Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | ... | 268
Meow
7786 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3846

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1906847 23-Nov-2017 23:37
4 people support this post
Send private message

So we tend to overlook many things in the Politics forums - as stated, they're less moderated but it doesn't mean that we're not watching.

 

Stop it with making things personal. We're not Children. If you feel you need to make things personal then disconnect your router and get off the internet for a bit. The Politics forum doesn't exempt you from the FUG and appropriate punishments for schoolyard type behaviour will still be given.







2479 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 678


  Reply # 1906855 24-Nov-2017 00:16
One person supports this post
Send private message

tdgeek:

MikeB4:


tdgeek:


 


new news, women will get tax breaks on womens essentials. Why? Im sure many things are essential to many different people. maybe us guys will get tax breaks on hedge trimmers???



Hedge trimmers are optional



Yes, I was being facetious. My point is why would we give a tax beard for that purpose? I am in full agreement helping any girls or women who struggle with that cost. But we, as in taxpayers are also foregoing GST revenue from the many who can afford that cost. Its help 2 people out of 10, and flag the revenue from the other 8.



Agree... we have no problem supplying these for our own needs, so at least they should target this idea toward WINZ (free pickup for WINZ clients?) or in high schools and Uni’s health/first aid centres.

7192 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3749


  Reply # 1906907 24-Nov-2017 09:16
Send private message

Pumpedd:

 

My statement was based on a television article where 2 Uni's Vice Chancellors stated that enrollments so far were 10% up on this time last year, and they were wondering if they too were going to get an increase in funding to cover this expansion.

 

 

They do get an increase, as their funding model is based on TEC funding based on number of EFT (equivalent full time) students enrolled. What may be a problem is that they'll get a cap on the number of EFTs they can use per programme and total, that being determined by central govt - probably based on how much they want to fund and dividing it up on a nominally rational basis, which includes forecast workplace demand for skills, but also the history of completion rates, short and long-term employment outcomes etc etc.  They also get flayed by TEC if they don't meet EFT targets - their allocation - hence funding - for subsequent years gets cut.

 

I suspect that it would be in the interests of the university to overstate the number of applications for enrolment at this time of year, because there's a considerable difference between numbers of initial applications and final enrolments - part of the reason for that being that potential students apply for the same or similar courses at different institutions to hedge their bets in case they aren't accepted at their first choice.  This creates planning chaos.  Nice to have enrolments confirmed and locked-in ASAP rather than scrambling at the last minute to figure out how programmes are going to be delivered.  Creating the impression that you're "lucky to be accepted" because demand is high hurries student applicants up in their decision making.

 

I don't think anybody really knows the impact of the free fee policy on student numbers.  IMO it (course cost) is only one of many barriers to addressing the ridiculous situation that mainly family wealth determines who does and doesn't make it in the present system. 


493 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 116


  Reply # 1906957 24-Nov-2017 09:37
2 people support this post
Send private message

Fred99:

 

They do get an increase, as their funding model is based on TEC funding based on number of EFT (equivalent full time) students enrolled. What may be a problem is that they'll get a cap on the number of EFTs they can use per programme and total, that being determined by central govt - probably based on how much they want to fund and dividing it up on a nominally rational basis, which includes forecast workplace demand for skills, but also the history of completion rates, short and long-term employment outcomes etc etc.  They also get flayed by TEC if they don't meet EFT targets - their allocation - hence funding - for subsequent years gets cut.

 

 

Labour have not made any statements regarding increasing EFTS related funding, so in the absence of any further information and giving the start of the new tertiary year is almost upon us, we'll have to assume that their intention is to keep enrolments at the same level but to waive the student payable fee component.

 

Tertiary institutions will need to be very careful in who they allow to enrol as TEC course completion measurements still apply, and if they allow students who are not committed to the course to enrol both parties will suffer.

 

Fred99:

 

I don't think anybody really knows the impact of the free fee policy on student numbers.  IMO it (course cost) is only one of many barriers to addressing the ridiculous situation that mainly family wealth determines who does and doesn't make it in the present system. 

 

 

I agree.

 

IMO a fee free first year (moving to three free years of post-secondary education) is not the right method to increase participation rates and lift educational achievements. Student loan write-offs for successful completion of strategically important courses (perhaps with bonding), combined with some tweaks to the EFTS funding system is the better way to lift outcomes.

