[ProgSoc] VSU (Was: What should the exec do? (Was: Scrap VSU info from UTS Union))

Andrew Halliday andrew.halliday at gmail.com
Mon Mar 9 23:38:35 EST 2009


On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:52 PM, Roland Turner <raz at raz.cx> wrote:

> On Mon, 2009-03-09 at 09:48 +0000, Anand Kumria wrote:
>
> > Raz,
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 8:26 AM, Roland Turner <raz at raz.cx> wrote:
> > > Again this is ad hominem, plainly absurd (a state can't function
> without
> > > taxes, or something analogous[1]) and is a separate argument (reduction
> > > of taxes by government vs. desisting granting monopoly rights to a
> > > non-governmental body). That said, there are places which operate _far_
> > > lower tax regimes than Australia, and do so with comparable or better
> > > community outcomes.
> >
> > Really?
> >
> > Why wouldn't you name them in that case?
>
> I hadn't anticipated this point being terribly controversial. I live in
> one: Singapore.
>

Oh yes that lovely nation which incarcerates homosexuals and hands out the
death penalty like candy. What a beacon of progress you have brought to the
table.

And of course how can you be so blatantly ignorant of the effect that
population density has on the cost and quality of service provision for a
population? I have no doubt that if the entire Australian population lived
in the geographic area of metropolitan Sydney we'd probably have lower
taxes, higher suicide rates and such as well.

I spit on your argument. Oh wait that'll land me in gaol in your super
nation as well.

I don't have anything against Singapore, just that it discriminates against
the sexuality of its citizens and thinks it's OK to execute. Aside from
those things I actually like the country (although let's be honest, it's
really just a big city).

> > It is in fact your latter acknowledgement is correct; this is the basis
> > > for limiting tax collection to that required to fund those services
> > > without which a society cannot function.
> >
> > Oh please. Since when is the tax collected being limited to those
> > services without which a society can not function?
>
> It's not; I was talking about the basis for the argument for. On
> re-reading, this was not as clear as it could have been.
>
> > I pay tax in Australia - I definitely do not need a service which
> > collects stamp duty but yet my taxes fund this "function without which
> > society can not function".
> >
> > That is just one of a number of services which I fund but do not
> > believe are critical for society to function. Whilst you can probably
> > come up with a easy rationale for that particular service,
>
> (chuckle)
>
> In the general sense that, in order to collect taxes a society needs tax
> collectors, then this service clearly is a "function without which
> society can not function".
>
> Stamp duty is an excellent example of an unjustly structured tax.


Maybe. The argument nonetheless is that taxation is needed for service
provision. How you implement such a policy will always be debatable.


> > the problem
> > with your argument is that whomever defines what are necessary and
> > critical services gets to define the playing field.
>
> I believe that this is the problem with Andi's argument; the surest way
> to limit the power of a government to determine what is and isn't
> essential is to limit its tax-collection powers in the first place.
>

And you and your voting peers do that by electing officials who enact
legislation or regulations which decides this. Sounds just to me.


> I agree, of course, that there is massive scope creep in the tax
> collection activities of most (all?) welfare states. That said, having
> accepted transfer payments as essential, working out where to draw the
> line (and preventing incumbent governments from doing so unilaterally)
> becomes a near impossible task. Perhaps collecting in taxes about half
> of the productive output of a country really has become essential (or
> rather, the transfer payments thereby funded have become essential).
>

So what do you do on a slippery slope? Slide down to the bottom as safe as
you can, or hang on mid slope not achieving much at all wondering what to do
next?


> > It's a slippery slope which Andi has correctly identified as being
> > under the purview of people who are elected.
>
> You are strengthening my argument, no? The more productive output that a
> society permits to be collected in taxes the first place, the more power
> is transferred away from the people (demos) to the [s]elected (ploutos).
>

Wrong. Society elects the people that have this power. The power is by
extension in our hands. If you, I or we do not accept the way it is wield,
we are able to campaign and educate society on our point of view and either
force the hand of the elected official through protest (unlikely but still
possible) or have them replaced with a candidate who better meets our
ideological perspective at the next election.


> > Andi's theory is that the tax imposed by the Union provides a
> > "necessary and critical service" (a social scene).
> >
> > So far none of the arguments presented counter that.
>
> Andi has yet to advance such a theory. His argument thus far has been a
> mix of his own enjoyment of the previous arrangement and a spurious
> attempt to confuse the Union with government.
>

Dismissal rather than counterpoint is rather effective isn't it? Just wave
an argument away without addressing it with some actual words of substance.


> If, however, _you_ are advancing it then the rebuttal appears
> straight-forward: the University is functioning perfectly well without
> mandatory unionism (no impact on security, justice, transport, health,
> education, social security), consequently mandatory unionism does not
> provide "necessary and critical service" that would otherwise not be
> provided.
>

Really? So you claim that legal representation, student appeals services,
student representation to the state and fed governments by student
organisations, childcare services and on campus bulk billing medical
services and specialists are all existing at the same level that they did
during VSU? And you ascertained this from Singapore and whilst not being a
current student at any campus of an affected institution within Australia?
I'm sure we'll all just have to accept your word on the matter. Personally
I've seen a decline in bulkbilling services provided for students and staff,
I've seen reductions in childcare or substantial increases in price (in
excess of the area and industry averages), I've seen reductions in student
legal support services as well. That's at ANU, UTS and USYD. Don't tell me
that there hasn't been an impact as a result of VSU because I've experienced
it on multiple campuses.


> Are you able to suggest arguments supporting the idea that the "social
> scene" previously provided under mandatory unionism could in any sense
> be considered essential?
>

Well what's your definition of essential?
The social scene acts as a conduit for students to interact, collaborate and
develop life long relationships that they carry into the workplace. These
relationships impact positively on the economy due to the nature of
connections made between domestic-domestic and domestic-international and
international-international students. Universities are not just places to
attend to learn a specific curriculum. They are places we go to acquire new
perspectives, to make connections in our global society that are relevant
for the rest of our lives. From who we deal with in the world of business to
how we decide something when writing policy, our experiences and
perspectives gained from the interaction provided by the 'social scene' of a
University I don't think can be measured at all, but nor can it be
discounted. You can't define everything economically, but sometimes you can
just stand back and say "this is a good thing, let's keep it around". Under
VSU, that sufferred and so did, I think, the exchanges and opportunities
that arise from such a social scene that could be funded under MSU.

Andi.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://progsoc.org/pipermail/progsoc/attachments/20090309/749dfa7c/attachment.htm 


More information about the Progsoc mailing list