We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: High Education Support Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: May 2124
Description[?]:
| The SLP wants to make high education more attractive for everyone. Independant from parents, every eligible student can decide by him/herself to study on an university. They pay back later when having a job. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Higher education tuition policy.
Old value:: The government subsidizes tuition only for students from families classified as low-income or poor.
Current: The government subsidizes tuition only for students from families classified as low-income or poor.
Proposed: The government introduces means tested loans for higher education tuition, to be paid back by students after earnings reach a certain amount.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 00:49:52, October 10, 2005 CET | From |  Liberty Party | To | Debating the High Education Support Bill |
| Message | How does this make education more attractive for everyone? Currently poor people are subsidised, under your proposal poor people will receive means tested loans. We fully support the view that access to education should be universal, regardless of family or personal wealth. We therefore recommend that all people offered a place at university (or other place of education, e.g., vocational training courses) should be eligible for educational vouchers. We also note that this proposal is a stealth tax on education and we see no reason to effectively increase tax when public spending is already excessive. |
| Date | 04:58:56, October 10, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy | To | Debating the High Education Support Bill |
| Message | "How does this make education more attractive for everyone? Currently poor people are subsidised, under your proposal poor people will receive means tested loans." True, but students themselves (not parents) pay back the loan their studies. It will also have a positive infuence on their performance. Besides that it is a facility open to everybody. "We fully support the view that access to education should be universal, regardless of family or personal wealth. We therefore recommend that all people offered a place at university (or other place of education, e.g., vocational training courses) should be eligible for educational vouchers." That is a possibility as well. We have read your statement on that matter somewhere else but we believe this is also a sound improvement. We like the idea of the student's urge to graduate and need to find a job in order to pay back the loan. "We also note that this proposal is a stealth tax on education and we see no reason to effectively increase tax when public spending is already excessive. " We don't agree on that. It's a loan (not a gift) which will be payed back. We don't subsidize anymore, so that means an important money saver. |
| Date | 05:20:03, October 10, 2005 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the High Education Support Bill |
| Message | "It will also have a positive infuence on their performance. " We suppose that it is a possibility, although we have not seen any empirical evidence to support the assertion. Of course, you have to set that against the fact that some people will be dissuaded from entering higher education out of the fear of debt (OOC: something which I didn't expect until I met people who had chosen not to go to university because of tuition fees and the increasing cost of education). "Besides that it is a facility open to everybody." No it isn't. 'Means tested' means it is only open to the poor. "We don't agree on that. It's a loan (not a gift) which will be payed back. We don't subsidize anymore, so that means an important money saver." It's a tax increase. At the moment you are spending, say X Rabols on education (i.e., paying grants) and taking Y Rabols in tax. If this passes, you will still be spending the X Rabols (i.e., giving the loans) and taking X + Y in tax. Previously the government's income was Y, now it is X+Y. You have increased taxes by X. But by calling it a loan, you get to claim you haven't raised taxes. That's a stealth tax. |
| Date | 19:03:11, October 10, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy | To | Debating the High Education Support Bill |
| Message | At first we need an investment, that's certainly so, but later on we'll earn it back. It's matter of bookkeeping (crediting and debiting). We don't want to raise taxes but by cutting some budgets will finance the needed capital. On the other hand we do not pay any subsidies. So, there are no finance problems and we realise an increasingly number of studying youngsters. We believe the Republic will profit greatly from this proposal. |
| Date | 20:45:20, October 10, 2005 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the High Education Support Bill |
| Message | "At first we need an investment, that's certainly so, but later on we'll earn it back. " What do you mean? "We don't want to raise taxes but by cutting some budgets will finance the needed capital." But you *are* raising taxes. And what to mean about financing the needed capital? You don't need any more capital, you're not giving away any more money. You're distributing the same amount of money but you're increasing the money that comes in. "It's matter of bookkeeping (crediting and debiting). " It's not a matter of bookkeeping at all. Bookkeeping is simply how you reflect the transactions in your books. You're not changing that, you're changing the nature of the transactions. Can you honestly not see how the current proposal is a tax increase? |
| Date | 21:42:54, October 10, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy | To | Debating the High Education Support Bill |
| Message | No, we do not and we think you're wrong. |
| Date | 22:09:37, October 10, 2005 CET | From | Liberty Party | To | Debating the High Education Support Bill |
| Message | OK, I'll have one last go at trying to illustrate this. Imagine you are a student at university. Your university education costs, say, TRA10,000. This is currently subsidised by government. You subsequently pay tax on your earnings, say an incremental (ie the additional tax arising from having a university education) TRA160,000 during your lifetime. Therefore, you have paid TRA160,000 for your education. Now imagine your proposal passes. Your university education costs, say TRA10,000. This is supplied as a loan from the government. You subsequently pay tax on your earnings, say an incremental (ie the additional tax arising from having a university education) TRA160,000 during your lifetime PLUS you repay your loan of TRA10,000. Therefore you have paid TRA170,000 for your education. 170,000 > 160,000. That is an increase. Money that goes from you to the government is tax. Therefore if the government increases the amount of money that it takes from people, it is increasing tax. |
| Date | 03:04:03, October 11, 2005 CET | From | People's Equality Party Of Trigunia | To | Debating the High Education Support Bill |
| Message | It's good(better) the way it is. I don't think people should be in debt because they wanted a higher education... |
| Date | 06:15:58, October 11, 2005 CET | From | Partiya Natsional'noy Gordyy | To | Debating the High Education Support Bill |
| Message | But they only have to pay back when they are capable to do so (having a job). |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 290 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 265 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Make sure to check out Particracy's wiki. http://particracy.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page |
| Random quote: "The use of solar energy has not been opened up because the oil industry does not own the sun." - Ralph Nader |