Comments on: The community corps and student debt, #2

By: Andrew Norton

Andrew Norton — Tue, 20 May 2008 20:25:54 +0000

Andrew E - Similar issues arise in that effectively this is just a pay rise, and while more pay is probably needed to attract people to these areas why restrict the applicant pool to those with HELP debts?

By: Andrew Elder

Andrew Elder — Tue, 20 May 2008 14:48:28 +0000

What about proposals by government to write down HECS/HELP debts not for volunteers, but those who take paid employment with government in areas where labour supply is low - eg teaching or nursing/medicine in remote areas? You don’t have to come from a wealthy backgroud to be clueless, or to rise to a position of power where that cluelessness is felt.

By: Rafe Champion

Rafe Champion — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:03:01 +0000

Cowgirl, I am just as much in favour of voluntary community service as anyone, but you are not addressing the basic reson for havaing HECS in the first place - to raise funds for education. How do you propose to make up the missing HECS funds if the scheme is implemented?

Second, if it is cost effective to have more care of the kind that you recommend, why not just fund that straight up instead of stealing the money from education?

By: Andrew Norton

Andrew Norton — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 07:20:23 +0000

Sublime cowgirl - But this is not a volunteer scheme; it is a delayed payment scheme. Though in the post above I do note the possibility of gains from the effective net cost to taxpayers being less than direct payment, this does not get around the more basic objection that if you are going to employ people you should get the best workers for the money you have, rather than just people with student debt. And if it saves money in the long run to give the elderly community care, that will be true whether or not we put HECS debtors to work.

By: sublime cowgirl

sublime cowgirl — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 05:10:09 +0000

I think you are missing a key factor. Volunteer community service could mean a reduction in present government expenditure in community care worth far more than the HECS reduction.

For instance the Home and COmmunity Care Program currently funded by govt,, there is no shortage of demand, high waiting lists in the community. Lack of basic home care services service can prematurely lead eldery and diabled people into higher care and to longer in patient, for more expensive options presently being funded by the taxpayer. Why not have health graduates encouraged to use their skills in a voluntary capacity and reduce their debt in this way?

By: Rafe Champion

Rafe Champion — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 12:23:33 +0000

As for the idea of relatively affluent people working with the disadvantaged, for a long time I have been challenging the caring people on the left to get out and work with disadvantaged schools or communitities or people, to show that they really care about the people (and are not just addicted to political agitation) and also to find out what is really needed (which is almost certainly not more money thrown in the general direction)

By: Rafe Champion

Rafe Champion — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 06:00:44 +0000

The idea is a total nonsense whichever way you look at it. The purpose of HECS is to raise funds for higher education. Is that too hard to understand? Sacrifice the return from the HECS debt, and how do you raise the extra? From the usual suspects, checkout girls and busdrivers, or do you just cut back on uni funds? So that is a bummer.

What are graduates trained for? We hope remunerative and useful careers and professions. So you train an architect or an engineer or a doctor and then instead of having them pursue their career, they go and do low paid work as …what? Maybe they can go of and be cut price workers in their proper field, then what have they gained if they save the HECS by working for lower pay?

Mad each way you look at it, but heck, it is the Comedy Festival we are talking about, sorry for taking it seriously:)