would be "righteousness".

I didnt make the definition. Somebody else defined what an ideologue is, and applied to the exact group of people the word is meant to describe.

Perhaps a better term more in keeping with my own "definition" of the Canadian Left being more of a faith than a philosophy would be "righteousness".

This is just more of the same... a broad generalization of millions of people you dont know, based most likely on loud ideologues on the OTHER side. You dont even know who the "left" is, or what they want, and they dont even all want the same things. Thats probably why they are splintered across 3 or 4 different national parties.

[jacee]

I didnt make the definition. Somebody else defined what an ideologue is, and applied to the exact group of people the word is meant to describe.

This is just more of the same... a broad generalization of millions of people you dont know, based most likely on loud ideologues on the OTHER side. You dont even know who the "left" is, or what they want, and they dont even all want the same things. Thats probably why they are splintered across 3 or 4 different national parties.

Liberals are not left.

They're corporate lackeys with nice smiles.

Edited May 22, 2012 by jacee

[jacee]

If university is so valuable then students should be willing to pay ...

So we should go back to user pay for secondary too?

Elementary?

Some kids get to go to school, some kids don't ... too bad so sad?

What about roads?

Roads are valuable ... User pay roads ...?

Education has value for our society as a whole, not just personal value.

Putting up barriers defeats our common purposes.

Edited May 22, 2012 by jacee

[TimG]

So we should go back to user pay for secondary too?

It is really tedious when you repeat arguments without addressing the replies I have already given. There are no choices in secondary education so there is no benefit to a price. There are endless choices when it comes to university/college/trade school. People should not be going to university unless they are willing to pay part of the cost.

Roads are valuable ... User pay roads ...?

What do you think gas taxes are? Are you suggesting that governments should give free gasoline away because gas is essential?

[punked]

It is really tedious when you repeat arguments without addressing the replies I have already given. There are no choices in secondary education so there is no benefit to a price. There are endless choices when it comes to university/college/trade school. People should not be going to university unless they are willing to pay part of the cost.

That is a silly argument. There could be choice, in fact many places in the country have magnet schools to offer choices.

[Peter F]

Angus, there are two trick questions I have sprung on many a university grad that have baffled them, to the great amusement of others in the group.

I'll share them with you:

"Did your mother have any kids that lived?"

and this gem from my Nova Scotia relations:

"Was it you or your brudder got killed in the war?"

"Must've been me! My brudder didn't go to the war!"

There's a few great silly math games that come from classic Abbott and Costello routines that are also sure-fire confusers for many a university grad.

....

This factor in our brain development is why it is so vital that teachers be trained to keep biases out of their teaching. Human beings of such age will swallow almost everything as true and factual. When so many teachers today are leftwing in their philosophies it is not surprising that younger adults tend to the left, not becoming more central or rightwing until they get into their 30's.

Anyone who doesn't believe my premise is welcome to take a nose count of any random group of people 18-26 years old that they meet. Better yet, if you are student at Queens try handing in a poli-sci or even economics paper that is not biased to the left and see what kind of mark you receive.

Interesting premise; University students are generally stupid and have learned nothing. This is proven by your inability to pass university economics exams.

[TimG]

That is a silly argument. There could be choice, in fact many places in the country have magnet schools to offer choices.

It is not the same an you know it. High school is mandatory for all kids there is no real choice that affects costs. The fact is university is one career choice of many for people and the choice of major matters. e.g. someone may really love art history but there is no real demand for those skills therefore they should be expected to pay for if they really want to pursue it. Putting a price on a degree forces people to think about the income earning potential instead of 'self actualization' - something which is good for society.

[Wild Bill]

Interesting premise; University students are generally stupid and have learned nothing. This is proven by your inability to pass university economics exams.

Never took economics in University. Didn't want to have to pretend to be a Marxist in order to pass!

That was the situation at McMaster in 1971.

BTW, you have totally butchered the meaning of my premise. I said nothing about their innate intelligence. My points were about their ability to critically vet all the info they were absorbing. The idea that the younger brain is not mature and fully capable in this area is not mine but has been virtually a given in such medical circles for a couple of decades now.

Not having a mature level of critical thinking is not the same as being stupid. That is your opinion, not mine.

I would however support the contrary argument, which would be that being able to quickly absorb massive amounts of information is not the same as being smart.

Obviously, someone capable of achieving a university degree in maths and sciences is not stupid. As he or she gets older the critical thinking skills will usually develop more strongly than someone not of that level.

However, if we are talking about arts or poli-sci majors I'm not sure if the same applies...

[August1991]

The Quebec government subsides those out of province students as well. Less students means the government will be saving money.

That's generally false. McGill for example has a quota system for Quebec students. In effect, it operates as a self-funding institution (based on high out of province tuition fees) with the understanding that it accept a minimum number of Quebec students. Most McGill students pay high tuition fees, and are out of privince.

How many foreign students do you think will pay big bucks to get involved in this mess?

Most foreign students have chosen faculties/universities/colleges that are currently not on strike. (In fact, the vast majority (over 80%) of university/college students have completed their session normally.)

Nevertheless Wilber, you make a good point. This strike will affect the Canadian "brand" around the world.

