Hard News: Revival
268 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 Newer→ Last
-
It actually cost quite a bit to attend university, mainly for books and sundry fees. I was a law student at Canterbury for 4 terms (1968/69)
It now costs anywhere between five and twelve times as much, depending on your course, in real terms.
I very much doubt it. It might, if you only consider fees. But living expenses still trump your fees, in New Zealand at least. When I did my BA it was 3,000 for fees and I spent five times as much to just live (and it wasn't a lavish lifestyle). Medical students pay more but I doubt it exceeds the cost of living. And if they charge that cost on their loan, again, it's an option that was simply not there for the boomers, so counting the amount borrowed for anything other than fees to the massive transfer of wealth you're talking about seems misleading.
-
@Joe
Later I discovered that, like my father, he'd been taken prisoner in Crete, and forced to take part in a gruelling march over several days.
This is from waaay back - somehow missed it (busy yesterday). My father fought in Crete. So did a guy called Fred Woollams, who was separated from his company and spent a couple of years, hiding from the enemy, living off the land with the help of locals. He was eventually captured and made to walk, shackled, for days. I worked with his daughter. She and I both came to the conclusion that the privations and stresses of war had cut their lives too short. Mine died of cancer, so did hers.
-
When I did my BA it was 3,000 for fees and I spent five times as much to just live (and it wasn't a lavish lifestyle).
The systems don't compare too well, but NZ used to have living support which wasn't income tested. With a bursary many students got by on it plus a summer job, though obviously some worked part time as well. Well gone by the time you got here.
Trumped by a student allowance scheme that financially ties you to your parents until your mid-20s, a rule so bizarre because it's simply a device to save the government money.
-
NZUSA has a useful history of student support:
Up until 1992, nearly every student (86.4 percent) studying at a public tertiary education institution in New Zealand received a living allowance or grant while they studied.
Prior to the mid 1970s, student support was based on a system of bursaries and scholarships. In 1976, a new system of government-funded tertiary bursaries was introduced. This included a study or living costs grant that was available to most students.
In 1989, the fourth Labour Government introduced the Youth and Student Allowances Scheme. Compared to the universally applicable standard tertiary bursary that had existed from 1976, an element of means testing was implemented for students under 20 years.
During the 1990 election campaign, the National Party promised to scrap the parental means test. However, this promise was broken soon after they took office after the 1990 election. The 1991 Budget saw the then Education Minister, Dr Lockwood Smith, implement a number of recommendations from the Tertiary Review, including extending parental means testing for those under 20 to those under 25.
It is worth remembering that Labour went into the 1996 election promising a universal student living allowance, and that its education spokespeople in the late 1990s, Steve Maharey and Trevor Mallard, constantly talked about Labour returning to a universal allowance.
Strict parental means testing for students under 25 has had disastrous consequences. Between 1990 and 2001, the proportion of full-time students receiving an allowance fell from 85.4% to 36.7%. By 2004, the proportion of full-time students receiving an allowance had dropped to 29%.
The parental income thresholds never moved or kept pace with increases in average incomes or inflation, and were frozen from when they were first introduced in 1992 until they rose for the first time in 2005.
So the best deal ran from 1976 to 1989, and nearly everyone received a government bursary or allowance to study until 1992.
-
The systems don't compare too well, but NZ used to have living support which wasn't income tested.
Not when the boomers went to university, no.
-
It is worth remembering that Labour went into the 1996 election promising a universal student living allowance, and that its education spokespeople in the late 1990s, Steve Maharey and Trevor Mallard, constantly talked about Labour returning to a universal allowance.
My number one reason to be pissed with NZ First going with National - I'd devoted the past three years of my life to get this that election, and we'd got both Labour and NZ First to commit to a universal allowance. We'd done everything a lobby organisation could successfully do and Labour didn't have enough seats and Winston went with National. Spewing.
-
Not when the boomers went to university, no.
Actually the changes in the mid 1970s were introduced as a reflection in the growth in participation in tertiary education that the baby boom generation caused.
The first ones through missed it, but the baby boomers born in the mid 50s caught it.
And the system before that wasn't income tested on parents either. Your bursary from high school (which stayed a fixed amount for many years, it was hardly worth applying for by the time I went to university) was a half-decent amount of money, students made up the gap with summer savings, scholarships, government grants. It was a lot more generous than the scheme over the past twenty years.
-
3410,
[Withdrawn]
-
It was a lot more generous than the scheme over the past twenty years.
If I win lotto my first action will be to pay back my three sons' student loans:)
And if I may go back to the discussion on the baby boomers and the effect of the war on their parents ...
