Bloody Students!

[Codex]

^This post is amazing

[Lias]

Very few degrees lead directly to employment. You have to compete for almost any job.

That's a given.. But I strongly feel there are many degrees that we could trim the fat on.

What degrees provide good job prospects is a product of the state of the economy at a given time. Some jobs, of course, are more exposed when there's economic downturns. Other jobs are key drivers of economic innovation and growth (we see this reflected in the additional subsidies STEM receives).
We ought to be careful though, in thinking that 'arts' aren't worthwhile pursuits.

Some BA's are useful.. others not so much. But hardly the only tertiary study, and particularly "lower end" tertiary study (IE Wananga/Polytech courses) could REALLY do with some cutting.
Disclaimer: I have worked in tertiary for aprox 9 years across both Wananga and Polytechs.

There is a case to be made that we over-subsidise tertiary studies, or that we have inefficient subsidies (like the blunt interest-free policy) which incentivise people into areas which are not very beneficial. Fine Arts would be the common exemplar used by some but there are some counter arguments from things like http://supportthearts.co.uk. In short you might intimate the value of the Arts through the John Adams quote:

I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.

The idea is that, in the long-run, Arts' contribution to society and economy is to promote innovation and prevent cultural stagnation. That may not be sufficient to get us to fork out our cash though.

I'm okay with fine arts being available as courses, but think pretty much anything beyond a Level 100 paper should be at full cost.

On the other hand, we still subsidise lots of things which are far less beneficial like stadiums, royal tours and yacht races. Maybe the discussion needs to shift away from cuts to education funding, towards cuts to funding extravagance?

Here's some figures nicked from Budget 2013 using wheresmytaxes.co.nz, they're quite nifty and are calucated on a per capita basis, to give you a more 'real' understanding of fiscal policy:

Agree on Super.. needs to be means tested, and the age needs to be going upwards, and KEEP going upwards. 65 was the age of retirement when the average age of death was the low 70's. Now the average age is 80+, so the retirement age should be about 72-73, and keep moving up as the population keeps living longer.

Student loans need to be interest bearing again, and the government needs to take greater steps to recover recalcitrant expat debt. Like withdraw passports, have non payers extradited, etc.

Unemployment benefit need to be work for the dole, and needs to have a max timeframe (like 6 months)

Health funding also needs to be slashed. Start by withholding all care from non citizens who don't have private insurance.  Means test public healthcare. End expensive drugs/operations/etc that only benefit a small number of people. Free public healthcare is a great thing, but it should be at a very basic level, and should be no substitute for private medical insurance.

Benefits, Health and Education account for roughly 60% of the budget. They are what needs slashing the most. I strongly disagree about slashing NZDF spending, but even if I did agree, it's 3% of the budget.

[Tandoori]

It makes you think, eh!

Studying Arts has not given me (m)any answers, but it's helped me question things.

Does overall government spending need slashing or just different prioritization? Fiscal policy equates to around 30% of GDP. Is this because the government is spending too much to provide things which are not public goods, or is it a product of a small country where public infrastructure is always going to be a large chunk of GDP?  Are taxes too high or are wages/salaries (and producitivity) too low?

This is what the Treasury uses as their framework for their goal of improving Living Standards for NZers:



Some fiscal policies promotes one at the expense of another, but some fiscal policies complement multiple dimensions.

1.I won't try to make sense of Wananga funding, because there's a number of constitutional issues there which are just messy to discuss on the internet. Roughly, there is an argument that the Wananga's purpose is not strictly providing education for jobs.

2.What's the cost of means-testing public healthcare versus the efficiency gain? Can the private system takeover where you propose cuts? Is the potential market large enough for competition and efficiency?

3.Does 'work for the dole' change behaviours? Could it help break cycles of welfare dependency and inter-generational unemployment? Why not a return to Department of Labour work schemes etc? Or might it be more efficient to simply continue making a cash transfer?

4.If we reduce availability of unemployment benefits, what does that mean for the ~5% of the population who will always be out of work as a result of natural market forces and macroeconomic policy (i.e. Phillips Curve)? Does the relative utility of  crime increase and so incentivise more people to commit crime? Would the result be: privatising the cost that used to be picked up by the tax system (e.g. instead of paying Unemployment Benefit, people pay higher insurance premiums, have to purchase security systems/services, and also bear the cost of property-related crime like theft?).


5. Does the Defence Force actually provide a public good?
Or is that job now being increasingly performed by the MFAT and the GCSB (whose funding is not included in the figure I put up before and whose combined cost per capita equaled $228.81 last year - but came with all the other services that both agencies provide).

6.That ~3% is a lot of money!
a.It's more than half of what we raised through Asset Sales last year.
b.It could offset what we're spending on Loans, Allowances and Fee-subsidies
c. It could be equal to a 57% increase in spending for Early Childhood Education (which is actually the best value-for-money area in Education we can spend on; it would boost mid-run economic growth substantially)
d.Phrased another way, we might look at the Value of Statistical Life that the Ministry of Transport uses when determining how much money to spend to make our roads safe; 519 less deaths if we took $2bn from the NZDF and put it into roads.
How many people did the NZDF save in New Zealand last year?
You could of course argue that by employing 13,544 people, they're a very expensive work-for-dole scheme. But I think we could do something a bit more efficient.

