Anidav posted:

UNIVERSITY graduates may have to start paying their loans back sooner after a report revealed many students will never earn an income high enough to repay their HELP debts.
A Grattan Institute report has found that the government could claw back an extra $500 million a year, and even more over time, if it lowered the income threshold that students start repaying their loans.
At the moment students repay their Higher Education Loans Program (HELP) and VET FEE-HELP loans once they start earning $54,186.
If this was reduced to $42,000, this would immediately increase the number of people repaying their debt by 50 per cent.
The report’s author Andrew Norton suggests that the HELP (formerly known as HECS) program has become unsustainable and without change, the ballooning cost would put teaching and research at risk of cuts.
The annual bill for HELP loans has reached $7.8 billion and 20 per cent is considered “bad debt” that will never be repaid. In 2014/15, this equated to about $1.6 billion a year.
“Interest subsidies on outstanding debt add $200 million a year to HELP’s costs, but would be five times higher if interest rates return to previous levels,” Mr Norton said in a statement.
Education and Training Minister Simon Birmingham acknowledged the problem when asked whether the government would consider the proposal.

“The costs to taxpayers of higher education have, over recent years, grown dramatically,” Mr Birmingham said in a statement to news.com.au.
This was partly driven by the removal of caps on the number of students allowed to study at public universities in 2012. The introduction of the “demand driven” system allowed more students to study at universities.
Mr Birmingham said taxpayer funding had increased by 59 per cent since 2009, compared to 29 per cent growth in nominal GDP over the same period of time.
“Funding of university students has, essentially, grown at twice the rate of the economy.”
The government is also considering collecting student debt from those who have died and leave estates worth more than $100,000.
“I welcome all ideas from the sector, experts and students on how to make university funding sustainable as I continue to consult widely on higher education reform,” Mr Birmingham said when asked about the reforms.
Mr Norton said a major cause of HELP’s problems was the growing proportion of graduates who work part-time.

“But most part-time jobs earn less than the current threshold,” Mr Norton said in a statement.
Adding to this problem is the fact that students completing courses at TAFE and other vocational courses are also now eligible for HELP loans, and these students are even less likely than university graduates to earn enough money to start repaying their loans.
The federal government planned to extend VET FEE-HELP to private colleges but there were reports this could be dropped.
However, when asked whether the plan would be dropped, Vocational Education and Skills Minister Scott Ryan said the Coalition would redesign the VET FEE-HELP scheme for 2017, following extensive consultation with the sector.
“We have already taken more than a dozen measures to crack down on vocational education providers who are flouting regulations and acting unethically,” Mr Ryan said in a statement.
“The VET FEE-HELP scheme, introduced by Labor, was demand driven, uncapped and had insufficient student protections in place.
“The original scheme opened the floodgates to shonky training providers and predatory brokers to take advantage of the system.”
He said the Coalition was committed to redesigning the VET FEE-HELP system to better serve the needs of all Australians.

Recoome posted:

Amazingly I bet they haven't considered the the knock-on effects of targeting lower income earners. For some bizarro reason these right-wing bootstraps people must think that you can adjust who has to pay X and magically all this money comes floating in.

bigis posted:

I wonder why they don't make you pay your spouse's HECS if only one of you are over the repayment threshold.

My wife is going to be a stay at home mum so I should probably repay her HECS when mine is done.

Or will this not raise enough money for anyone to care? It seems fairer than pinging low income earners.

bigis posted:

I wonder why they don't make you pay your spouse's HECS if only one of you are over the repayment threshold.

My wife is going to be a stay at home mum so I should probably repay her HECS when mine is done.

Or will this not raise enough money for anyone to care? It seems fairer than pinging low income earners.

Anidav posted:

Waiting for mother nature to cook up that airborne disease that only kills those over 69

Recoome posted:

As a successful military officer,

The Peccadillo posted:

http://www.fortitude-australia.com

Recoome posted:

Actually while I'm on a rant about poors, here's a really nice personal anecdote from me.

The Peccadillo posted:

quote:

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/mar/29/states-offered-5bn-hospitals-funding-income-tax-raising-powers
The Turnbull government is offering the states more than $3bn in additional hospitals funding over three years and the radical prospect of their own secure income tax stream in the long term, but no immediate extra money for the final two years of schools funding under the Gonski education plan.

The prime minister has outlined the broad elements of the offer to state premiers in the lead up to Friday’s Council of Australian Governments (Coag) meeting. The detail was due to be set out in a phone hook-up between commonwealth officials and the heads of the departments of premiers and cabinet on Tuesday.

As revealed by Guardian Australia in February, Malcolm Turnbull has been reassuring the states that he would provide extra hospital funding to prevent them falling off the “fiscal cliff’ caused by Tony Abbott’s 2014 budget cuts, which removed $57bn in long-term hospitals funding promised by the former Labor government. The commonwealth and the states have been discussing interim funding while a longer term deal is negotiated.

The NSW premier, Mike Baird, had proposed around $7bn over the next four years as a compromise – representing about 45% of the increased costs faced by the states. The South Australian premier, Jay Weatherill, had asked for $10bn. It is understood the commonwealth is offering to pay 45% of increased costs – but only up to a cap of around 6.5% in the cost growth. The states had estimated this would represent around $5bn over the next four years. Federal sources say it represents over $3bn over the next three years. Many states predict their hospital costs will rise faster than that. And the commonwealth’s calculations reflect the growth in hospital costs but not the increasing number of procedures.

At the same time the commonwealth has told the states it will not make an immediate offer on schools funding or match Labor’s promise to spend $4.5bn funding the final two years of the Gonski education plan in 2018 and 2019.

The decision opens the way for a fierce Labor attack during the imminent federal election campaign, but it is understood the commonwealth believes there is time to negotiate longer term changes to schools funding after the election.

It is understood the federal government is considering a sweeping plan to offer the states a share of income tax after 2020 to fund the growing costs of both health and education.

Weatherill had earlier proposed a guaranteed fixed share of commonwealth income tax, but it is understood the commonwealth is looking at a slightly different plan, which would hand the states the ability to raise a certain proportion of income tax, and allow them to raise that tax rate if necessary to fund state services.

The commonwealth’s proposal is understood to be along the lines of the recommendation in the Abbott government’s commission of audit, which suggested the federal government reduce its personal income tax rates, allow the states to charge an equivalent amount as an “income tax surcharge” and then deduct that amount from the commonwealth’s direct payments to the states. The advantage of this shuffle for the states would be that they had access to a steadily growing source of income.

Turnbull confirmed an offer had been made to the states, but not its detail.

“The health budget is enormous, spread across state and federal government, and it is vital that we work closely together on hospitals. Yes ... we will be presenting to the premiers and the chief ministers a proposal that ... will see us maintaining the commitment to activity-based funding and a national efficient price,” he said.

He said “everything we are doing at the federal level is calculated to ensure that Australians get the best care in hospitals and that hospitals are delivering that care to Australian patients as efficiently and effectively as we can”.

Treasurer Scott Morrison told radio 2GB any offer to the states on hospitals would be offset by other spending cuts in the 3 May budget.

Exclusive: South Australian premier says states won’t abide PM cutting company tax rate unless he restores health and education funding

Asked where he would find the money for the hospitals deal, Morrison said: “The budget will set out all the areas where we will make further gains in getting expenditure under control ... we are making sure if we have to spend more money then we will find the savings to do that ... they are the principles we work off.”

On Tuesday morning Weatherill described the outlines of the deal as “a $5bn bandaid on what we estimate to be a $57bn problem” that would represent a “downpayment” on what was needed in the longer term.

“Any contribution would be welcome because of the size of the problem ... we cannot go into this federal election campaign without acknowledgement of the fact there has been a massive cut to health and education and there needs to be a political response otherwise it will find its way into the election campaign.

“If it is $5bn we have a $57bn problem. The good thing is the acknowledgement that there is a cut ... for months we have been putting up with this nonsense that there has been no cut,” Weatherill said.

A report by Ernst and Young found that the hospital cuts currently on the table would mean that more than 56,000 patients a year would be left untreated in the public system by 2019-20, growing to more than 107,000 patients a year by 2024-25. Waiting times in the public system would grow, leading to an increase in demand for the private health system for those individuals who could afford it, and the price of private health premiums would increase by an extra 0.5% per annum as a result of increased demand, the report found.

State premiers will meet on Thursday before a dinner with the prime minister and the formal Coag meeting on Friday.

ewe2 posted:

I find it frankly sinister that you're being used as an intern like this, do you feel pressure to conform in order to get ahead as well?

Recoome posted:

I mean like everyone I work for is usually amazing, that's not really my problem. The issue I have is that we basically put so little money into mental health that unpaid internships are the only way for undergrads to gain experience unless you are about to luck out on a stable paid psychology job (you won't be working as a psych though, you need your degree first). It's this lovely catch-22 bullshit which forces undergrads to be slaves in order to have a chance at doing anything.

But hey guys it's cause I'm a lazy no-good uni student i mean i'm just a leaner

freebooter posted:

I could understand your dad having weird and rigid ideas about working for free, but I honestly cannot see how he could turn that into the idea that you're the leaner.

The Peccadillo posted: