The Vietnam war protest was about the draft really, a protest that allowed the North Vietnam government and Ho Chi Minh to massacre millions of civilians after the war.
The Vietnam war protest was about the draft really, a protest that allowed the North Vietnam government and Ho Chi Minh to massacre millions of civilians after the war.
AnitaPeterson
Diamond Member
- Apr 24, 2001
- 6,050
- 640
- 126
Correct. I bolded the most relevant part. Yet, our federal government is actually more interested in buying overpriced (and unreliable) fighter jets from the United States, than solving domestic problems.
Once again, correct.
Bravo!
But then again, this is AT you're talking to... It's a hopelessly right-wing, conservative bunch of geeks, most of whom have no inkling of the way things work in the rest of the world...
Last edited:
silverpig
Lifer
- Jul 29, 2001
- 27,703
- 12
- 81
They don't lose the entire value of the loan. The government borrows money to loan it interest free while you are in school, and then gives you a low interest rate thereafter. They lose money but don't pay your full tuition.
They don't have to predict 5-10 years out, and a lot of it is quite easy to do.
Teaching is a 1-1.5 year program at the end of a bachelor's degree. The demographics of schools are easy to predict and some workforce planning isn't terribly hard to do.
Healthcare budgets are planned on cycles that coincide with elections (5-years here for a majority). That gives you nursing demands and doctor requirements with a long lead time, if you decide on a nurse:citizen or doctor:citizen ratio.
You can do stats on which majors get jobs and look at trends to make predictions about which majors are needed. If 10% of art history majors are employed in their field, and that number has been holding steady for 20 years, it doesn't take a genius to figure out what the market will be in the future.
A bureau of statisticians can probably do a better job predicting what majors are in demand than your average joe, yet the average joe is the one deciding to add one more art history major to the world.
a777pilot
Diamond Member
- Apr 26, 2011
- 4,261
- 21
- 81
LOL!
(Yes, I know I'm not suppose to do that. I don't care.)
I am a fucking moron. I could not agree more.
The reason that I am able to sit around all day and post my shit on these various sites is because I am retired after a life of doing things you know nothing. Good for me.
I have nothing against a Liberal Arts education. In fact I'm all for it, but at some point these cry babies need to go live in the real world and make their living on their own. I just don't want to pay for your lazy life style. If they can find a benefactor to underwrite their ways, good for them. Go for it.
This is already true. Most of the people I know who went to college took something totally useless.
-Drama (now works as a social event coordinator)
-Print Making (now works as a hotel manager)
-Biology (now works as a secretary)
-Chemistry (now works as a paint salesman)
-Music (unemployed)
-Graphic Design (now works as a secretary)
-Marketing (works at Future Shop)
I have my own worthless chemistry degree. I worked as an analytical chemist then went back for engineering. I still have lots of my class mates as Facebook friends and very very few of them use their degree. It's every bit as useless as a degree in Basket Weaving, except I actually like chemistry and I don't regret learning more about it because a lot of it has a practical use. Most of my class mates were not interested on a personal level, so it was a complete waste of time for them. They forget everything within a couple years and end up doing silly things like buying a new humidifier filter after it turns red (the red is iron oxide and can be cleaned off with muriatic acid or CLR).
That would be incredibly easy.
This would never work. People will bitch and complain that there are not enough spaces for African Studies. A politician will promise to change that. He gets elected. He changes it. This is basically what we see the US doing right now. Some candidate will say "our goal is for 80% of Americans to have a 4 year degree" and people vote for him because of that.
AnitaPeterson
Diamond Member
- Apr 24, 2001
- 6,050
- 640
- 126
I find the bolded parts disturbing. I couldn't care less about a Medieval Literature degree (and I remember snickering upon hearing about a "Poetry of Tupac Shakur" course at Berkeley), but the hard sciences should not be lumped in the same "useless" category. And the fact that graduates of such science programs can't find proper employment reflects a failure on the part of the society.
Frankly, I would consider moving to another country, if mine would be so f***ed up to lack prospects for a balanced growth in the industrial sector.
Crap... Canada is becoming, once again, a "natural resources" country, instead of an industrialized/manufacturing economy... *sigh*... Lumberjacks, anyone?
Throckmorton
Lifer
- Aug 23, 2007
- 16,829
- 3
- 0
Indeed. We can't all be astonauts. Too many chiefs, not enough Indians.
The failure of society is misleading people and making them think education is the path to most careers. It is only used for some careers.
Michael
Elite member
- Nov 19, 1999
- 5,435
- 234
- 106
Silverpig - do you keep missing the fact that only if they stay in the province will they pay the higher taxes? I left when I was 25 and other than a couple of visits, have not really been back to Montreal since. I am paying no Quebec or Canadian taxes. I just finished paying for my o,dest daughter to finish a degree at McGill, so I guess I got double benefit.
It does not make logical sense to pay for university so that tuition is free. Some countries (a few) do so, but it doesn't mean it is the only way. Canada and Quebec don't follow all of their practices.
Like I said, the logical move is to increase tuition but to keep it lower than the other provinces. That way the cultural commitment of lower university tuition is kept and the burden of the higher expenses is on the students (and their families).
Michael (degrees in accounting that I use every day at work - thanks Concordia and McGill)
It does not make logical sense to pay for university so that tuition is free. Some countries (a few) do so, but it doesn't mean it is the only way. Canada and Quebec don't follow all of their practices.
Like I said, the logical move is to increase tuition but to keep it lower than the other provinces. That way the cultural commitment of lower university tuition is kept and the burden of the higher expenses is on the students (and their families).
Michael (degrees in accounting that I use every day at work - thanks Concordia and McGill)
BoberFett
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 37,562
- 9
- 81
Education is the path to many careers. The mistake is in leading children to believe that getting a certain education guarantees them employment in that field. It's up to each individual to determine their aspirations and compete to reach them.
Let's say that we do set hard limits on the number of people allowed to pursue certain fields. Are we as a society prepared to tell somebody "Sorry, we've already got our quota of chemists this year. You get to be a garbage man instead." How long until the determination of your place in the world is set earlier and earlier in life. Gattaca anyone?
silverpig
Lifer
- Jul 29, 2001
- 27,703
- 12
- 81
Anecdotal evidence doesn't mean a thing. A lot of the people I graduated with got relevant jobs. Everyone ends up doing something, and most people use their education whether they realize it or not.
How do you know that?
silverpig
Lifer
- Jul 29, 2001
- 27,703
- 12
- 81
There's inflow and outflow.
I got my undergrad in physics and MBA in BC, and now pay tax in Ontario.
There are people who went to UofT who work in Vancouver.
Eventually I'll end up back there.
Besides, I'm considering this more as a national ideal rather than a Quebec ideal.
silverpig
Lifer
- Jul 29, 2001
- 27,703
- 12
- 81
Not now, but it used to be dirt cheap. My wife met someone here in Toronto a few weeks ago who paid something like $2,000 for her MBA from UofT about 20 years ago. I think it's $80k now. Inflation doesn't count for that much.
This is quite the slippery slope argument, but this already happens today. Universities already turn down people for programs because they're full.
My personal preference for a system would be a public/private mix, where the gov paid for a certain number of each degree type based on need at each university but the universities could still offer paid for degrees. The universities would decide who to offer the positions to themselves other than certain excluded criteria (income level, gender, race).
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
silverpig
Lifer
- Jul 29, 2001
- 27,703
- 12
- 81
That's the executive MBA. The regular MBA is $84k for citizens and permanent residents, $98k for internationals.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
What is 10K here or there at that point? :hmm: IT looks like the Executives are there that already have the jobs.
Either way, there hopefully is come cost justification for that expense.
