State of play in student strike
The major student groups have all voted to reject the government’s offer. La Presse has accounts of last weekend’s negotiations but also a story about anti-strike students being “infiltrated” by double agents of the red square. (All very dramatic, isn’t it? Like something out of a Russian novel.)
One of the young women named by La Presse yesterday as a suspect in this week’s metro follies shares a name with another young woman who has since been pestered for interviews and explanations when she was not actually among that little group shown on a metro car.
The metro four may be facing charges connected with terrorism.
Is academic term “foutue”?
A Maisonneuve writer asks why the CBC is doing such a bad job reporting on the student strike.
ant6n 14:26 on 2012/05/12 Permalink
Maybe it’s ‘green’ infiltrators that break shit at ‘red’ demos!
Spock 17:56 on 2012/05/12 Permalink
Please oh please can this thing just end!!!
Declare the “strike” illegal already! I for one will not fork out a single cent more to pay for an education that is way cheaper today than what I paid in the late 90s (taking into account the value of the dollar today).
Josh 18:54 on 2012/05/12 Permalink
Is the layout change on the main page deliberate? Am I the only one seeing it?
ant6n 18:56 on 2012/05/12 Permalink
@Spock
People like you are very resilient to numbers, it is very tiring going through them over and over…
mdblog 20:01 on 2012/05/12 Permalink
I’m with Spock. Two can play hardball, and if these students don’t want to negotiate a deal, well, let’s all walk away from the table and see who comes out on top.
Hamza 07:27 on 2012/05/13 Permalink
It’s not the people vs. the students guys. I know I know, the people on TV in shiny suits told you it is. But it’s not. They lied to you. Outrageous, yeah , but they are paid to say what their bosses want them to say.
Not every political crisis is black vs. white , this vs. that. Please let’s work together . Fighting one another is what has lead to the position we find ourselves in now.
qatzelok 08:20 on 2012/05/13 Permalink
One of the most tragic things about mass media is how it’s used to turn ordinary people into agents for the tyrants who would dominate them. “They must enslave us. That will make us happier.” Of course, they learn a different vocabulary than “enslave” or “tyrant.” They learn “job creation” and “economic performers.”
If dogs could speak English, I wonder what they’d call their masters. “Leash providers?”
Ian 11:59 on 2012/05/13 Permalink
From a purely economic perspective, funding education creates a higher-earning workforce who will earn and therefore spend more money, pay more taxes, and be a more skilled labour pool – increasing the value of their output for their employers. On the other hand, offloading education costs onto students in the form of tuition increases benefits nobody but the banks, who are already making record profits and avoid paying taxes whenever possible. There are of course social benefits to having a more educated population. I’m not a student, but I can see how education benefits the individual and society as a whole. To me it only makes sense to keep the tuition freeze, and admire the student activists for standing up for what they believe in even if it means ridicule by the media and violent suppression by the police. But hey, if you want to let the media convince you that the very people fighting for our collective rights are in fact our enemies, well, there’s not much point in continuing the discussion.
Spock 19:33 on 2012/05/13 Permalink
Violent suppression? That’s funny.
Tell that to the thousands of dead Syrians… They’ll tell you what violent suppression is.
Those spoiled brats here are getting off EASY!!
Ian 20:37 on 2012/05/13 Permalink
Just because there is a scale of violence doesn’t negate that violence is done. If I were to punch you in the face then stab you in the neck, would the punch in the face no longer count? You can call the students spoiled brats if you like, but in my experience it’s only the truly spoiled that refuse to acknowledge that there may be social injustice afoot and ridicule those that do something about it.
Kevin 21:14 on 2012/05/13 Permalink
@qatzelok and @Hamza
Such lazy thinking. Seriously. I’d expect more from you than standard anti-corporate ‘anyone with a real job is a drone’ doublespeak.
That type of comment just demonstrates your ignorance.
And @ant6n your grasp of numbers seems pretty weak.
mdblog 22:38 on 2012/05/13 Permalink
@Ian, there is no causal link between funding education and creating a higher earning workforce, as you have implied. If that were the case, a country like Austria, which offers 100% free university education, would be able to boast the highest earning workforce in the world – but it doesn’t. America, which has some of the highest costs for post-secondary education on the planet also happens to be home to one of the world’s most productive workforces. They create as much wealth in one year as the entire European Union, with about 50 million less people.
@Hamza and quatelok: The way the both of you talk down to the “rest of us” is downright frustrating. I don’t want to get ageist, but someday you’ll both be a little older and wiser, and maybe you’ll realize that the greatest fools are the people who the one’s who are convinced that their version of the truth is the only one. Get over yourselves.
ant6n 23:51 on 2012/05/13 Permalink
@Kevin
“And @ant6n your grasp of numbers seems pretty weak.”
Any numbers to back that claim?
OK, here is the claim from Spock:
“I for one will not fork out a single cent more to pay for an education that is way cheaper today than what I paid in the late 90s ”
Fact:
tuition increase between 1998 and 2012: ~30% + hidden increases in institutional fees
inflation between 1998 and 2012: 33.59%
You guys are just a bunch of jerks, seriously.
ant6n 00:06 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
Another fact of numbers. Next year, when the 300$ or so tuition increase is in effect, the tuition will be more expensive in Quebec, adjusted for inflation, than ANY time since about 1975. So if you studied in Quebec since 1975, and you paid Quebec tuition, you paid LESS than students will next year. This is ONLY the actual tuition, not including any other fees.
