At least one protester and one police officer were injured in the melee. According to police, the demonstrator was injured in the leg by a stun grenade while the officer received a slight injury near an eye from a projectile.
Oh goodie. Another Quebec-bashing thread on Calgarypuck.
Personally, I say good for them. I think more students should be standing up for more affordable education. I remember protesting with my student union for lower tuition and my professor at the time got a kick out of our protests. "You aren't going to get anywhere unless you are more militant in your demands. A nice quiet 'Please don't make education less accessible please Mr. Politician.' is useless'.
Yes, Quebec already has the lowest tuition across the country. But not because their's is too low, but because everywhere else is way too high.
These students are not looking to live off the trough as "entitled brats". They are looking to get an education so they can get a good job.
As much as CC poo-poos this as "$70 a year", it's a 3% increase each year for the next 5 years. Most students won't be making 3% more each year for the next 5 years working at Provigo or whatever part time job they can get between classes. Which means more loans. And I think the concern of the student strikers is that if they speak out now and stop the increases, there is nothing to stop the situation there to be as bad as it is elsewhere in Canada.
I know many parents that are PRAYING that their child is able to get some kind of scholarship because they know they cannot afford tuition costs here in Ontario. The only option then is starting your working career with a massive student debt.
I don't know if you remember my friend Evan who pied Chretien. He most certainly regrets that stunt.... not because of going to jail for the incident but because nobody knows that the reason he did it was because it was a protest against the high cost of education. I may not agree with his methods, but I do agree with his stance.
My belief is that everyone should be given an equal chance in life. And if the rich can afford the best schools, while the poor have the choice of not being educated or racking in massive debt on the lottery ticket of getting a good job, then the system is broken. I say good on the Quebec students for standing up whereas the students around the rest of the country meekly get walked all over.
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Devils'Advocate For This Useful Post:
Disagree completely. A higher education shouldn't necessarily be easy. Not everyone needs one. There are only so many spots available as it is and it's already subsidized by the taxpayers enough. If you really want an education, you don't have have to be rich, you just have to want it.
The Following User Says Thank You to Zevo For This Useful Post:
Higher education shouldn't be easy. GETTING a higher education should be. We should WANT a higher educated society.
I don't think it is nearly subsidized enough. Though I do believe that subsidized should be performance based. Basically an expansion of the scholarship program. But it cheeses me off that a poor performing rich kid has so much of a better chance of getting a good education than a hard working poor kid that struggles to get decent grades despite his disadvantages. As much as I have socialistic tendencies, I have no problem with having a wealth gap so long as there is a more equal opportunity for all to make it.
And I think the links I posted show that the cost is the most common reason people give when they are asked why they did not pursue a higher education.
And I find most of the people that are against higher subsidies are those that have enough money to pay their way through. Those struggling to make it through or those that came out with massive debts know the tribulations.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Devils'Advocate For This Useful Post:
I too am a proponent of affordable higher education, but modest annual tuition increases (and a measly $70/year most certainly is modest) are an absolute necessity.
I assume you believe that the faculty, administration, and support staff of Quebec's universities deserve annual salary increases like most employees in the country, yes? Consequently, the operating costs to run an institution increase every year. Do you think the taxpayers should perpetually absorb the rising costs of higher education? Isn't linking tuition increases to inflation justified?
Quote:
As much as CC poo-poos this as "$70 a year", it's a 3% increase each year for the next 5 years. Most students won't be making 3% more each year for the next 5 years working at Provigo or whatever part time job they can get between classes.
Forget about getting a part-time job between classes, what about full-time summer employment? When I was an undergrad ~15 ago, I was hired to paid student internships at $10/hour. At my current employer, we hire student interns at rates of $15-20/hour. A student in Quebec should have no trouble earning more than enough to pay for their tuition if they choose to work full-time over the summer instead of boozing the months away.
The Following 32 Users Say Thank You to MarchHare For This Useful Post:
Rioting over a $70 per year increase to the people who are using the service is as ######ed as rioting over your civic tax bill going up. There is something truly asinine about suggesting that these fools are right to protest against the idea of making the people using the service pay more of the cost of their own education than making everyone else pay for it through higher taxes. These people deserve no respect and they deserve no support. They are hooligans and morons, and should be treated as such.
Higher education shouldn't be easy. GETTING a higher education should be. We should WANT a higher educated society.
I don't think it is nearly subsidized enough. Though I do believe that subsidized should be performance based. Basically an expansion of the scholarship program. But it cheeses me off that a poor performing rich kid has so much of a better chance of getting a good education than a hard working poor kid that struggles to get decent grades despite his disadvantages. As much as I have socialistic tendencies, I have no problem with having a wealth gap so long as there is a more equal opportunity for all to make it.
And I think the links I posted show that the cost is the most common reason people give when they are asked why they did not pursue a higher education.
And I find most of the people that are against higher subsidies are those that have enough money to pay their way through. Those struggling to make it through or those that came out with massive debts know the tribulations.
How many Canadians live within an hour of a University? I would guess that the vast majority do. The vast majority of students can then live at home while going to school which greatly reduces their costs. Couple that with a summer job and perhaps a weekend job waiting tables and debt free graduation seems pretty feasible.