The graphic novel Maus spoke to me very strongly about how the traumas of one generation are visited on the next.
-
The babyboomers here lived in a very different culture to those in Canada or the USA. I was not aware so many NZers were drafted into the war in Vietnam (I had thought the soldiers from here were either career soldiers or volunteers) but there was certainly no draft in Canada, nor any generation gap to speak of, as the generation that fought in the WW2 - or Korea - in Canada tended to be as anti war as their boomer offspring.
The permissive society I meant by Benjamin Spock's "Baby and Child Care" was to a large extent a good thing - I was glad to grow up - as were my sisters born in the 1940s - without defined gender roles, with plenty of latitude, lots of input - play, conversation, attention - from our father and absolutely no smacking or spanking. This is largely Benjamin Spock, and I am horrified when I hear accounts of NZ childhoods, which - Russell you may be the exception - seemed to be completely oblivious to Benjamin Spock and his liberal ways. There seemed to be much smacking and very sharply defined gender roles. I talk to people my age and their experience sounds like something from a vastly different era.
The part about "Baby and Child Care" that even Dr. Spock admitted may have been a little off was the degree of importance the feelings and self esteem of children were given. Sure, children's self esteem is important, should be fostered, but so many boomers grew up with an inability to comprehend any experience where they are not the point of the events. In everything. Most North American Boomers are more likely to think of their experience in absolutes - their misery, their love, their fatigue, is expressed in absolutes, as if their perception of their own experience is the zenith of all perception and eclipses all other, less significant suffering or joy.
There is so much talk of depression - not exclusively a boomer malady - but I was struck by Leonard Cohen's refusal (in the CBC interview I posted a page or so ago) to describe his "darkest hour". He said "it's an unwholesome luxury to even think I had a darkest hour, when you think of how much suffering there is in the world".
Perhaps it wasn't Benjamin Spock to blame for the "Me Generation" phenomenon, but in his later years he himself questioned the child centred message, and agreed with critics (I believe later editions addressed this) that yes, children should perhaps be taught to consider other peoples' feelings as well as their own.
Generation X is used to describe an age group - the youngest boomers - , but it was a specific book by a Canadian who was describing their "accelerated culture" and "no culture to replace their anomie", living as they did in "a world populated with dead TV shows, Elvis moments and semi-disposible Swedish furniture". (He meant Ikea).
-
No, "the establishment" just got better at lying ( the growth in forms of positivist linguistic expression were immensely helpful to the dumb fucks)
And making minor changes around the fringes (while making a big deal about it).Thanks Andin. Pinpointed without reserve.
and we'd got both Labour and NZ First to commit to a universal allowance. We'd done everything a lobby organisation could successfully do and Labour didn't have enough seats and Winston went with National. Spewing.
Yeah, that's a tragedy Kyle, good on you for fighting though. The strangest loophole was that students who were married could get the allowance, I could never quite get my head around that. Most interesting in that it was so rarely exploited (at least amongst those I knew).
-
. . . there was certainly no draft in Canada, nor any generation gap to speak of, as the generation that fought in the WW2 - or Korea - in Canada tended to be as anti war as their boomer offspring.
The mood in post-WW2 NZ was very pro-military. The 1949 Labour Government's referendum on conscription resulted in 77.9% in favour. Compulsory military training was abolished by Labour in 1958, and reinstated by National in 1960.
. I was not aware so many NZers were drafted into the war in Vietnam (I had thought the soldiers from here were either career soldiers or volunteers)
All NZ forces in Vietnam were volunteers. While conscription existed it was only for an initial three months of training, followed by three weeks part-time training for another three years. The only way a New Zealand citizen could be sent to Vietnam as a conscript was to be resident in Australia at the time of their 20th birthday. Once you turned 21 it was safe to visit the fatal shore.
In NZ you could register as a conscientious objector, and if your birthday came up in the lottery you got to argue your case before a tribunal. A pacifist one-legged WW1 veteran from Wellington kindly made himself available to provide support for those who wished it on these occasions.
Information about who registered as a conscientious objector back then is a matter of public record in NZ. All you have to do is enter a name into the search facility at Archives NZ's Archway site, and the link to their record will be displayed.
-
A compulsory military training of sorts as you know, Joe, was prevalent throughout the 1950s/60s& early 1970s with school cadets.
Which is when all* male children dressed up in army uniforms(where the hell did they get those?) as did teachers, and those latter, along with male prefects, turned into army officers...I am very sure it gave them the completely wrong idea about life.
*Unless your religious beliefs exempted you. There was a wee encampment of Bretheren around Aranui, and a few Quakers.
-
I'm humbled Chris. Ta
1950s/60s& early 1970s with school cadets.
