The Average New Zealand student:

Owes $28,000+ in Debt.
Lives away from home.
Receives little financial support from family.
Works part time. (around 15 hours a week) often for minimum wage.
Doesn’t qualify for a student allowance.

The rich student:

Owes nothing in debt. Either their parents have paid their entire way through or they have a scholarship (often because their parents have paid for extra school lessons).
Either lives at home or away from home. Pays nothing in rent because parents cover it all.
Receives full financial support from family.
Doesn’t work part time. They can therefore spend more time on studies and do better.
Qualifiers for a student allowance because their families have creative accountants who tie all the money up in trusts, investments, and company expenses.

My situation:

32,000 in debt.
Lives away from home.
Receives no financial support from family.
Worked 20 hours a week while studying.
Did not qualify for a student allowance.

I am fired up. As blogged below do not critise those who are below you. We have just as much a voice as you do.

If you want to know more about student support and how little students get check this page out: http://www.students.org.nz/index.php?page=livingallowances

Here are some highlights:

Students are the only group in our society who are not entitled to public income assistance when out of paid work. While the cost of living increases more and more, full-time students are being forced to scramble together income from a range of sources to meet ever increasing weekly living expenses - whether through working long hours on top of full-time study or borrowing to live from the loan scheme.

New Zealand’s low level of living allowance eligibility and relatively high cost of living forces a large number of students to borrow to live from the Student Loan Scheme and/or scramble together income from a range of sources.

In a 2005 report by the North American-based Education Policy Institute, research compared countries on six different measures of tertiary education and student living cost affordability. Out of a total of 16 countries, New Zealand only scored 15th, while understandably Sweden and Norway, two countries that have a fully funded tertiary system, scored first and second.

NZUSA believes that students must be relieved from the burden of being forced to borrow to live and plunged into high debt. Students must be provided with a living allowance as of right while enrolled in full-time tertiary study, and out of full-time paid work. Full-time study is just that – full-time! We strongly deplore the current and previous government’s view that debt constitutes a form of income for students.

30% of all borrowing under the Student Loan Scheme includes borrowing for student living costs, and 50% of all loan scheme borrowers in 2004 borrowed for living costs.

The maximum a student can borrow per week is $150.00. Despite being the longest un-inflation adjusted figure on the government’s books, this is not a sufficient amount to live on, in light of increasing costs, and particularly if students have no where else to turn for income.

The logic from parties who support age related means testing tends also supports the view that if a student is ineligible for an allowance then their parents will support them.

However, only 28 percent of all respondents to the TNS Income and Expenditure Survey (2004) reported receiving some parental support while studying, and this was not necessarily on a weekly basis. The median amount gained from this source for the year was $1,999. The 1998 Income and Expenditure Survey revealed that 31 percent had received some form of monetary gift from their parents.

And there is plenty more in the linked article read up before you blindly critise.

One of the things I really cannot stand is people who decide to reject reality and established facts.

Early tonight one of these Rich Pricks Students decided that they would talk to the other people in their masters degree course to try and establish if it was normal for students in NZ to be supported by their parents.

They concluded that it was normal for students in NZ:
to be fully supported by their parents,
to live at home, and
contribute nothing back to the household.

Now I cannot even begin to express how outrageous this statement is.

But lets look at where this conclusion came from.

First it came from a taught masters class. This means a few things. First it is a bloody expensive class. Secondly it means that you have to be pretty good academically to get into it. It is well known that to get as far as masters you typically come from a very well off background or get lucky with a scholarship. So it is little wonder this conclusion was made.

So what is the true reality of students? Well here are some true facts.

(Data and edited comments from NZUSA 2007 Student Income and Expenditure Survey)

The socio-economic level of parents/guardians was calculated from their stated occupation
using the Elley-Irving index. These figures are based on at least one parent or guardian
currently in paid employment.

Significantly more students were from a high socio-economic background in 2007 than in 2004
(59% in 2007, 47% in 2004). Over one third of students (35%) were from a middle socio
economic background. Significantly fewer students were from a low socio-economic
background in 2007 (6%) than in 2004 (15%).

Students from a high socio-economic background were significantly more likely to be
studying full time, with parents earning over $80,001, international students, aged 20-
22 years.