That would require 10 year payoff at 100K salary (allowing 12% to pay the loan off)
Will the average person coming out of the program get a starting salary of 6 figures?
Can the market support that number of people(300) graduating from just that program alone each year.
The two year degree is $84K as stated.
Last edited:
silverpig
Lifer
- Jul 29, 2001
- 27,703
- 12
- 81
Yeah, a lot of people get $100k coming out. Some get more. Some get quite a bit more.
AnitaPeterson
Diamond Member
- Apr 24, 2001
- 6,050
- 640
- 126
http://montreal.mediacoop.ca/story/...ould-know-about-quebec-student-movement/10896
Ten Points Everyone Should Know About the Quebec Student Movement
The student strikes in Quebec, which began in February and have lasted for three months, involving roughly 175,000 students in the mostly French-speaking Canadian province, have been subjected to a massive provincial and national media propaganda campaign to demonize and dismiss the students and their struggle. The following is a list of ten points that everyone should know about the student movement in Quebec to help place their struggle in its proper global context.
1) The issue is debt, not tuition
2) Striking students in Quebec are setting an example for youth across the continent
3) The student strike was organized through democratic means and with democratic aims
4) This is not an exclusively Quebecois phenomenon
5) Government officials and the media have been openly calling for violence and fascist tactics to be used against the students
6) Excessive state violence has been used against the students
7) The government supports organized crime and opposes organized students
8) Canadas elites punish the people and oppose the students
9) The student strike is being subjected to a massive and highly successful propaganda campaign to discredit, dismiss, and demonize the students
10) The student movement is part of a much larger emerging global movement of resistance against austerity, neoliberalism, and corrupt power
Ten Points Everyone Should Know About the Quebec Student Movement
The student strikes in Quebec, which began in February and have lasted for three months, involving roughly 175,000 students in the mostly French-speaking Canadian province, have been subjected to a massive provincial and national media propaganda campaign to demonize and dismiss the students and their struggle. The following is a list of ten points that everyone should know about the student movement in Quebec to help place their struggle in its proper global context.
1) The issue is debt, not tuition
2) Striking students in Quebec are setting an example for youth across the continent
3) The student strike was organized through democratic means and with democratic aims
4) This is not an exclusively Quebecois phenomenon
5) Government officials and the media have been openly calling for violence and fascist tactics to be used against the students
6) Excessive state violence has been used against the students
7) The government supports organized crime and opposes organized students
8) Canadas elites punish the people and oppose the students
9) The student strike is being subjected to a massive and highly successful propaganda campaign to discredit, dismiss, and demonize the students
10) The student movement is part of a much larger emerging global movement of resistance against austerity, neoliberalism, and corrupt power
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
Now we have one side of the story.
My comments are based on the ten points - have not had time to actually look at the linked story
dennilfloss
Past Lifer 1957-2014 In Memoriam
I was involved in the mid-late 70s student strikes in Quebec. Those were against tuition hike (we were paying ~$370-420 per term ) (1974-75) but also against the establishment of SATA/GRE-like aptitude exams (1978).
There have been similar negotiations and strikes by students in Quebec over tuition hikes every few years since the late 60s when they led to the establishment of the first provincial student union, L'Union Générale Des Etudiants du Québec (UGEQ). Some dissentment in 1974-75 led to the UGEQ being replaced by a new association called ANEQ (Association Nationale des Etudiants du Québec). I was involved in my CEGEP's Political Action Committee during the time that led to the ANEQ, when we discussed its purpose, chart, rules, etc... As a moderate (centre-left) I saw the ANEQ quickly being diverted by more radical & vocal elements, particularly the PCCml (Parti Communiste Canadien marxiste-léniniste) who often clashed with the maoists and the trotskyists (there were many communist groups active at the time). I stopped being involved in such matters when I entered university, partly after having gone almost to fisticuffs during some meetings.
