[ProgSoc] Tertiary Education Funding - A Modest Proposal (Re: Compulsory Student Unionism coming back!)

Peter Brownlow roentgenation at gmail.com
Thu Nov 10 18:59:16 EST 2011


Nailed that point.
On Nov 10, 2011 4:45 PM, "Roland Turner" <raz at raz.cx> wrote:

>  Sydney, Australia, November 10, 2011. Jonathan Swift, the newly appointed
> federal minister for education and welfare, has today announced a bold new
> plan to simultaneously reduce debt burdens for tertiary students, halve
> taxpayer spending on tertiary education and address labour shortages in the
> licensed brothel industry. Henceforth, annual enrolment at all Australian
> universities by females aged 18-25 will include signing up for a 30-day
> stint as a "hostess" at a licensed premises, the proceeds from which will
> cover the enrolling student's tuition for the year. The discount for
> up-front HECS payment will of course apply.
>
> Claims that the scheme is unjust because some women might not wish to work
> as prostitutes as a condition for access to tertiary education have been
> thoroughly refuted by renowned ethicist Daniel Bryan who explains "you
> aren't compelled to sell your body - you voluntarily enrol in university
> and under CSP, prostitution is a requirement of that".
>
> Swift acknowledges that the scheme is somewhat discriminatory at present
> in that males cannot participate. To address this he plans to expand the
> scheme to brothels in several middle-eastern countries - thereby
> eliminating almost all taxpayer spending on tertiary education - just as
> soon as High Court judges stop waffling about human rights.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 09/11/2011 13:50, Daniel Bryan wrote:
>
>  At any rate, this is a major #ethicsfail. You aren't Compelled to belong
> to the organisation - you voluntarily enrol in university and under CSU,
> student unionism is a requirement of that.
>
> On Wednesday, 9 November 2011 at 4:49 PM, Daniel Bryan wrote:
>
>   On Wednesday, 9 November 2011 at 4:20 PM, Roland Turner wrote:
>
>  On 09/11/2011 11:42, Bryn Davies wrote:
>
>  compelling membership in any association is morally wrong. Doubly so
> when that organisation claims to politically speak for its members.
>
>
> +1
>
> - Raz
>
>  "Nations".
>
> On Wednesday, 9 November 2011 at 4:20 PM, Roland Turner wrote:
>
>   On 09/11/2011 11:42, Bryn Davies wrote:
>
>  compelling membership in any association is morally wrong. Doubly so
> when that organisation claims to politically speak for its members.
>
>
> +1
>
> - Raz
>  _______________________________________________
> Progsoc mailing list
> Progsoc at progsoc.org
> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Progsoc mailing list
> Progsoc at progsoc.org
> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://progsoc.org/pipermail/progsoc/attachments/20111110/5ba19890/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Progsoc mailing list