SoylentNews

Australia Plans University Fees Hike to Deter Humanities Students

posted by Fnord666 on Sunday June 21 2020, @11:53PM   

Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:

Australia's conservative government announced plans Friday to double university fees for humanities students, in a bid to push people into more useful, "job-relevant" courses like maths and science.

Under the proposal—which critics panned as an "ideological assault"—the cost of degrees like history or cultural studies will rise up to 113 percent to around US$29,000, while other courses such as nursing and information technology will become cheaper.

Education Minister Dan Tehan—an arts graduate with two advanced degrees in international relations—said the government wanted to corral young people towards "jobs of the future" to boost the country's economic recovery from the coronavirus pandemic.

"If you are wanting to do philosophy, which will be great for your critical thinking, also think about doing IT," Tehan said.

The plan would help pay for an additional 39,000 university places by 2023 and for cost cuts for courses like science, agriculture, maths and languages.

[...] "I'm an arts graduate and so is the minister for education so I'm not sure you can draw the conclusion that we're completely unemployable," said opposition lawmaker Tanya Plibersek.

---

Original Submission

• Re:Work slaves Re:Work slaves (Score: 0, Troll) by khallow on Wednesday June 24 2020, @03:38AM (2 children)

  by khallow (3766) on Wednesday June 24 2020, @03:38AM (#1011851) Journal

  Let's consider a similar example - claiming that dressing provocatively excuses rape. There is an implicit equating of the wrongness of dressing provocatively with the wrongness of rape. Even when they can't explicitly make that connection due to social mores or other constraints, they can hint darkly that there are other wrongs than rape. That's just like your claim that there are other kinds of violence than the direct sort. There's no reason to bring up that up at all, except to do an implicit equating of the violence of the punching with the alleged violence of having the wrong opinion.
  
  After all, what's the indirect violence in the thread or my post that you replied to? Are you not writing in support of OriginalOwner's comment where direct violence was discussed?
  
  Fortunately, you made it clear later:

  Your idea of "helping people with their ignorance" is one short step away from that snuff-porn troll's idea of "helping little children understand mens' rights." One symptom of not having morals is you're not morally competent to KNOW you haven't got any. Believe me, I see this all the time with actual religious fanatics who subscribe to theological voluntarism, AKA divine command theory. You may be a case of a secular fanatic rather than a religious one, but fanatic you are nonetheless.

  Yes, indeed it was an equating of opinions with direct violence all along.

  Parent

  Starting Score:	1		point
  Moderation		-1
  Troll=1, Total=1
  Extra 'Troll' Modifier		0
  Total Score:		0

• Re:Work slaves Re:Work slaves (Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday June 25 2020, @01:17PM (1 child)

  by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Thursday June 25 2020, @01:17PM (#1012377) Journal

  Okay, I see your problem...it's not that you can't comprehend what you're reading, it's that you won't. You have an agenda and will do any violence (hah!) to any written or spoken word in order to further that agenda.

  Your problem, in short, is that you're a bullshitter. And as I've said before at least once on here, if the liar is Truth's rapist, then the bullshitter is Truth's obese, impotent, waddling pimp, unable even to appreciate her for what she is and seeing her only as a means to an end. The most amazing part of all this is that you really think most people here haven't figured you out yet, that you think you're fooling anyone but yourself.

  Even ACs are rolling their eyes at you and pointing out how full of shit you are.

  --
  I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...

  Parent

  • Comment Below Threshold

    Re:Work slaves (Score: -1, Troll) by khallow on Friday June 26 2020, @12:17AM

    by khallow (3766) on Friday June 26 2020, @12:17AM (#1012703) Journal

    How DARVO [wikipedia.org] of you. Let's review that thread a bit. It all started with some AC remarking on the following closing paragraph of a World Socialist Web Site (WSWS) story:

    There is no progressive answer to the continual lowering of living standards outside of the transformation of industry, communications, and transportation monopolies into publicly owned utilities under the democratic control of the working class.

    The AC wrote:

    lmao! control? working class? yeah right. parasites feeding from production until it dies, more like.

    In response, OriginalOwner (who also was was the source of the story and the WSWS blurb) wrote:

    Glad to known that you're so satisfied with your awesome privately-owned ISP's service.
    
    If you go spouting your anti-public ownership nonsense in Chattanooga or Wilson, NC or Sandy, OR or Longmont, CO or several hundred other places, expect to be cussed out or even punched in your stupid mouth.

    In other words, a dumbass threat of violence, though obviously not to be implemented by OriginalOwner. That is when I wrote:

    Because violence is the first refuge of the irrational.

    Which fits here.

    There are other kinds of violence than the direct sort. Of course, you're too much of a moral nullity to figure that out, but it needs said.

    What was the point of that first sentence? Looks to me like you were insinuating something earlier in the thread was violent as well. That's a typical conflation of wrongs like rape and dressing provocatively. I think it's telling that you never explain yourself then or now. You just claim that my interpretation is wrong somehow.
    
    As I noted earlier, we don't have to guess about your motives. You later wrote:

    Your idea of "helping people with their ignorance" is one short step away from that snuff-porn troll's idea of "helping little children understand mens' rights." One symptom of not having morals is you're not morally competent to KNOW you haven't got any. Believe me, I see this all the time with actual religious fanatics who subscribe to theological voluntarism, AKA divine command theory. You may be a case of a secular fanatic rather than a religious one, but fanatic you are nonetheless.

    So my opinion is equivalent to snuff porn. That's your nuanced view of "indirect violence".

    You have an agenda and will do any violence (hah!) to any written or spoken word in order to further that agenda.

    And look, you're not disagreeing now either.

    Your problem, in short, is that you're a bullshitter. And as I've said before at least once on here, if the liar is Truth's rapist, then the bullshitter is Truth's obese, impotent, waddling pimp, unable even to appreciate her for what she is and seeing her only as a means to an end. The most amazing part of all this is that you really think most people here haven't figured you out yet, that you think you're fooling anyone but yourself.

    Sorry, you got caught again. Notice how you don't even try to rationalize those posts or engage in honest debate. It's all DARVO-style attack on the messenger. I think it's telling that you can't even be bothered to say that (much explain why) I'm incorrect or wrong.

    Even ACs are rolling their eyes at you and pointing out how full of shit you are.

    They do that to everyone, including you. Doesn't mean a thing. There's a lot of idiots on the internet. You're not alone.

    Parent