In 1974-1975 when we went on strike similarly against a tuition hike, our strike lasted about three weeks if I remember correctly (I was president of the occupation for my CEGEP - François-Xavier Garneau) and was totally peaceful. We did not disrupt the everyday lives of other people. We simply occupied our campuses and boycotted our classes. The only demonstration we did was to go sit on the Plains of Abraham around la Croix du Souvenir, once, close to Parliament and in view of the Prime Minister's window in Le Complexe H bunker.
It would never have crossed our minds to be violent or disruptive of other folks who went about their work & daily lives. That works against you. You do not gather support from the general population doing this, quite the contrary as we're seeing right now. Plus none of us wore masks. We showed our faces to show our discontent.
Times have changed though. This was when you could settle an argument one on one, with fists. No knives, no guns, no 5-6 friends of the other guy jumping you if you happen to win the fight, and no kicking a downed man. Once he is down and possibly out, the fight is over. You have won and it's time for both sides to heal their bruises.
Things are much more tribal nowadays.
Things have also changed since then in that there no longer is a single national association representing all students but individual faculties & departments can choose to be part of at least three main organizations (there are more) and a strike vote is taken at the level of the department/faculty, not the whole institution.
Another thing to remember about the current situation: 70% of the faculties & departments in CEGEPs and universities have not voted in favour and are not on strike. The majority of those students are in fact in favour of a moderate tuition increase, particularly students in Science, Engineering, Accounting, Medicine. Those we see on the news are the vocal minority, some bandwagoners and some who have decided toenlarge the conflict into a general call for societal change. As such, many demonstrations have been infiltrated by anarchist and radical groups (the Panda you see often is proudly called the anarchopanda) who are bent on provocation.
Within the faculties that voted for a strike, the quorum needed can be very low. For example, the most militant (and left-leaning) university in Québec is L'Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM). Here is a picture showing what quorum is needed for a strike vote in each of its faculties, as low as 0.8% of the faculty's enrollment.
Also, as per the UQAM's own regulations, students who are on strike must not prevent others who decide not to boycott their classes from attending lectures. Profs are required to keep on lecturing etc... as if all is normal. They can only stop lectures if there is major disruption that prevents learning (e.g. tumult) or physical danger, e.g. intimidation by striking students, in which case campus security is supposed to take the perpetrators away so classes can resume normally. There are probably similar dispositions in the rules of other colleges and universities. The current Bill 78 goes further in making harassing and preventing other students from attending classes a criminal act to be dealt with by police rather than just by campus security, probably because it got too much for campus security to handle.
One must remember also that this is not a strike in a strict labour sense as per Quebec law. Student unions share some aspects with labour unions in being able to collect mandatory union fees, providing job search and other services but they do not have a formalized right to strike. This is why the term boycott is employed by the government and those students opposed to the walk out. Since there is no formal legal strikes, legislation applying to scabs/picket lines/etc... do not apply.
To those who say the right to demonstrate is impeded, well freedom of expression sin't an absolute right (you cannot yell fire in a cinema for example). In Canada, some reasonable constraints can be applied to an individual right if circumstances warrant it for the greater good. We have an exception clause in our Charter of Rights & Freedoms that is there exactly to address such situations. There are checks & balances in Canada. If people think the law is unconstitutional, then challenge it in court. Even if it is judged constitutional, if you think it goes too far, then vote another party in government who promises to strike it down or replace it.
Sounds like some of the protesters are more into Life, Liberty & The Pursuit of Happiness than into Peace, Order & Good Government (which the checks & balances address).