7.Finally, the point I want to make with this post is: Market economies are impressive in their productive capability, and generate massive amounts of surplus, but they need to be competitive to do this and;  they can struggle to provide public goods (like health, defence) and; they don't address equity or justice very well and; the New Zealand market economy exists in, and depends on, a political environment which does value justice and equity.

[Pyromanik]

Pretty much what Lias started to say, but then nothing Lias actually said at all.

Then pretty much everything Hori said.

With the added point that paying for heathcare is a fucking farce. Look at the condition it's put America in.
Fuck that. That's pretty much why we pay tax.
On the other hand the UK's NI system is a fucking farce too. So much sloppy uncaring bullshit it's just redonk.
Neither is good, and while NZ's not great, it's an almost happy medium.

There's a reason everyone thinks ACC are cunts. It's because they're not paying out for everything blind.

[Lias]

Does overall government spending need slashing or just different prioritization? Fiscal policy equates to around 30% of GDP. Is this because the government is spending too much to provide things which are not public goods, or is it a product of a small country where public infrastructure is always going to be a large chunk of GDP?  Are taxes too high or are wages/salaries (and producitivity) too low?

Absolutely needs cutting. I'm very much a fan of small government, not bloated bureaucracy.

1.I won't try to make sense of Wananga funding, because there's a number of constitutional issues there which are just messy to discuss on the internet. Roughly, there is an argument that the Wananga's purpose is not strictly providing education for jobs.

I'd disagree, the purpose of Wananga is to provide an alternative educational system (to whit a holistic whanau based approach rooted in maori culture and tradition), but it's end goal is still to upskill and educate people for the work force.

2.What's the cost of means-testing public healthcare versus the efficiency gain? Can the private system takeover where you propose cuts? Is the potential market large enough for competition and efficiency?

Without access to a lot of numbers I don't have access too, it's just speculation. I suspect we could save a lot of money thou.

3.Does 'work for the dole' change behaviours? Could it help break cycles of welfare dependency and inter-generational unemployment? Why not a return to Department of Labour work schemes etc? Or might it be more efficient to simply continue making a cash transfer?

It won't change behaviours for all, but for some nothing will. It might be cheaper in the long run to just keep giving them "free money" but your never going to break those cycles you talk about doing that. "Work for Dole", work schemes, public labour battalions, workhouses whatever you want as long as they are not just sitting around doing nothing.

4.If we reduce availability of unemployment benefits, what does that mean for the ~5% of the population who will always be out of work as a result of natural market forces and macroeconomic policy (i.e. Phillips Curve)? Does the relative utility of  crime increase and so incentivise more people to commit crime? Would the result be: privatising the cost that used to be picked up by the tax system (e.g. instead of paying Unemployment Benefit, people pay higher insurance premiums, have to purchase security systems/services, and also bear the cost of property-related crime like theft?).

We're in the realm of speculation here, but my belief is our system should be like Singapore's (in many areas actually, not just unemployment).

5. Does the Defence Force actually provide a public good?
Or is that job now being increasingly performed by the MFAT and the GCSB (whose funding is not included in the figure I put up before and whose combined cost per capita equaled $228.81 last year - but came with all the other services that both agencies provide).

6.That ~3% is a lot of money!
a.It's more than half of what we raised through Asset Sales last year.
b.It could offset what we're spending on Loans, Allowances and Fee-subsidies
c. It could be equal to a 57% increase in spending for Early Childhood Education (which is actually the best value-for-money area in Education we can spend on; it would boost mid-run economic growth substantially)
d.Phrased another way, we might look at the Value of Statistical Life that the Ministry of Transport uses when determining how much money to spend to make our roads safe; 519 less deaths if we took $2bn from the NZDF and put it into roads.
How many people did the NZDF save in New Zealand last year?
You could of course argue that by employing 13,544 people, they're a very expensive work-for-dole scheme. But I think we could do something a bit more efficient.

If we didn't have a defence force, you and I would not be sitting here discussing this, we'd be living in slave labour camps and speaking Japanese. But as for the value of NZDF training and the values it instills in people, pretty much all of the people I know who I consider to be GREAT human beings, have served in the armed forced of this or another country.

[Pyromanik]

Singapore had the vision to attract overseas investment into it's economic growth as a country, not just to use and abuse them as a slave labour camp.

[Tiwaking!]

It makes you think, eh!

Studying Arts has not given me (m)any answers, but it's helped me question things.

The supreme end of education is expert discernment in all things--the power to tell the good from the bad, the genuine from the counterfeit, and to prefer the good and the genuine to the bad and the counterfeit.

[Tiwaking!]

Just wanted to post up some information I got from an email I ignored about Student Loans

Living overseas or thinking about it?
Don't forget, interest is charged on your student loan if you're overseas for six months or more. So it's important to keep on top of your loan while you're away. It's also important to let us know if you'll be overseas for more than six months.

