In article <EueWd.185124$K7.61935@no-spam>, "jg"
<jg@no-spam> wrote:
>"Hunter1" <hunter1@no-spam> wrote in message
>news:4229424c$2@no-spam
>> jg wrote:
[snip]
>> > They hock houses in the US, but the point is they can obviously
>> > afford to... you don't have a house to hock.
>>
>> Don't need a house to hock in Australia, they pay for education for us
>> and we only have to pay them back in tiny chunks of your wage with a
>> negligible interest rate. Any other country have it that easy?
>>
>> > In fact do you actually have a family to support
>> > before you crow about how easy it is?
>>
>> Nope, don't need to. Know a baby factory or two that earn more than I do
>> on the generous welfare system, and remember we were talking about HECS,
>> not family benefits.
>
>Yeah & I bet their kids go to uni... not. Look, the process is
>knowledge>meal ticket>job>family>house. Unless you've done the lot your
>knowledge is second hand, the kids are starting to work out there are more
>attractive options than a long uni course & a hecs debt at the end.
Old friend of mine is often remarking how he wished they had a HECS
scheme back in the days when he went to Uni. As it was, he had to
work as an unskilled labourer for two years to get enough money to
start out there.
The knock-on effect is that he effectively has two years less in his
professional career, which means a simplistic loss of around $140,000
in wages at going rates, plus a loss of around $29,000 in final
superannuation benefits.
The local daily tabloid had an article some time ago which purported
to show an average lifetime benefit of around $500,000 for those
getting a Uni degree compared with those without one. (But they
didn't separate out TAFE certificates in the comparison, so I don't
know how much they might be worth compared with a Uni degree.)
Cheers, Phred.
--
ppnerkDELETE@no-spam
"Phred" <ppnerkDELETETHIS@no-spam> wrote in message
news:38ti1tF5m8uflU1@no-spam
> In article <EueWd.185124$K7.61935@no-spam>, "jg"
> <jg@no-spam> wrote:
> >"Hunter1" <hunter1@no-spam> wrote in message
> >news:4229424c$2@no-spam
> >> jg wrote:
> [snip]
> >> > They hock houses in the US, but the point is they can obviously
> >> > afford to... you don't have a house to hock.
> >>
> >> Don't need a house to hock in Australia, they pay for education for us
> >> and we only have to pay them back in tiny chunks of your wage with a
> >> negligible interest rate. Any other country have it that easy?
> >>
> >> > In fact do you actually have a family to support
> >> > before you crow about how easy it is?
> >>
> >> Nope, don't need to. Know a baby factory or two that earn more than I
do
> >> on the generous welfare system, and remember we were talking about
HECS,
> >> not family benefits.
> >
> >Yeah & I bet their kids go to uni... not. Look, the process is
> >knowledge>meal ticket>job>family>house. Unless you've done the lot your
> >knowledge is second hand, the kids are starting to work out there are
more
> >attractive options than a long uni course & a hecs debt at the end.
>
> Old friend of mine is often remarking how he wished they had a HECS
> scheme back in the days when he went to Uni. As it was, he had to
> work as an unskilled labourer for two years to get enough money to
> start out there.
>
2 years as a labourer could pay for fees and living expenses for a course
which might go for maybe 5 years? I don't believe the good old days were
that good.
> The knock-on effect is that he effectively has two years less in his
> professional career, which means a simplistic loss of around $140,000
> in wages at going rates, plus a loss of around $29,000 in final
> superannuation benefits.
>
> The local daily tabloid had an article some time ago which purported
> to show an average lifetime benefit of around $500,000 for those
> getting a Uni degree compared with those without one. (But they
> didn't separate out TAFE certificates in the comparison, so I don't
> know how much they might be worth compared with a Uni degree.)
>
Those are usually so non-specific it's hard to argue or agree, but I know a
dollar in your hand is pretty attractive when you're young & see the local
plumber doing pretty well.
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 19:52:40 +0800
> The local daily tabloid had an article some time ago which purported
> to show an average lifetime benefit of around $500,000 for those
> getting a Uni degree compared with those without one. (But they
> didn't separate out TAFE certificates in the comparison, so I don't
> know how much they might be worth compared with a Uni degree.)
>
Averages are great, and I believe that is why they have the bands for
HECS. However, I fail to see how a science graduate on average,
continuing on in science, is better off financially getting a degree
rather than starting a trade apprentiship at age 16. To go further in
science than a lab jockey ($35-50kps) you need to spend another 3-5
years completing a doctorate and all the associated opportunity costs
that go along with that.
