ABC Theorists
Student Loans: Bring us your children... to the slaughter. |
May 12, 2008 - 03:31 PM |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have 7 guests and 0 members online
Welcome Guest, become a member today.
|
|
|
|
|
| god money's not looking for the cure, god money's not concerned about the sick among the pure, god money let's go dancing on the backs of the bruised, god money's not one to choose. -- NIN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 13th April 2005, the House resumed from April 6 consideration of the motion that Bill C-236, an act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (student loan), be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Unfortunately, the bill was defeated at 3:25 p.m, 105 (yeas) - 168 (nays) - 4 (paired). All NDP and BQ members supported Bill C-236. The Conservatives withdrew their support of the bill, which led to its demise. This is surprising, as the Conservatives were initially supportive of this bill, providing the change "ten to five years" from "ten to two years" be made; this could have easily been changed if the bill had been passed to a committee, which was exactly what this vote was for.
It is important to point out the select few from the Liberal and Conservative parties who supported the bill, despite their respective party lines; here's a list of the Liberal and Conservative members who deserve your praise. As well, a list of the members who voted "Nay" is included to remind you of the members applying for early parliamentary retirement -- on election day, of course.
Note: The results of the final vote on Bill C-236 in the house.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The House resumed from February 25 consideration of the motion that Bill C-236, an act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (student loan), be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Debate continued with the same tone, with the NDP and BQ being supportive of the bill, the Liberals making wild and fallacious claims, and the Conservatives being somewhere in between.
One example:
Mr. Roger Valley (Kenora, Lib.): "Indeed for the 1995-96 year alone, the fiscal cost of bankruptcies involving student loans totalled more than $100 million.
Since then the cost of bankruptcies has been reduced dramatically. In 2000-01, the last year where complete data is available, the cost of bankruptcies to the Canada student loans program was only $5.8 million."
Brilliant! After making bankruptcy impossible, the government observed a sudden drop in bankruptcy claims. To what other realms can we propagate this confounded logic?
Note: another full-hour of debate in the House of Commons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On October 20th 2004, Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax, NDP) re-introduced Bill C-236 (Formerly C-329).
Bill C-236: amends the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act to reduce, from ten to two years after a bankrupt leaves school, the period of time during which an order of discharge does not release the bankrupt from the reimbursement of his or her student loan.
On February 25th 2005, the house kicked off debate on the bill.
The Result
NDP: SUPPORTIVE
BQ: SUPPORTIVE
LIB: NOT SUPPORTIVE (IN DENIAL)
CON: RECEPTIVE (WILL SUPPORT REDUCTION TO FIVE-YEARS)
The conservatives also point out how the student loan program profits from gouging students with obscene interest rates.
Note: The full-text of 1 hour of parliament debate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am thankful that these organizations gave me the opportunity to be part of Canadian society.
by Shoe
Note: Shoe's adventures: here
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Canadian Federation of Students have given Jack Layton and today's NDP top marks for their post secondary education platform.
According to CFS's Report Card on Education, the NDP scored an ‘A' for our proposal to reduce tuition fees by 10 percent and then freeze them by increasing federal funding to post secondary education. The NDP also won kudos for plans to increase grants, not loans, available to students.
From Canada's New Democratic Party
Note: For immediate release: 12/06/2004.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ABC Theorists provides a platform for debate. Administrators and guest writers own and are responsible for their respective articles. Likewise, persons contributing to any forum thread or other section, remain responsible for their own comments. Moreover, contributors do not necessarily endorse views put forth by other members. ABC Theorists has neither confirmed nor denied material in the fora. Readers should responsibly evaluate comments made therein. If any posts are deemed legally questionable, ABC Theorists reserves the right to remove such comments. As well, this site may contain links to other websites and files. ABC Theorists has no control over offsite content, and thus cannot ensure that content will be neither offensive nor objectionable. ABC Theorists will, however, remove links to material felt inappropriate when made aware of such links. Equally important, offsite sources do not necessarily endorse viewpoints made on this site, and accordingly are not responsible for content herein.
Copyright © ABC Theorists (abctheorists.com) RSS
|
|
|