Of my friends who graduated, the ones that had big debt afterwards almost never worked during their education. Instead they spent the summers traveling and relaxing. There is also a huge network of scholarships that are merit based so your hard working kid should be in a much better position to win those over the rich lazy kid.
Perhaps they need more scholarships for students that live further away from a University, but I think the majority are okay.
How many Canadians live within an hour of a University? I would guess that the vast majority do. The vast majority of students can then live at home while going to school.
Just because you're close to a university doesn't necessarily make it the best university to go to for you though.
I just love how so many of them in that video don't even know what they are protesting. One person waving a Che flag, and another waving an anarchy flag. Those represent 2 very different ideologies. Kids these days.
(I think I even saw a Germany flag... why?)
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 03-06-2013 at 12:12 PM.
Oh goodie. Another Quebec-bashing thread on Calgarypuck.
Personally, I say good for them. I think more students should be standing up for more affordable education. I remember protesting with my student union for lower tuition and my professor at the time got a kick out of our protests. "You aren't going to get anywhere unless you are more militant in your demands. A nice quiet 'Please don't make education less accessible please Mr. Politician.' is useless'.
I consider this more of a Quebec student bashing thread than a Quebec bashing thread. Frankly there is only a finate amount of capital to go around - if the government continues to sponsor education at the rate that they currently are then other social assistance programs are going to suffer. Right now Quebec has many major issues going ranging from high unemployment to the fact that their bridges continually seem to crumble. It seems selfish and shortsighted to be saying that the very moderate increases to tuition that still result in them having very low rates of tuition is a useful protest.
To use an analogy it seems like this is akin to a senior citizen getting upset that a chocolate bar doesn't cost a nickel anymore... if the senior also started to destroy the shelves, prevent other people from getting around the store, and being a general nuisance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate
Yes, Quebec already has the lowest tuition across the country. But not because their's is too low, but because everywhere else is way too high.
I disagree, the cost of a university education is still heavily subsidized by the government in Alberta to the extent of 70% I believe. In Alberta it is roughly 7000 dollars a school year depending on the program or around $30,000 for a degree. Expensive, yes. Unmanageable, no... Especially when there are student loans that can help people who require help.
These students are not looking to live off the trough as "entitled brats". They are looking to get an education so they can get a good job.
No they are looking for someone else to pay for their education. Look at the clothing that they are wearing, the cameras that they are taking pictures with, the phones they are using. Now obviously this doesn't apply to everyone and there are students who do struggle to make ends meet, but the majority of the students there fall closer to the spoiled brat end of the spectrum than the poor student side.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate
As much as CC poo-poos this as "$70 a year", it's a 3% increase each year for the next 5 years. Most students won't be making 3% more each year for the next 5 years working at Provigo or whatever part time job they can get between classes. Which means more loans. And I think the concern of the student strikers is that if they speak out now and stop the increases, there is nothing to stop the situation there to be as bad as it is elsewhere in Canada.
I am sure that I could make up the 6 dollars a month somewhere else. Services cost more over time due to inflationary pressures. A loan of an extra 70 dollars a year isn't awful either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate
I know many parents that are PRAYING that their child is able to get some kind of scholarship because they know they cannot afford tuition costs here in Ontario. The only option then is starting your working career with a massive student debt.
Or work for a year at a labour job, save your money, go to school living off the profits of your hard work in conjunction with scholarships for doing well, loans from the government (with a certain amount that is forgiven for completion of the program), as well as a part time job and summer employment. It isn't easy and it isn't glamorous but it isn't impossible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate
I don't know if you remember my friend Evan who pied Chretien. He most certainly regrets that stunt.... not because of going to jail for the incident but because nobody knows that the reason he did it was because it was a protest against the high cost of education. I may not agree with his methods, but I do agree with his stance.
My belief is that everyone should be given an equal chance in life. And if the rich can afford the best schools, while the poor have the choice of not being educated or racking in massive debt on the lottery ticket of getting a good job, then the system is broken. I say good on the Quebec students for standing up whereas the students around the rest of the country meekly get walked all over.
So your belief is one that is completely unrealistic. I would like to have the same options as Prince Harry but I understand that will never happen so I make due the best I can. It isn't about getting walked on, it is about being realistic regarding the circumstances and making personal adjustments accordingly.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Mean Mr. Mustard For This Useful Post:
One other thing to consider is that cheaper tuition alone does not guarantee greater access to education. Subsidizing tuition solely from the taxpayer means that without major increases in education funding, fewer spots become available over time. This leads to increased competition for those fewer spots and less access for everyone as a whole. Tying tuition increases to inflation helps to lessen this burden on taxpayers, but there is still a limited amount of money to go around for these spaces.
On this note, we focus way too much on forcing people to go to university in this country. There are many forms of post-secondary education from trade school to community college that would be way more useful to providing a strong workforce for our economy. Not everyone can or should go to university, but we need to ensure that if they choose to go that route and have the non-monetary entrance requirements that they should be able to.
The Following User Says Thank You to Maccalus For This Useful Post:
Quebec Riots start up again