Students from a middle socio-economic background were significantly more likely to be
studying part time, with parental income between $20,001 and $40,000.

Students from a low socio-economic background were significantly more likely to have
parents earning under $60,000, Maori, over 30 years.

Thirty eight percent of tertiary students are financially independent. Almost one third of
students (32%) are partially supported by another adult (4% by their partner, 28% by their
family). One fifth (20%) are totally supported by another adult (5% by their partner, 15% by
their family).

International students were significantly more likely to be fully supported by their family (55%
of international students, compared to 11% of domestic students). Domestic students were
significantly more likely to be partially supported by their family (29% of domestic students,
compared with 15% of international students) or to be financially

During 2007, half (50%) of students rented a home or flat. Just over a quarter of students
(26%) lived with their parents.

Now it is important to note that this survey was of tertiary students only. What about those other people in society who cannot afford to attend tertiary education. Are they supported by their parents? I highly doubt it.

So lets look at the statements again.

The vast majority of students are not fully supported by their families.

The vast majority of students do not live at home.

The vast majority of students are expected to contribute back to their families.

Word of advice: Don’t mess with someone who loves statistics, debating, and looking out for the downtrodden.

Rick Pricks need to open their eyes and see beyond their gold plated fences. How about spending a year without your comforts. How about spending a whole year financially independant and earning the minimum wage? Don’t critise what you have not experienced.

Update: Here are some more facts… This is a press release from 30 July 2008 on Student Allowances showing very clearly that students are not supported.

Government report justifies calls for universal student allowances

Students are welcoming the release of a government report highlighting the positive educational
outcomes associated with student allowances.

“The findings of this report come as no surprise. NZUSA has long advocated that adequate support
in the form of student allowances is integral to academic success, and this government report now
confirms this,” said Paul Falloon, Co-President of the New Zealand Union of Students’ Associations
(NZUSA).

The Ministry of Education report, Educational achievements of student support recipients, found that
those who receive student allowances do better academically and are twice as likely to achieve
successful completion of their studies.

“This evidence provides an excellent academic justification for the introduction of a universal student
allowance”, said Falloon.

Currently only around one third of students receive an allowance, with two thirds excluded due to
parental-income means-testing till the age of 25. As a result many must borrow simply to cover basic
living costs, resulting in the vast amount of student debt that individual students bear, and the
immense collective student debt of $10 billion now held in the community.

“In 2007 NZUSA conducted the national Student Income & Expenditure Survey and found that 90%
of fulltime students undertake paid work during the academic year, and 59% cite a stressful financial
situation as a major concern,” said Falloon. “The impact of this, and the often significant time away
from study at paid work, has concerned academics and student representatives alike for years,”
concluded Falloon.

With both political and public support for a universal student allowance, and now government
research identifying allowances as a significant factor in positive educational outcomes, the time is
now right for its implementation into policy.

ENDS

If students were supported by their parents then why are those who recieve an allowances twice as likely to complete their studies?

Press Release: MASSEY UNIVERSITY STUDENTS’ ASSOCIATION FEDERATION

Massey University dumps on International Students

From 2009 all new International Students studying at Massey University will face an immediate 6 - 7% average increase in tuition fees and ongoing annual tuition fees increases due to a removal in fee Grand-parenting for International students.

Fee Grand-parenting of tuition fees for International Students ensures that students do not face tuition fee increases throughout their course. Massey University introduced fee Grand-parenting in 2005 to give International Students stability in their finances while they study.

“The decision by the Massey University Council last Friday to remove these protections for students’ financial wellbeing will severely hurt international students” says Albany Students’ Association (ASA) President, Brad Heap. “This decision was made entirely behind closed doors; students had no knowledge of this move and the University did not consult with a single student on the changes.”

“Massey University has decided to put profits before pastoral care of students and I find this disgraceful. You would expect the University to have a social conscience and protect their students not dump fee increases on them without consulting them,”said Heap.

MUSAF is committed to ensuring that the University treats all students as individuals and does not treat its International Students as ‘cash-cows’. MUSAF will continue to work with students across Massey University’s three campuses to ensure that the University actively consults with students and in the meantime urges Massey University Council to reverse its decision.