Turns out the growing support doesn't exist, it only appears that support is growing simply because they are the loudest while the majority who are tired of them want it over.

IMHO, this has been the problem from the start.

This is not democracy. This is mob rule. (I personally prefer the term "civilized society" to democracy or even Trudeau's "Just Society".)

At present in Montreal, we have something beyond mob rule - we have mafia, extortionate rule: "That's a nice bridge you have there. It'd be sad if drivers were blocked for an hour or two."

This is what radical students in Montreal are doing now.

Edited May 22, 2012 by August1991

[August1991]

If tuition was free every moron would go to college. Enough morons go to college as it is.

If you want to go to college, you should have to work at it. I know I did.

This deserves QOTD.

Again, all of these elitist and patronizing arguments were once made about free tuition for secondary school, from which those of limited means were once excluded. Most of the men who fought WWII had only a Grade 8 education or less as secondary school cost money (and still does in some countries). Free public secondary education only appeared in the baby boom generation.Sixty years later, it's time now to extend that to postsecondary.

And in 2056, we will finally achieve true nirvana when the State pays for education so that people can go to ex-post graduate university, or Grade 75 education!

Jacee, you are describing grade inflation, or what Americans call the new "education" bubble. How long does it take to educate someone? As a species, if it takes half our life "to learn", then as a species, we're not sustainable.

----

As often with bureaucrats, more money is not the solution.

Edited May 22, 2012 by August1991

[Signals.Cpl]

That's generally false. McGill for example has a quota system for Quebec students. In effect, it operates as a self-funding institution (based on high out of province tuition fees) with the understanding that it accept a minimum number of Quebec students.

Most foreign students choose faculties/universities/colleges that are not on strike.

Nevertheless Wilber, you make a good point. This will affect the Canadian "brand" around the world.

IMHO, this has been the problem from the start.

This is not democracy. This is mob rule. (I personally prefer the term "civilized society" to democracy or even Trudeau's "Just Society".)

At present in Montreal, we have something beyond mob rule - we have mafia, extortionate rule: "That's a nice bridge you have there. It'd be sad if drivers were blocked for an hour or two."

This is what radical students in Montreal are doing now.

Well their parents generation had their protests, and now these students want their protest whether there is a reason or not. And the way I see it is that the leadership of the student protests is just hoping for exposure for a future political career.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Signals.Cpl

[August1991]

Last time I checked there were no choices to be made for K-12. Everyone goes to school for the same amount of time and learns roughly the same material and they can't stay in indefinitely.

When it comes to university people have to make choices: i.e. what major or trade school, whether to get a masters or PhD and people can stay in university indefinitely. Given these choices it is irresponsible not to put a price on it to ensure that people think carefully about their choices and don't go unless they are convinced it is worth it.

Why do we have this K-12 system? Why does it take another 8 years to do a PhD? Why do people often study until they're 30 or more - without having ever worked?

I'm just fascinated to watch "free market" advocates suddenly claim there's a moral purpose behind profit-making...for the sake of the payer, not the payee...which is in direct contradiction to all capitalist and free market theory.

Uh, there's "money". We can use it to make chocolate bars, educate kids or install a traffic light.

The installation of traffic lights at an intersection costs about $100,000. Canadians spend about $1 million/day on chocolate bars. How many lives could be saved if we installed more traffic lights at dangerous intersections?

Bleeding heart, it's not "profits". It's "chocolate bars".

Edited May 24, 2012 by August1991

[August1991]

I'm old and I know bullying when I see it.

The bullies are the kids in the streets - and sadly jacee, you don't see that.

To you, these student activists are soft-spoken, appear well on TV and seem to defend the weak. GNB is a master.

----

As I warn older family/friends, the fraud artist who deceives the elderly widow of her life savings will not have greasy hair, dirty clothes, a beard and an unctuous voice. It will be a polite young attractive man or woman with coiffed hair and who speaks well and dresses cleanly.

Edited May 22, 2012 by August1991

[August1991]

Well their parents generation had their protests, and now these students want their protest whether there is a reason or not. And the way I see it is that the leadership of the student protests is just hoping for exposure for a future political career.

There may be some truth to your idea. (Fifteen minutes of fame, and so on.)

But Andy Warhol is dead (heck, the 1960s is dead). And with youtube, there are many who claim that 15 minutes.

There is something pathetic about 25 year old kids (born around 1985) reliving the ambitions of their "radical" parents born around 1950.

----

Nowadays, we have the Internet and many ways to express an opinion. There is something 18th or 19th century about a mob in an urban street.

IMHO, this Montreal student protest is backward, arriéré.

Edited May 22, 2012 by August1991

[Argus]

These broad left vs right generalizations are nothing more than the hall mark of idiots and hacks. Without exception the folks making them, and the people who use terms like "the left", and "the right" and all the various synonyms are not only the lowest quality voters in Canada, but the lowest quality posters here on MLW.

I don't know if you've figured it out yet but this is a political discussion forum. Therefore, the eternal conservative/liberal or right/left paradigm is going to be talked about.

Personally, I feel the lowest quality of poster here is the one who is incapable of talking about ideas but instead attacks the proponent of those ideas and imputes an inferior morality to them.

You generally fall into that category, btw.