Kate 00:14 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
I wish i could find a thing I saw this week about how, mid 20th century or so, Quebec had a radically lower rate of university attendance than anywhere else in Canada. I skimmed it and didn’t link it but it’s very germane to our debates here. (If anyone knows what I mean, please add it in a comment.)
Quebec really needed to be jump-started in this area and to some extent still does: although nobody wants to talk about it much, there are ways in which this place is still getting over being shell-shocked bigtime by Mother Church.
Also it seems to me that many families are just getting by in this economy, and all this endless talk about the expense of going to university is going to make some of them antsy about what it will cost to not only have their kids delay entering the job market for 5 years after high school, but also possibly have to pay for their tuition, books, fees and all the rest. Parents like this don’t necessarily grasp that there is some help available – what they will do is discourage their kids from extending their education.
Kate 00:19 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
Oh and folks – getting a bit heated and ad hominem up there. I know this is a very charged issue and there are strong feelings about it on both sides, but let’s be civil.
Spock 07:42 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
Civility is important. We should be civil here and not like those “students”.
Kate 08:35 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
Watch it, Spock. Don’t hijack what I say to support your own viewpoint. I repeat: the real violence we’ve seen has been on the police side.
Kevin 10:49 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
@Kate
Oh that’s just bullshit. I’m not a fan of cops — ever since I was abandoned on the median of the T-can during a blizzard by the SQ — but there is no way anyone can claim that police have been the source of all violence.
@ant6n
Parse a sentence correctly. There’s a difference between tuition and assorted university fees. If you want to talk about extra fees, go ahead, but use the terms correctly.
Tuition now is about $150 more than when I went to school in the mid-90s. Min. wage is 45% higher.
Loans and bursaries available (at least at my alma mater) are also far more generous than when I was in school.
ant6n 11:41 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
@Kevin
I used tuition, and tuition only. The cost of other fees would indicate the education is even more expensive.
Tuition today is exactly 500$ more since the de-freeze in 2007. That is a 30% increase since 2007. After the first increase in 2012, tuition (alone) will be higher than any time since 1975, adjusted for cpi. That’s a fact, it’s simple, the numbers don’t lie. They have no contempt.
Minimum wage has gone up faster than inflation; but that point is irrelevant (i.e. unrelated to the claim about tuition COST).
Ian 13:29 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
@mdblog – “there is no causal link between funding education and creating a higher earning workforce” … well, that’s where you’re wrong. “Achieving education beyond high school offered an even greater earnings benefit. On average:
a trades or college graduate earned $7,200 more than a high school graduate;
a university graduate had earnings nearly double that of a high school graduate ($23,000 more).” http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/.3ndic.1t.4r@-eng.jsp?iid=54
Kevin 13:33 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
@ant6n
My apologies I made a typo. Tuition has gone up $500 since I was school in 1994.
That said, too many people are playing fast and loose with figures.
I need to get time off work to make a chart of education costs every year since 1960-whatever, cross-referenced with inflation and real dollars, because I’ve had it with people picking and choosing their comparison points based on whatever suits their argument best.
Because honestly, comparing what students pay now to when I was 2 years old is just silly. We all know boomers got to reap all benefits. That’s why we hate them.
But Ach I’m just too fed up to write any more.
ant6n 13:40 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
I mad such a chart, just for you ;-)
tuition 1968-2018 in 2012 dollars.
ant6n 13:55 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
Also
How many weeks of full time minimum wage are needed to pay Quebec tuition?
(disclaimer: I assume 2% inflation between 2012-2018 (above the recent average), and I assume minimum wage will increase at the same rage as the last 20 years (2.8% every year, tuition between 1990 and 1993 is interpolated, because I didn’t have exact numbers))
Spock 20:21 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
Really Kate?
Did the police smash windows and break cars? I think not.
Ian 21:08 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
O RLY? https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/178952_347152892019148_184749301592842_888437_1112078012_n.jpg
Kate 21:43 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
Spock, windows and cars are not anyone’s heads or eyes.
Ian, is that a local picture?
mdblog 23:06 on 2012/05/14 Permalink
@Ian, I said “funding” higher education doesn’t lead to a higher earning workforce, which is exactly what you stated. You said:
“From a purely economic perspective, funding education creates a higher-earning workforce”
I don’t disagree that “achieving” a post secondary education leads to higher earnings for the people with the education, but that wasn’t what you said. Perhaps you misspoke, and for that I forgive you. :)
qatzelok 09:04 on 2012/05/15 Permalink
@ Kate, referring to uneducated Quebec having been: “shell-shocked bigtime by Mother Church.”
Two things: Quebec can’t be compared to ROC when it comes to post-secondary education because of the CEGEP system. When Anglo media barks out numbers that don’t include this, they are being disingenuous. Secondly, Quebec’s “shell shock” has resulted in it being the only jurisdiction in N.A. that makes Morality mandatory in public schools. The rest of North America encourages immorality, and it shows.
Kevin 09:11 on 2012/05/15 Permalink
@qatzelok
How would you accurately include CEGEP numbers in comparison?
Other provinces have Grade 12, which we don’t.
Other provinces have community colleges and technical schools offering programs which are part of our CEGEP system.
Other provinces have 4-year streams for a BA, which we don’t.
Spock 11:53 on 2012/05/15 Permalink
qatzelok, don’t talk about immorality. When Americans and English Canadians want to go and get laid they come here, when they want cheap drugs they come here, when they want alcohol they come here.
Yeah its really moral here…
Also do you understand the concept of CEGEP? It bridges Grade 12 and U0/U1 which exist in every corner of the world. So, please, understand what you try to preach…