Finally, the separatist Parti Québécois is co-opting the conflict but they had a very different message when they were the government facing a similar strike in 1977. Back then, Premier René Lévesque said:
There have been similar negotiations and strikes by students in Quebec over tuition hikes every few years since the late 60s when they led to the establishment of the first provincial student union, L'Union Générale Des Etudiants du Québec (UGEQ). Some dissentment in 1974-75 led to the UGEQ being replaced by a new association called ANEQ (Association Nationale des Etudiants du Québec). I was involved in my CEGEP's Political Action Committee during the time that led to the ANEQ, when we discussed its purpose, chart, rules, etc... As a moderate (centre-left) I saw the ANEQ quickly being diverted by more radical & vocal elements, particularly the PCCml (Parti Communiste Canadien marxiste-léniniste) who often clashed with the maoists and the trotskyists (there were many communist groups active at the time). I stopped being involved in such matters when I entered university, partly after having gone almost to fisticuffs during some meetings.
In 1974-1975 when we went on strike similarly against a tuition hike, our strike lasted about three weeks if I remember correctly (I was president of the occupation for my CEGEP - François-Xavier Garneau) and was totally peaceful. We did not disrupt the everyday lives of other people. We simply occupied our campuses and boycotted our classes. The only demonstration we did was to go sit on the Plains of Abraham around la Croix du Souvenir, once, close to Parliament and in view of the Prime Minister's window in Le Complexe H bunker.
It would never have crossed our minds to be violent or disruptive of other folks who went about their work & daily lives. That works against you. You do not gather support from the general population doing this, quite the contrary as we're seeing right now. Plus none of us wore masks. We showed our faces to show our discontent.
Times have changed though. This was when you could settle an argument one on one, with fists. No knives, no guns, no 5-6 friends of the other guy jumping you if you happen to win the fight, and no kicking a downed man. Once he is down and possibly out, the fight is over. You have won and it's time for both sides to heal their bruises.
Things are much more tribal nowadays.
Things have also changed since then in that there no longer is a single national association representing all students but individual faculties & departments can choose to be part of at least three main organizations (there are more) and a strike vote is taken at the level of the department/faculty, not the whole institution.
Another thing to remember about the current situation: 70% of the faculties & departments in CEGEPs and universities have not voted in favour and are not on strike. The majority of those students are in fact in favour of a moderate tuition increase, particularly students in Science, Engineering, Accounting, Medicine. Those we see on the news are the vocal minority, some bandwagoners and some who have decided toenlarge the conflict into a general call for societal change. As such, many demonstrations have been infiltrated by anarchist and radical groups (the Panda you see often is proudly called the anarchopanda) who are bent on provocation.
Within the faculties that voted for a strike, the quorum needed can be very low. For example, the most militant (and left-leaning) university in Québec is L'Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM). Here is a picture showing what quorum is needed for a strike vote in each of its faculties, as low as 0.8% of the faculty's enrollment.
Also, as per the UQAM's own regulations, students who are on strike must not prevent others who decide not to boycott their classes from attending lectures. Profs are required to keep on lecturing etc... as if all is normal. They can only stop lectures if there is major disruption that prevents learning (e.g. tumult) or physical danger, e.g. intimidation by striking students, in which case campus security is supposed to take the perpetrators away so classes can resume normally. There are probably similar dispositions in the rules of other colleges and universities. The current Bill 78 goes further in making harassing and preventing other students from attending classes a criminal act to be dealt with by police rather than just by campus security, probably because it got too much for campus security to handle.
One must remember also that this is not a strike in a strict labour sense as per Quebec law. Student unions share some aspects with labour unions in being able to collect mandatory union fees, providing job search and other services but they do not have a formalized right to strike. This is why the term boycott is employed by the government and those students opposed to the walk out. Since there is no formal legal strikes, legislation applying to scabs/picket lines/etc... do not apply.
To those who say the right to demonstrate is impeded, well freedom of expression sin't an absolute right (you cannot yell fire in a cinema for example). In Canada, some reasonable constraints can be applied to an individual right if circumstances warrant it for the greater good. We have an exception clause in our Charter of Rights & Freedoms that is there exactly to address such situations. There are checks & balances in Canada. If people think the law is unconstitutional, then challenge it in court. Even if it is judged constitutional, if you think it goes too far, then vote another party in government who promises to strike it down or replace it.