Cheers,
Anil
In article <42299D88.1020406@no-spam>, Anil Sharma
<anil_groups@no-spam> wrote:
> > The local daily tabloid had an article some time ago which purported
>> to show an average lifetime benefit of around $500,000 for those
>> getting a Uni degree compared with those without one. (But they
>> didn't separate out TAFE certificates in the comparison, so I don't
>> know how much they might be worth compared with a Uni degree.)
>
>Averages are great, and I believe that is why they have the bands for
>HECS. However, I fail to see how a science graduate on average,
>continuing on in science, is better off financially getting a degree
>rather than starting a trade apprentiship at age 16. To go further in
Which is why so few are doing science these days. Of course, you
could be a bit selective: I believe geologists are presently up there
with mining engineers and starting on around $90k/year, versus about
$70k/year four years ago (for mining engineers at least).
>science than a lab jockey ($35-50kps) you need to spend another 3-5
>years completing a doctorate and all the associated opportunity costs
>that go along with that.
True. But you have to factor in a value for the fun of doing it! ;-)
Cheers, Phred.
--
ppnerkDELETE@no-spam
"jg" <jg@no-spam> wrote in message
news:GOgWd.185353$K7.97410@no-spam
>
> "Phred" <ppnerkDELETETHIS@no-spam> wrote in message
> news:38ti1tF5m8uflU1@no-spam
>> In article <EueWd.185124$K7.61935@no-spam>, "jg"
>> <jg@no-spam> wrote:
>> >"Hunter1" <hunter1@no-spam> wrote in message
>> >news:4229424c$2@no-spam
>> >> jg wrote:
>> [snip]
>> >> > They hock houses in the US, but the point is they can obviously
>> >> > afford to... you don't have a house to hock.
>> >>
>> >> Don't need a house to hock in Australia, they pay for education for us
>> >> and we only have to pay them back in tiny chunks of your wage with a
>> >> negligible interest rate. Any other country have it that easy?
>> >>
>> >> > In fact do you actually have a family to support
>> >> > before you crow about how easy it is?
>> >>
>> >> Nope, don't need to. Know a baby factory or two that earn more than I
> do
>> >> on the generous welfare system, and remember we were talking about
> HECS,
>> >> not family benefits.
>> >
>> >Yeah & I bet their kids go to uni... not. Look, the process is
>> >knowledge>meal ticket>job>family>house. Unless you've done the lot your
>> >knowledge is second hand, the kids are starting to work out there are
> more
>> >attractive options than a long uni course & a hecs debt at the end.
>>
>> Old friend of mine is often remarking how he wished they had a HECS
>> scheme back in the days when he went to Uni. As it was, he had to
>> work as an unskilled labourer for two years to get enough money to
>> start out there.
> 2 years as a labourer could pay for fees and living expenses for a course
> which might go for maybe 5 years? I don't believe the good old days were
> that good.
More fool you. More of your complete pig ignorance.
You dont even know that he had any real living expenses, stupid.
>> The knock-on effect is that he effectively has two years less in his
>> professional career, which means a simplistic loss of around $140,000
>> in wages at going rates, plus a loss of around $29,000 in final
>> superannuation benefits.
>>
>> The local daily tabloid had an article some time ago which purported
>> to show an average lifetime benefit of around $500,000 for those
>> getting a Uni degree compared with those without one. (But they
>> didn't separate out TAFE certificates in the comparison, so I don't
>> know how much they might be worth compared with a Uni degree.)
> Those are usually so non-specific it's hard to argue or agree, but I know a
> dollar in your hand is pretty attractive when you're young & see the local
> plumber doing pretty well.
Waffle.
Anil Sharma <anil_groups@no-spam> wrote in
message news:42299D88.1020406@no-spam
>> The local daily tabloid had an article some time ago which purported
>> to show an average lifetime benefit of around $500,000 for those getting a
>> Uni degree compared with those without one. (But they didn't separate out
>> TAFE certificates in the comparison, so I don't know how much they might be
>> worth compared with a Uni degree.)
> Averages are great, and I believe that is why they have the bands for HECS.
> However, I fail to see how a science graduate on average, continuing on in
> science, is better off financially getting a degree rather than starting a
> trade apprentiship at age 16.
It would be more viable to compare say a civil engineer and the
monkeys that work for him with trades certificates for the local council.
> To go further in science than a lab jockey ($35-50kps) you need to spend
> another 3-5 years completing a doctorate and all the associated opportunity
> costs that go along with that.
Science isnt a particularly representative profession.