Paying a student loan from overseas? This could help
These law changes will actually help you pay off your loan sooner:

Your annual repayment obligation is now based on whatever your loan balance was on 31 March 2014. If you left New Zealand after this date, it'll be based on your loan balance on your date of departure.
Your repayments won't reduce as your loan balance decreases - which means you'll be able to pay off your loan sooner.
If you have a loan balance over $45,000, your repayment obligation will go up. So you'll need to increase your repayments. But you'll pay off more of your loan each year.
Are you seriously behind with your repayments and haven't recently talked to us about it? Remember that might mean you may be stopped from leaving New Zealand if you come home for a visit. So it's important you talk to us before this happens - remember, we're here to help.
Spend less repaying your loan from overseas
It's now even easier - and cheaper - with our new fee-free payment options.
And don't forget, the due dates for your student loan payments are 30 September and 31 March.

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

You thinking about going overseas Tiwa?

[Tiwaking!]

You thinking about going overseas Tiwa?

No. I was just interested in the "you may be stopped from leaving New Zealand if you come home for a visit" part.

I thought they were changing something important about the Student Loan but nope: Same old 0% interest. The same amount of interest I have in paying it back

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

These are the kind of emails I ignore;

[Pyromanik]

Just wanted to post up some information I got from an email I ignored about Student Loans

Living overseas or thinking about it?
Don't forget, interest is charged on your student loan if you're overseas for six months or more. So it's important to keep on top of your loan while you're away. It's also important to let us know if you'll be overseas for more than six months.

Paying a student loan from overseas? This could help
These law changes will actually help you pay off your loan sooner:

Your annual repayment obligation is now based on whatever your loan balance was on 31 March 2014. If you left New Zealand after this date, it'll be based on your loan balance on your date of departure.
Your repayments won't reduce as your loan balance decreases - which means you'll be able to pay off your loan sooner.
If you have a loan balance over $45,000, your repayment obligation will go up. So you'll need to increase your repayments. But you'll pay off more of your loan each year.
Are you seriously behind with your repayments and haven't recently talked to us about it? Remember that might mean you may be stopped from leaving New Zealand if you come home for a visit. So it's important you talk to us before this happens - remember, we're here to help.
Spend less repaying your loan from overseas
It's now even easier - and cheaper - with our new fee-free payment options.
And don't forget, the due dates for your student loan payments are 30 September and 31 March.

Fucking government.

Overseas for just under 6 months (because earning interest > charged interest).
Pay off student loan with massive lump sum.
Get statment showing $0.00 owed.
A month later, get a bill for $1500 interest.

How the fuck does 0.00 accrue that much interest?

Especially in what could be no less than a week if the dates were off bit a little bit? (they weren't)

[Apostrophe Spacemonkey]

A Kiwi living overseas who ignored requests to repay his student loan has been arrested at the New Zealand border after returning home for a visit - the first time the hardline sanction has been used.

Bahahaha, good job.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11577650

[Lias]

Yeah I saw that and zero fucks were given lol.

[420fairy]

A Kiwi living overseas who ignored requests to repay his student loan has been arrested at the New Zealand border after returning home for a visit - the first time the hardline sanction has been used.

Bahahaha, good job.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11577650

Good job! Yes it's a struggle to live while repaying a student loan. Just because people skip off overseas doesnt mean they dont have to repay the funds they borrowed for their qualifications.

[Tiwaking!]

Fucking government.

Overseas for just under 6 months (because earning interest > charged interest).
Pay off student loan with massive lump sum.
Get statment showing $0.00 owed.
A month later, get a bill for $1500 interest.

How the fuck does 0.00 accrue that much interest?

Especially in what could be no less than a week if the dates were off bit a little bit? (they weren't)

IRD is run by accounting students who pay back their student loans by charging them to other people with student loans. I thought everybody knew that.

A Kiwi living overseas who ignored requests to repay his student loan has been arrested at the New Zealand border after returning home for a visit - the first time the hardline sanction has been used.

Bahahaha, good job.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11577650

We are concerned that this will turn those who are overseas with student loans into permanent refugees

They could always go to Germany. Germans love Kiwi's. Germans love Refugees. Kiwi Refugees would probably be automatic citizenship

[toofast]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11577974

He said his plan was never to rack up a huge debt and then ignore it after graduating but accepted he was in the wrong for not keeping in touch with the IRD.

Though he was committed to making repayments he said he had a $300,000 mortgage to think about.

This guy must live in some fantasy world.

[Tiwaking!]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11577974

He said his plan was never to rack up a huge debt and then ignore it after graduating but accepted he was in the wrong for not keeping in touch with the IRD.

Though he was committed to making repayments he said he had a $300,000 mortgage to think about.

This guy must live in some fantasy world.

He had been given a $40,000 loan while studying a Bachelor of Arts

Whomever approved that loan should be shot

[Tiwaking!]

Its interesting to see how it has come full circle and Post Graduate papers can get student allowance again. Why they took that away I'll never know. That does mean some people will just carry on doing papers for another year after they graduate, just in case they cant get a job.

These are the kind of emails I ignore;

How did Google know who I was?

How did Google know who YOU were?

HOW DOES GOOGLE KNOW THESE THINGS?!?!

#ProjectDragonfly