Quasi-Mandatory Donation Program?

[Chief Hoult]

The Student Union at Acadia is toying with the idea of adding a student levy (basically, all students would have $1-4 added to their student fees) in order to create bursaries only for students in need of financial aid.

There are a few ideas:

1) Mandatory -- All students would be required to pay in

2) Opt-out -- It would be added to your fee, but you could opt-out of you went to the registrars office and requested it.

3) Opt-in -- Students could choose to sign up for the program

(there are several more ideas, but these are the big ones. This has been an idea tossed around at the union for a while, so whether or not it will happen is anyone's guess.)

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

CH

[Bright Eyes]

Universities increase tution and other fees all the time without students ever perceptably seeing where their money goes besides into new flowerbeds. (Plant perennials!!!! You waste your money every year on darned annuals that only die anyway!!! Who recruits with petunias anyway?!?)

Personally, I'd have no problem with money being taken from me as long as I knew where it was going. Offering the option to opt out would be nice, but I would hope that students bound for university would recognize that they are in a fortunate percentile of the population and would not mind giving less than $5 to help someone out that is perhaps not as fortunate.

Overall I'd like to see more accountability in terms of where universities spend the money that they receive in terms of easily accessible accounting documents and limits as to where money gathered from tuition specifically can be spent.

[Insane Power Pilot]

The U of A has a quasi-mandatory donation program called the Access Fund. (http://www.su.ualberta.ca/su/businesses_and_services/accessfund) It is roughly $15 per student per semester and it has an opt-out available. I've opted out of it a few times because I heard a few stories about people blowing all their student loan money on gambling or crack and then they get bailed out by the Access Fund. I can think of better ways to spend fifteen bucks, like giving it to the Campus Food Bank so some of my fellow students don't starve to death.

Most people aren't aware that the opt-out exists. When they advertise for the Access Fund, they have a giant poster about what you have to do to get a bursary from it, and in small print in the corner, it says "opt-out available." And when you do opt-out, the people at the SU try to lay a huge guilt trip on you. They make you sign a form that says "Before you sign this, understand that the Access Fund could be helping the person sitting next to you in class!" and "I realize by signing this I am decreasing the number of bursaries available." I couldn't make this up if I tried. I tell them if they don't like people opting out, they should put the Access Fund back to referendum without the opt-out clause and until then, they should give me back my money sans the guilt.

[RedLead]

In my opinion, no one should be forced to donate. There are no guarantees that the money will be spent properly by the students who receive it. Also, I haven't met very many students who don't have financial need.

[Juice]

To counter your point, there's no guarantee that people will spend welfare money properly, does that mean all welfare should be cut out as well?

JB

[Rhino Rob]

To counter your point, there's no guarantee that people will spend welfare money properly, does that mean all welfare should be cut out as well?

JBIf we cut out welfare then we can say that nobody is on welfare:D All is great in Canada!

Honestly, I was never a long-term student at University or College. I do believe that you should be permitted to spend your hard earned loans how you want to. Paying a "poor student" tax is a lazy persons way of fundraising or better yet, searching for sponsors. If council wanted to help out students, fundraising is a better way than taxing..............IMO.

[RedLead]

To counter your point, there's no guarantee that people will spend welfare money properly, does that mean all welfare should be cut out as well?

JB

At the same time, the cost for welfare isn't paid for by other people who need social assistance, whereas in this case the students are being charged to send other students to school. The most important part of my argument is that most students can barely afford school as it is.

[Juice]

At the same time, the cost for welfare isn't paid for by other people who need social assistance, whereas in this case the students are being charged to send other students to school. The most important part of my argument is that most students can barely afford school as it is.
How many times do you go out a semester? How much money do you spend on drinks? Or coffee? Or eating out? There are many ways that students could spend their money better, and they could potentially save A LOT of money. A couple of extra dollars might stop people from buying that one last drink before the end of a night out. Big deal.

I don't think that students being hard-up for money is a universal thing. There are enough students that can afford to go to school with little problems. I don't see how me giving an extra buck or two on tuition to help send someone who otherwise couldn't is a bad thing. Sure, I have a hard time affording school, but I don't think there are too many students out there that are THAT hard up for money that an extra couple of dollars will cripple them financially.

And if you are a student in that situation, wouldn't that make you the perfect candidate for some of that money?

Student loans are nice to have, and all that, but it sucks paying them back. Scholarships and bursaries are much better, because any money that you don't have to worry about paying back is a good thing.

JB

[Bright Eyes]

At the same time, the cost for welfare isn't paid for by other people who need social assistance
Yes it is ... through taxes. (Not income taxes, obviously, but other taxes on goods and services.)