 

I think the policies we've seen publicised thus far are politically expedient sound-bytes but lack any real strategic thinking behind them.


17957 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5171

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1906966 24-Nov-2017 09:56
One person supports this post
Send private message

Oh God! Michael Cullen will be leading the Labour Tax Group.

 

/me facepalm.

 

 


12872 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6079

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 1907004 24-Nov-2017 10:24
One person supports this post
Send private message

networkn:

 

Oh God! Michael Cullen will be leading the Labour Tax Group.

 

/me facepalm.

 

 

 

 

That news does not fill my Friday with joy and happiness.





Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 


Glurp
7988 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3714

Subscriber

  Reply # 1907029 24-Nov-2017 10:59
Send private message

michaelmurfy:

 

So we tend to overlook many things in the Politics forums - as stated, they're less moderated but it doesn't mean that we're not watching.

 

 

It must be hard for you to have to read every single post to see who's transgressing.

 

 





I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage
 


11831 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3836

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 1908716 27-Nov-2017 22:10
Send private message

MikeB4:

 

networkn:

 

Oh God! Michael Cullen will be leading the Labour Tax Group.

 

/me facepalm.

 

 

 

 

That news does not fill my Friday with joy and happiness.

 

 

 

 

He's a bit past his prime. Perhaps the whiskey helps keep him focussed.






493 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 116


  Reply # 1908800 28-Nov-2017 08:12
Send private message

Geektastic:

 

He's a bit past his prime. Perhaps the whiskey helps keep him focussed.

 

 

 

 

He is however still very ideologically driven, and consequently the likely policy outcomes from this process are readily guessable.

 

 


7192 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3749


  Reply # 1908818 28-Nov-2017 09:41
One person supports this post
Send private message

wsnz:

 

Geektastic:

 

He's a bit past his prime. Perhaps the whiskey helps keep him focussed.

 

 

 

 

He is however still very ideologically driven, and consequently the likely policy outcomes from this process are readily guessable.

 

 

 

 

Hard to think of more ideologically driven than Douglas, Richardson etc.

 

Oh - okay - there's Morgan.

 

I don't think "ideologically driven" should be a valid criticism of politicians (including ex).  They all are - every single one of them.  Even anarchists.


700 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 201


  Reply # 1908819 28-Nov-2017 09:50
Send private message

Michael "Can we Tax it, Yes we Can" Cullen


7192 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3749


  Reply # 1908820 28-Nov-2017 09:53
Send private message

sen8or:

 

Michael "Can we Tax it, Yes we Can" Cullen

 

 

The "tax on (almost) everything" (GST) wasn't his idea.


13223 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2371

Trusted

  Reply # 1908826 28-Nov-2017 10:06
Send private message

The purpose of the TWG is to make the existing tax take, fairer. Its not to increase the tax take. Some taxes will  increase, some will decrease, some will be added some will be removed

 

Thats been very clearly stated.

 

Or, thats not much good as we cannot whinge about that so we will pretend that its add tax add tax add tax working group so we can diss the Govt?


13223 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2371

Trusted

  Reply # 1908828 28-Nov-2017 10:07
One person supports this post
Send private message

Fred99:

 

sen8or:

 

Michael "Can we Tax it, Yes we Can" Cullen

 

 

The "tax on (almost) everything" (GST) wasn't his idea.

 

 

Kiwisaver, Super, Working For Families, were, they seem like sound ideas


7192 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3749


  Reply # 1908835 28-Nov-2017 10:18
2 people support this post
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Fred99:

 

sen8or:

 

Michael "Can we Tax it, Yes we Can" Cullen

 

 

The "tax on (almost) everything" (GST) wasn't his idea.

 

 

Kiwisaver, Super, Working For Families, were, they seem like sound ideas

 

 

I don't think WFF was a good idea at all:

 

it was an admission of defeat, that ordinary working people with children in the post-reform low-wage high-cost economy were struggling to get by.

 

It effectively penalised young people without children who were on low wages but not eligible for any WFF payment, and made it harder for them to get ahead as it cemented the low-wage economy - combined with a double-whammy for that generation with tertiary fees and repaying student loans, at a time in life when you should be trying to put money aside for your future life, a deposit on a house etc.

 

Instead of giving away money, I'd have rather seen an all-out attack on low wages, "real" job creation, and a high tax-free threshold.

 

 


1 | ... | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | ... | 268
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.