Which is when all* male children dressed up in army uniforms(where the hell did they get those?)All we got were the side caps, which we gave back after we'd drilled around the school quad for 45mins. We did do weapons training at Hobsonville.
A 303 has a hell of a kick with a live round in it.
-
One of things that *really* irritated me, Andin, was -I was taught to use an airgun, then another 'real' .22, and then a .303 - before I was 10.
I was (and am) a really good shot. And the monkeying around that went on at 'the range' by the so-called cadets at AHS in the early 1960s - they fucking didnt know how to sight let alone 'shoulder'.Gah. A crap waste of money the whole of it-
-
I hated military training at school and would avoid it at all costs (but somehow was placed in the 'Non-commissioned Officer's Training Corp). Amongst the useless things we were taught was how to assemble and fire a Bren gun. Just imagine--a callow 13 year old weedy schoolboy in South Taranaki firing a machine gun with live ammunition! It generated a life-long distaste of all things military.
-
A crap waste of money the whole of it-
It was on me for sure.
I fired one magazine (I cant remember how many rounds in a magazine)at the rifle range and had a sore shoulder for a week.
I never made it to cadet status. -
Amongst the useless things we were taught was how to assemble and fire a Bren gun.
We were taught Bren's, Stens and Lee Enright 303s in Palmerston North. Our cadet training extended a year beyond the abolition because our headmaster thought it good for our characters. At 16 I could strip and rebuild a machine gun in the allotted time, a skill I've happily forgotten.
The upside was managing to work my way into the desirable Air Training Corps, using the fact I came from an air force background, which meant gliders at Ohakea some weekends whilst the others were trekking around the bush.
-
Wait, they made teenagers train with Army surplus .303s? That seems like one of those great ideas that is founded upon a strong desire to save money despite other negative consequences. They would have been much better just to get a load of .22s
I used such a .303 quite a bit growing up and while it was a nice rifle to shoot, it certainly had a rather impressive recoil and I didn't like using it until I was 14-15.
-
If you *cuddled* the .303 (the term was my uncle Bill's) the right way & were braced, the stock didnt kick. Let it loose, half an inch, and you had an impressive bruise.
-
As cadets were not compulsory during my schooling, we'ld tease them mercilessly. They seemed nothing more than scouts with guns.
Then of course, I signed the dotted line and wore the green for a decade & more ... there was alot of fun with firearms to be had.
If I had my time in again, I'ld join the Engineers.
-
Islander - it also helped to wear a good thick woollen jersey.
There must have been tens, if not hundreds of thousands of those surplus .303s floating about NZ by the 1980s. I still remember visiting gun shops in Dunedin or Christchurch in the 80s/90s where there would be heaps of them stacked up, of various models from WW1 onwards.
There hasn't been any big hand-in drive or anything, so I presume they must still be about, gradually wearing out with use
-
I've still got one Ben Austin, as have 4 of my neighbours here, and we have corrosion-free ammo...they are still esteemed as a good deer rifle.
-
The mood in post-WW2 NZ was very pro-military. The 1949 Labour Government's referendum on conscription resulted in 77.9% in favour. Compulsory military training was abolished by Labour in 1958, and reinstated by National in 1960.
It could not have been more different in Canada. The post war mood was buoyant, and the people who'd been through WW2 wanted to focus their lives on family and enjoying life, I think.
The mood that prevailed in Canada was about peace, progress and egalitarianism - or so it seems to me in hindsight. The people who shaped Canadian society were peacenicks
Lester B. Pearson; Tommy Douglas; (Keifer Sutherland's grandfather) Marshall McLuhan and John Kenneth Gailbraith seemed to be the big cultural influences.By the time I was learning history, a great Canadian communist, and huge cultural Chinese hero Norman Bethune had been welcomed back out of historical obscurity in Canada and was as celebrated (finally).
Bethune is seen in China the way Sir Ed Hillary is seen in Nepal - almost a god. In Canada we take more pride in that aspect of our cultural heroes, though I'm not sure why - most people here are only dimly aware of what huge esteem the Nepali people hold Ed Hillary, and all NZers because of his good work. Not like that in Canada... we were taught to take great pride in Norman Bethune... after we discovered the Chinese worshipped him.
Communist Chinese take on Norman Bethune:
CBC interview with Adrienne Clarkson, who has researched his life (lengthy, but fascinating) - Adrienne Clarkson was Canada's Governer General and is married to John Ralston Saul. She also looks a lot like my Mum. -
dyan - I'd never heard of Norman Bethune before...must learn more.
You ever come across an ANZer called Rewi Alley? Also esteemed in China for his work there.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.