bogarde73 wrote on Mar 29
th, 2016 at 4:17pm:
No I don't but does that disqualify my comments?
It shows that you're inflicted with the Liberal disease. Make OTHER people pay more. I would take your remarks more seriously if you made a suggestion that would leave you personally a lot worse off. You won't of course - Liberal disease.
bogarde73 wrote on Mar 29
th, 2016 at 4:17pm:
The bottom line here is too many people are doing higher education in relation to the needs of the market. And many are doing courses which qualify them for very little. And to cap it off, the entrance standards for many things have progressively reduced encouraging more people to opt in.
Why should business, as a matter of market economics, pay more than the salaries of the people they want to hire? Unless, as I expect people like yourself would wish, they are forced to?
Why should graduates start their working life with a huge debt while businesses pay nothing?
If businesses were making a 50% co-contribution towards higher education instead of the nothing they pay now, it would be feasible for businesses to have some input into the number of places offered in courses where they have a vested interest. A large firm would have a good idea how many graduates they need each year. They could sponsor courses training those graduates. If enough businesses gave an indication of their future demand for graduates, the number of places in university could be aligned more closely with the market.
If the system was working right, we wouldn't have to import so many doctors on skilled migration visas and companies wouldn't have to import so many people on 457 visas. The system clearly isn't working, but making people pay more for their education isn't the answer. All it does is make those areas of skill shortages worse.
Forum
Pages: 