ENDS

http://melissa-network-news.blogspot.com/2008/05/healthy-competition.html

I read an interesting blog post today about supposed “healthy competition” between universities (see link above).

Now I want you to ponder this. Should universities be in competition with each other?
What marks the difference between “healthy” and “unhealthy” competition?

This is something that the Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) has been focusing on over the past few years and trying to stamp out. Universities and other tertiary providers should not be in competition with one and other but should rather be working together. At the end of the day cooperation benefits everyone far greater then competition.

Think about this. With cooperation in research people can move forward on ideas faster. How many different universities need to invent the wheel? Cooperation in research also allows for more open, honest and transparent findings and less allegations of faking results because rather then being the first to do something, as a team you are the best at doing it and therefore you have the best result. Competition does not drive improvements in research but rather forces researchers to work harder and rush things often making mistakes rather then actually doing something beneficial.

So how does this apply to undergraduate and postgraduate taught classes? Well the reality is this, in New Zealand you are forced to pay for your education. Therefore the education that you receive should be the highest possible quality education and you should get value for money. Money aka your fees should not be wasted on competition between universities such as advertising that trades off one university against another and neither should it be spent on anything other then the provision of your courses. Universities should not set up courses to compete with each other and steal students off one an other but should rather be introducing courses to meet the need of the market - something the TEC is trying to implement through its investment plans.

So is any form of competition healthy? No. Competition should not be permitted between universities. There are only 8 universities in New Zealand we are a small country and the majority of our funding to our universities comes from the government and at the end of the day they are all owned by the crown so in a round-a-bout way you only end up competing with yourself. Cooperation not Competition!

Entitleme is a new website that takes a look at your tax take and what you get back for it. Very rough information for me is shown below.

Check it out: http://entitleme.com/ I can’t believe that the largest proportion of my tax is going on social welfare. Maybe we really are in a communist country after all and we have been hoodwinked.

If you haven’t heard about Air New Zealand’s new baggage charges you can read about them here:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10502213

The words money making rip off come to mind when reading about it. I am currently traveling on around 20 - 30 flights per year and I am never over my baggage weight allowance, in fact 90% of the time I am more then 50% under it. Although I do occasionally travel with two bags - always underweight.

I think Air New Zealand have figured out that not many people traveling domestically actually go over the baggage weight limit and have found another way to squeeze them for money. Only a few days ago it was announced that fairs would also increase.

To put it bluntly Air New Zealand want you to pay more for you ticket. Pay more for your bags. Provide less people behind the desk and expect more from you (ie you have to put your own bags on the baggage trolley).

What is next? A $1000 per ticket cost to fly to Wellington where you create your own ticket, act as your own security screener, fly the plane yourself, be baggage handler, air traffic controller, and ground crew. Customer Service yeah right!

I would be inclined to call this the best piece of opinion that I have read for a while.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10491537

Some excerpts:

We have an extraordinary situation where we have full employment yet our wages are among the lowest in the developed world.

—

Profits are way up and business has been so successful here that the Reserve Bank has to keep jacking up the interest rates to slow the economy. The World Bank continues to commend our government for its pro-business policies and rates us number one on Earth when it comes to supporting business.

—

Even if we gave workers a $50 weekly tax cut, their wages would still be well behind Australia’s.

—

Until now, government initiatives have arguably let low-paying employers off the hook and have institutionalised a poverty trap. For example, rent subsidies paid to low-income workers make no difference because rents have increased in response to soaring house prices. Although the heralded family support is a welcome relief to low-paid parents, it helps sheet in low-paid wages. This comes about because any increase in wages a parent may get is then deducted from their family support, neutralising any benefit.

—

New Zealand workers, according to numerous reports, have the most flexible terms of employment and hours of work in the world. We have the highest percentage of people working more than 50 hours a week than any other developed country. Few households can survive on the income of one breadwinner. We have an increasing social dysfunction in our society as many parents are required to spend too much time away from their families because of work demands.

—

What we have now is a society where inequity has cemented in. A third of New Zealanders are never going to be able to afford their own home; the average wage earned by the average New Zealander cannot even pay for the basic necessities of life. The minuscule tax breaks that will trickle down to workers next year won’t change a thing whether Labour or National is in power.