Sounds like some of the protesters are more into Life, Liberty & The Pursuit of Happiness than into Peace, Order & Good Government (which the checks & balances address).
Finally, the separatist Parti Québécois is co-opting the conflict but they had a very different message when they were the government facing a similar strike in 1977. Back then, Premier René Lévesque said:
Last edited:
dennilfloss
Past Lifer 1957-2014 In Memoriam
I was involved in the mid-late 70s student strikes in Quebec. Those were against tuition hike (we were paying ~$370-420 per term ) (1974-75) but also against the establishment of SATA/GRE-like aptitude exams (1978).
There have been similar negotiations and strikes by students in Quebec over tuition hikes every few years since the late 60s when they led to the establishment of the first provincial student union, L'Union Générale Des Etudiants du Québec (UGEQ). Some dissentment in 1974-75 led to the UGEQ being replaced by a new association called ANEQ (Association Nationale des Etudiants du Québec). I was involved in my CEGEP's Political Action Committee during the time that led to the ANEQ, when we discussed its purpose, chart, rules, etc... As a moderate (centre-left) I saw the ANEQ quickly being diverted by more radical & vocal elements, particularly the PCCml (Parti Communiste Canadien marxiste-léniniste) who often clashed with the maoists and the trotskyists (there were many communist groups active at the time). I stopped being involved in this when I entered university, partly after having gone almost to fisticuffs in some meetings.
Things have changed since then as there no longer is a single national association representing all students but individual faculties & departments can choose to be part of at least three main organizations (there are more) and a strike voted is taken at the level of the department/faculty, not the whole institution.
Another thing to remember about the current situation: 70% of the faculties & departments in CEGEPs and universities have not voted in favour and are not on strike. The majority of those students are in fact in favour of a moderate tuition increase, particularly students in Science, Engineering, Accounting, Medicine.
Within the faculties that voted for a strike, the quorum needed can be very low. For example, the most militant (and left-leaning) university in Québec is L'Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM). Here is a picture showing what quorum is needed for a strike vote in each of its faculties, as low as 0.8% of the faculty's enrollment.
Also, as per the UQAM's own regulations, students who are on strike must not prevent others who decide not to boycott their classes from attending lectures. Profs are required to keep on lecturing etc... as if all is normal. They can only stop lectures if there is major disruption that prevents learning (e.g. tumult) or physical danger, e.g. intimidation by striking students, in which case campus security is supposed to take the perpetrators away so classes can resume normally. There are probably similar dispositions in the rules of other colleges and universities. The current Bill 78 goes further in making harassing and preventing other students from attending classes a criminal act to be dealt with by police rather than just by campus security, probably because it got too much for campus security to handle.
One must remember also that this is not a strike in a strict labour sense as per Quebec law. Student unions share some aspects with labour unions in being able to collect mandatory union fees, providing job search and other services but they do not have a formalized right to strike. This is why the term boycott is employed by the government and those students opposed to the walk out. Since there is no formal legal strikes, legislation applying to scabs/picket lines/etc... do not apply.
To those who say the right to demonstrate is impeded, well freedom of expression isn't an absolute right (you cannot yell fire in a cinema for example). In Canada, some reasonable constraints can be applied in exceptional circumstances to an individual right if such circumstances warrant it for the greater good. We have an exception clause in our Charter of Rights & Freedoms that is there exactly to address such situations. There are checks & balances in Canada. If people think the law is unconstitutional, then challenge it in court. Even if it is judged constitutional, if you think it goes too far, then vote another party in government who promises to strike it down or replace it.
Sounds like some of the protesters are more into Life, Liberty & The Pursuit of Happiness than into Peace, Order & Good Government (which the checks & balances address).
Finally, the separatist Parti Québécois is co-opting the conflict but they had a very different message when they were the government facing a similar strike in 1977. Back then, Premier René Lévesque said:
There have been similar negotiations and strikes by students in Quebec over tuition hikes every few years since the late 60s when they led to the establishment of the first provincial student union, L'Union Générale Des Etudiants du Québec (UGEQ). Some dissentment in 1974-75 led to the UGEQ being replaced by a new association called ANEQ (Association Nationale des Etudiants du Québec). I was involved in my CEGEP's Political Action Committee during the time that led to the ANEQ, when we discussed its purpose, chart, rules, etc... As a moderate (centre-left) I saw the ANEQ quickly being diverted by more radical & vocal elements, particularly the PCCml (Parti Communiste Canadien marxiste-léniniste) who often clashed with the maoists and the trotskyists (there were many communist groups active at the time). I stopped being involved in this when I entered university, partly after having gone almost to fisticuffs in some meetings.
Things have changed since then as there no longer is a single national association representing all students but individual faculties & departments can choose to be part of at least three main organizations (there are more) and a strike voted is taken at the level of the department/faculty, not the whole institution.
Another thing to remember about the current situation: 70% of the faculties & departments in CEGEPs and universities have not voted in favour and are not on strike. The majority of those students are in fact in favour of a moderate tuition increase, particularly students in Science, Engineering, Accounting, Medicine.
Within the faculties that voted for a strike, the quorum needed can be very low. For example, the most militant (and left-leaning) university in Québec is L'Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM). Here is a picture showing what quorum is needed for a strike vote in each of its faculties, as low as 0.8% of the faculty's enrollment.
Also, as per the UQAM's own regulations, students who are on strike must not prevent others who decide not to boycott their classes from attending lectures. Profs are required to keep on lecturing etc... as if all is normal. They can only stop lectures if there is major disruption that prevents learning (e.g. tumult) or physical danger, e.g. intimidation by striking students, in which case campus security is supposed to take the perpetrators away so classes can resume normally. There are probably similar dispositions in the rules of other colleges and universities. The current Bill 78 goes further in making harassing and preventing other students from attending classes a criminal act to be dealt with by police rather than just by campus security, probably because it got too much for campus security to handle.
One must remember also that this is not a strike in a strict labour sense as per Quebec law. Student unions share some aspects with labour unions in being able to collect mandatory union fees, providing job search and other services but they do not have a formalized right to strike. This is why the term boycott is employed by the government and those students opposed to the walk out. Since there is no formal legal strikes, legislation applying to scabs/picket lines/etc... do not apply.
To those who say the right to demonstrate is impeded, well freedom of expression isn't an absolute right (you cannot yell fire in a cinema for example). In Canada, some reasonable constraints can be applied in exceptional circumstances to an individual right if such circumstances warrant it for the greater good. We have an exception clause in our Charter of Rights & Freedoms that is there exactly to address such situations. There are checks & balances in Canada. If people think the law is unconstitutional, then challenge it in court. Even if it is judged constitutional, if you think it goes too far, then vote another party in government who promises to strike it down or replace it.
Sounds like some of the protesters are more into Life, Liberty & The Pursuit of Happiness than into Peace, Order & Good Government (which the checks & balances address).
Finally, the separatist Parti Québécois is co-opting the conflict but they had a very different message when they were the government facing a similar strike in 1977. Back then, Premier René Lévesque said:
silverpig
Lifer
- Jul 29, 2001
- 27,703
- 12
- 81
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...older-generation-thats-entitled-not-students/
I had actually written a post in a similar vein but didn't end up posting it.
Anyways, sure, society pays a lot to educate young people, but they benefit even more later when those educated people go on to create companies and work highly skilled jobs.
I had actually written a post in a similar vein but didn't end up posting it.
Anyways, sure, society pays a lot to educate young people, but they benefit even more later when those educated people go on to create companies and work highly skilled jobs.
So you're saying people won't educate themselves if it costs more?
Aren't there already too many people with degrees?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter