I wanted to leave this comment on the website comment box but I know it will be rejected almost right away

WHO THE FUCK CARES

The issue they need to address is the fact that most people (at least in my classes), don't even speak proper English anymore. Universities ANYWHERE need to make sure they admit students who at least know the official language used in the University itself.

at least speak the damn language right?

What pisses me off the most is that most students nowadays, they approach me (I'm Chinese - Cantonese to be exact), and speak in Mandarin IMMEDIATELY. I mean, I know I'm Chinese at all, but for myself, out of respect for all those around me, I was taught to always approach another person first in English, then proceed onto whatever language you choose. that DOES NOT happen anymore, and if you don't speak Mandarin, you are generally excluded from that group (especially girls). I'm not against you speaking in your own language or anything... but yeah... ridiculous.

^damn you for taking this thread to the next pg so nobody sees my comment, but you basically summed up what I was trying to get at.

It's not horrible new, actually. What would society be without unskilled labor, or crappy skilled labor?

Agreed. That's one of the oddities of this country. I am an non-white, non-asian, and I damn well better read and write in English, because I live in an English speaking country. If I didn't want to, I'd be better off going back home.

^Now people will see your comment.

My second year English class got our midterms back yesterday, and only myself and two other people scored above an 80%. Its like an 8th grade English class, with 2 year material.

There is free education available to everyone - it's called the public library and it's far cheaper than university. Funny how universities seem to be full of people and public libraries comparatively empty. People such as yourself really want a piece of paper that gives you an expectation of higher future income but you expect the rest of society to pay your way through.

If you want to get to a top university, for the most part, you should have to pay your way for the true cost of education while you're there. Subsidies should only go to the best students selected on the basis of a wide range of factors that predict their future contributions to society.

Canada subsidizes university education because the thinking goes that graduates earn higher salaries and that means more tax revenues. It seems like investing in many student's higher education today is a bad investment. Graduates barely make enough income to pay for their already massively subsidized student loans much less become worthwhile tax payers.

Instead a university degree should be available to fewer elite students, which will increase the value of a degree and increase wages and employment prospects for graduates. The people who don't make the cut will be redirected to occupations that have a shortage of people such as nursing, cooking and the trades. The increase in supply of people to these professions will drive down wages for trades back to a more reasonable level. There is something seriously wrong when many people in the trades that don't own their own business can earn six figure salaries, while the average income for undergraduates is $45K/yr. There needs to be better balance between blue-collar and white-collar work.

University students hardly expect society to fund thier educations; To imply they do is not only a completely unsupportable statement, but unaware of the realities of life as a student. Even top students with scholarships would not be able to afford an education without government for subsidies, unless they accepted crippling student loan debt. Very few, if any, students enroll in their degree programs with the their future increasing their potential future salaries in mind. As you stated, many graduates with Bachelor of Arts degrees do not find a job in their given fields. We don't live under rocks, we know that. Students enroll in school for the experience, enlightenment and personal fulfillment they gain from an education; if monetary success was their prime concern, they would have enrolled in a vocational school and secured the six figure salaries you mentioned.

If you believe that university degrees should be reserved for elite students with the highest probable contributions to society, I'd like to inform you of the existence of graduate degrees. A university degree where only students with a 3.8gpa or higher are considered, and likely future contributions are factors in the admissions process. Also, to become a RN requires a Bachelors of Science in Nursing, and thats one of the most competitive degree programs at any university.

People like you, with your innate desire to prevent others from bettering themselves, because of your fear that you won't be able to compete with their superior skills, should be sources of both great pity and detest. A world without such extreme ignorance, would be a much better place to live.

you are ultimately a product of your environment.
the article itself is a fucking embarrasment and just demonstrates how privileged we are when "university life" is a factor in "deciding" which post-sec institute to attend.

what are we in the 1800s? you're comparing modern day lazy asians to those who were victims of british colonialism? how about vap lounge where people make the conscious decision to be lazy and blaze? (nothing wrong with that)

a little different from whole cities being addicted to a substance that was forced in through mandatory unrestricted "trade"

I didn't make an unsupportable statement. You stated that, "raising tuition rates or fees is not the answer to any problem," which implied that you expected society to make up the difference in your tuition cost. You, meanwhile, make the unsupportable statements: "Realities of life as a student" is hardly an argument. Where are education subsidies coming from, if not from tax payers?

Not only can you not figure out simple economics, it seems like reading comprehension isn't your strong point either.

There you go with your feeling of entitlement once again, which only proves my point. You'd rather someone else pay for your education than take on personal "crippling student loan debt." Why are you so unwilling to pay for the true cost of your education?

If you had to pay the true cost of your education, perhaps you wouldn't sit on your ass and feel entitled to "the experience, enlightenment and personal fulfillment." If you had to pay the true cost of your education, you'd realize that it made poor financial sense. Rather than get a useless Arts degree like thousands of other students with Arts degree that flood the job market every year, you might instead have to become a plumber. Unfortunately, society is burdened with having to pay for your education, while you admit that there isn't much of a financial return in it. And when my plumbing breaks, I have to wait hours for some asshole to show up and charge $200 to fix a leaking pipe.

Learning the skills necessary to become my plumber is bettering yourself and is definitely bettering society since we are short of tradesmen. Recall, I went to an Ivy League school, so people of my ilk can do all the thinking and white collar work that society needs. Witness the fact that you have an Arts degree and can hardly out-debate me on this topic. I want a world where there are fewer Arts degree holders, but the ones that exist are a breed that is smarter, more informed and more literate than the mass of peons waving their society funded B.As and whining about not being able to find employment. These are the same people that feel too proud to take up trade jobs and occupations, which are more suited to their marginal intellectual capabilities so they end up in the civil service and are a further burden on tax payers.

Do you think it is fair that a plumber who never went to university, that works hard and is in a high income tax bracket as a result, should be forced to pay high taxes on his income so your ass could be in school for "personal fulfillment"? That, in my opinion, should be the source of great pity and detest.

.

and usually the hotter ones speak mando... :(

im in the same shoes. im canto. i barely understand mando, let alone speak it.

I do agree that a person who JUST gets a Bachelors/Master/Ph.D in a liberal arts field is useless and generally caucasian but I do respect the people who get it as a stepping stone to further enhance their education such as law school or CA designation. I know one person who got into med school with a B.A.

The problem is we are letting too much of one race into the province. I thought Canada was supposed to be multicultural but it is obviously unbalanced. We should only let a certain number from each race come in so it doesn't turn into another china.
This imbalance could lead to a disruption , especially when the people we let in don't bother to learn the culture and stick to themselves.

I suppose you don't realize that I am Chinese.

Also, SkinnyPupp gave me a 20 point infraction for that post :lol

Well you know, your parents...

http://knowyourmeme.com/i/000/048/90...jpg?1273371846

good one, that just negates our Charter of Freedom and Rights

I remember from my first year at BCIT asians were probably the majority of any one race in my classes.
But I also remember that by the second year the majority of drop-outs or those who had to take a modified schedule because they did not pass all their previous courses were also asians...

It never bothered me much. I got awesome grades, and even won a graduating award and I could have tried a lot harder.

Charter of Rights and Freedoms don't apply to immigration cases though. They can deny you for multiple reasons.

What really irks me is that it's more efficient to illegally come to Canada and declare refugee status than apply legally.

"hey gaiz, you kan skip the queue if u cum here on a boatz!!" it free and guaranteed admisshun!"

If you were to re-read my response, you'd realize you were the one with reading comprehension issues. Realities of life as a student is more than a sufficient for argument given the context, if this were a formal paper being submitted for peer review of course I would of outlined the specific details. Anyone who has attended university, which you apparently have, would understand the difficulty of the enormous costs associated with an education, while earning a minimal income. Costs, which would put university out of reach of all except the extremely wealthy if it were not for education subsidies. Canada student loans are subsidised, would you propose we do away with those as well,and force students to use credit cards instead?

Explain what people of your ilk means, do people who went to ivy league schools? The only real difference between your ivy league schools and UBC, Mcgill or UofT, is tuition cost. American ivy league schools are ranked higher than Canadian schools of equivalent quality, because their geographic locations put them in a far superior position for name recognition and grant money.

Also, I'm proud to say that my gpa has never dropped below 4.1 while working on my Arts degree. I assume that qualifies me to be included in, "a breed that is smarter, more informed and more literate than the mass of peons"; If not, I'll refer you to the 4.0 gpa I had while working on my BS.

Well it's a double-edged sword. If you want post-secondary education to be affordable/heavily subsidized then prepare to have the value of your degree significantly reduced.

Just looking at my office, it's a little sad(?) that the administrative assistants all have stuff like arts/criminology/marketing degrees.

There is a HUGE difference between UBC/UT/Mcgill and an ivy league. Even if you graduate with a 4.0GPA in commerce, you cant even get into Goldman Sachs as a mailroom worker. It's about networking/alumni and nothing beats an ivy league for that. Also, ivy leagues are very selective such as creating quotas for different demographics and ethnicity to ensure a diverse student life. Thus a kid from Idaho can network with a son of the CEO of a multinational corporation. Also, if your parents earn less than $75,000/year, most ivy leagues will pay your whole tuition! Not being shallow but rarely a Fortune 100 company will recognize what UBC stands for, compared to say Harvard or Princeton.

This is exactly the problem I have with university graduates from degree mills such as the school you went to. Besides your excuse of intellectual laziness, a truly educated person would be able to form an opinion or a cogent argument based on rational thought. You have proven that you can do neither. You show no evidence of your opinion having evolved despite being unable to refute any of my arguments. That is the essence of ignorance.

Incidentally, "realities of life as a student" is a statement, not an argument.
It is equivalent to arguing that one should not kill cockroaches because of the "realities of life of a cockroach."

Let me introduce you to a concept that you might not have heard of called Net Present Value. It has to do with initial cash outflows with the expectation of future cash inflows that provide a positive internal rate of return. If people had to pay the true cost of college, they would pick degrees that would allow them to pay off their school in the future. This surplus economic value benefits society.

I don't agree that universities would ONLY cater to the wealthy. I accept that there will be a disparity in the proportion of students from higher income families in universities and perhaps only the most capable students from lower income families would see the economic value of going to universities. So be it. Life isn't fair. The unwashed masses shouldn't feel entitled to an expensive college degree at the best schools on someone else's dime without society being able to extract a fair return.

If you think I'm being unfair, think about this: A wealthy student didn't choose the family he was born into anymore than a poor student chooses the intelligence he was born with.

Interest rates are low enough that loans don't have to be subsidized. Student loans should always be available for those who need it. My argument has always been about ACCESS to higher education. If access were overly wide, there would be a surplus of graduates who drive down the value of degrees and the ability to repay student debt. These subsidies also result in an imbalance in the work force. The high taxes required to support an inefficient distribution of skills in the workforce make it less attractive for corporations to create high paying jobs. That's why there are so few major corporations based in Canada.

An Ivy league is equivalent quality to a Canadian university, the same way Johns Hopkins or the Mayo Clinic is equivalent quality to VGH. They are pretty far from equivalent. A recruiter from McKinsey or Goldmann knows that at Harvard or Stanford most of the students are going to be cherries because of the school's heavily selective criteria that ensure a well-rounded and balanced class. At the degree mills, it would be difficult to find the cherries among the thousands of 4.0GPAs where university spots are filled by sorting applicants from the highest grades to the lowest.

Judging by the quality of your arguments, it does not, I'm afraid. If you think your degree is just as good as mine, come up with something of substance to prove your arguments and refute mine!

Admissions at Ivy Leagues are "needs blind." They do not look at your ability to pay in their decision process to admit a student.

That does not mean they are free or someone else will pick up the tab if you can't afford it. If you can't afford it, you have to apply for either loans or scholarships. Loans are guaranteed, but you have to pay this onerous debt of >$100K once you graduate and start working. To get a scholarship or subsidized tuition you have to qualify. Only a small proportion of top students qualify - and the critieria is not just grades.

As a result, many admitted students choose to go to cheaper state schools and the places that become available get filled by children of wealthier families that are on the waiting list. The schools can claim they are needs blind in their admission process, the quality of students remains high, and those that can afford to pay and are competent are admitted, which adds to the mystique and appeal of the school. You didn't think that Ivy Leagues just happened to be filled by the network set based on pure merits alone, did you?

The problem is that no matter how many books you read, nor how many binders you fill with notes, you still can't advance in certain jobs without that piece of paper stating you actually know that information. It's not that people necessarily want their degree in such-and-such, it's because it's so often a requirement.

Okay, so how and what would you base this screening on? Social peers? Who their parents are? Their grades in school? An IQ test? Or perhaps a simple written and oral test designed to tax their knowledge on certain subjects?

I agree with you here...

...yet disagree with this. Again, how do you screen students in order for them to become said elite students? As stated, thousands of students who hold GPA's of 3.8+ apply to universities throughout Canada every year. You can't base a screening standard on grades alone, yet going into areas like who you know creates an unfair advantage for those students who have family members already well connected in various places.

I don't think the majority of people feel that they're entitled to an expensive degree for the lowest price possible. It's simply that if tuition was jacked up to the price that it really is, most people wouldn't be able to afford it. It doesn't matter how smart you are, there are only a very limited amount of scholarships available to the market. Someone who could be the next Einstein, Tesla, or whomever else may not be able to afford an education at a high calibre school (read: not an Ivy League school, but at least a high ranking one), and is instead relegated to a community college or a mid-range University like UBC at best. In fact, if he was subjected to a screening process like you proposed earlier, he may not even be able to get into a career path that he wanted. That tangent aside, many people who may be capable of changing the face of the earth for the better may be left behind and instead relegated to blue collar jobs or working as an accountant instead of behind a lab desk, experimenting.

:thumbsup: