Nats propose centrally planned economy

Written By: - Date published: 2:38 pm, May 12th, 2017 - 21 comments
Categories: economy, education, humour - Tags: , ,

National are proposing that the economy should be centrally planned, though they are disguising it as an education policy – Government not ruling out limiting the number of students who get tertiary courses subsidised

Put simply, the government would decide, for example, how many lawyers, vets, accountants or teachers it needed each year and subsidise accordingly.

Anyone falling outside of the “need” category would still have access to courses but would need to cough up the cash themselves.

Williamson broke down his argument by taking a look at art history.

His data suggests about 10,000 students took the subject at Auckland University, which he says he has no issue with but the question was whether taxpayers should fund it.

“Maybe we want 500 art historian graduates that we fund well, the next cohort moderately maybe and the last cohort is anyone who wants to can but they fund it themselves.”

Take that market forces! Make way for communism by stealth. Да здравствует славная революция! I can’t wait for the first five year plan…

21 comments on “Nats propose centrally planned economy ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Carolyn_nth 1
    12 May 2017 at 2:45 pm

    Because they only want a select few of Natz propagandists with an in-depth understanding of art history, and how artistic processes can be used to subvert democracy.

  2. dukeofurl 2
    12 May 2017 at 3:14 pm

    10,000 students took Art History at Auckland ?

    That would make it far away the most popular subject!

    Wouldnt it be a filler 1st stage course for most.
    maybe 150 made it their major ? or does anyone have reliable figures

    The people in the faculty seem to think its much wider than old paintings
    ‘Studying Art History can build skills in creative thinking, design and planning, which are useful for careers in communication and media, marketing, journalism, conservation, exhibition management, galleries and auction houses, tourism, diplomacy, intellectual property and copyright law, and business management.”

    • Carolyn_nth 2.1
      12 May 2017 at 3:18 pm

      Yes. It is an appropriate subject for people working in all those areas. And they are quite central to contemporary society. Plus there’s the critical element.

      • AB 2.1.1
        12 May 2017 at 5:00 pm

        ” It is an appropriate subject for people working in all those areas”
        I expect you are right – but let’s not get sucked into utility-based arguments on education.
        Utility is important but not the only factor.
        It’s simply a ‘good thing’ that quite a few people in our society know something about art history, irrespective of whether it helps them earn their daily bread or not. Human beings are not machines intended purely for working in the most efficient manner possible. They have aesthetic, intellectual and spiritual faculties and these need to be fed to make complete, happy people.
        Once we start talking utility we have surrendered ground to authoritarian philistines like Steven Joyce.

    • the pigman 2.2
      12 May 2017 at 6:24 pm

      First year ELAM (school of Fine Arts) students are forced to take art history. So anyone doing a Bachelor of Fine Arts is required to do the (I believe only first year) of art history courses.

      I just can’t stand how they pull figures out without context and use them to prove a point they don’t actually prove. *sigh*

    • Psycho Milt 2.3
      13 May 2017 at 12:38 pm

      10,000 students took Art History at Auckland ?

      In the entire history of the relevant department, maybe.

  3. McFlock 3
    12 May 2017 at 3:55 pm

    I’m surprised they pick on art history students: I would have thought the average tory swine would have loved a portrait done in the style of David…

  4. Ad 4
    12 May 2017 at 4:14 pm

    I’m still waiting, like Billy Bragg, for the Great Leap Forward:

    • WILD KATIPO 4.1
      12 May 2017 at 11:57 pm

      Why not the reverse?…

      The Great Leap Backwards was there for the taking but sadly it went unrecognized with the McGillicuddy Serious party…

  5. ianmac 5
    12 May 2017 at 4:19 pm

    Art History or The Arts as in a BA?

  6. joe90 6
    12 May 2017 at 4:23 pm

    Everything old is new, again.

    There are, however, a large number of bursaries awarded for special vocational purposes and these usually require the student, on graduation, to give service with some government department or other organisation. In general, awards are competitive and are made by special selection committees.

    http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/1966/education-special-aspects-scholarships-and-bursaries

  7. lprent 7
    12 May 2017 at 5:09 pm

    This is just stupid. Consider my tertiary education as a vocational guideline for instance

    1. BSc in earth sciences with minor in some business courses. While in it, I did several philosophy courses and a few compsci courses. Post-degree I went out and worked in several businesses with a clay based materials but doing management work for 4 years.

    2. MBA in operations management (mostly so I could argue with accountants). Post-degree I was stuck in Dunedin (a bastion of employment) while my partner finished did her degrees. So I went and did computer support for 2 years because it was interesting and paid the bills. Moved from that to doing cross-country inventory management – mainly using computers.

    3. Started a contract programming a prototype system in c++ while doing some post-grad DipCompSci papers.

    I’ve mostly been building greenfield or large code redevelopments for the last 25 years as a computer programmer ever since.

    I’ve also done papers in assorted areas like history, anthro, law, etc. I would have taken art history except I got the required start level when I did that in 6th and 7th form at school.

    I get as much work from my science and business background as I do from straight compsci and computer development skills. That is because I need to be able to talk to engineers, read science data, accounts, project plans, and talk to everyone about whatever they are trying to do.

    Now I couldn’t have picked where I was heading back when I started university. The government would have been useless at picking it too. Virtually everything that I am currently doing was not even science fiction 40 years ago.

    Only a educational moron or the members of a “productivity commission” who probably have fuckall to do with the real economy would ever consider prescriptive pathways in education. As an employer I never look at the kinds of simpletons who follow simple courses. They aren’t productive people.

  8. keepcalmcarryon 8
    12 May 2017 at 6:15 pm

    Places in “professional” degrees like vet ,medicine, law (I believe) already have limited positions. Already some dodginess around “full fee” paying students mostly from overseas doing degree with lower grades but more money. Oversupply already of some “professionals” as universities concentrate on high demand high fee students rather than what society needs. (oversupply of just about all except doctors and dentists)
    To me the main issue is money buying a career that usually requires a certain level of merit. (full fee payers with lower grades vs those competing for set places with higher grade averages) which doctor would you want?

  9. Whispering Kate 9
    12 May 2017 at 8:38 pm

    Why does the Government not put any value into Art History – I have a family member with a MA Hons in Art History who has a career as a Vice President in an American Merchant Bank. Not that I am saying that being a banker in the US is anything illustrious – only that a good Humanities degree gives graduates a broad scope in critical thinking and versatility in all career options. This Government is absolutely incorrect into steering people into particular degrees – social engineering is all they are interested in.

    At university years ago I saw a cartoon in Craccum magazine where they portrayed an old fashioned kitchen mincer with all sorts of different shapes going into the machine and identical little squares coming out the other end. I rest my case. This Government is a dull as ditch water government.

  10. Ad 10
    13 May 2017 at 6:56 am

    I have a PhD in Art History.

    I work on really large scale infrastructure projects.

    I am pretty grateful for all the taxpayer support I got.

    Williamson should accept that the NZ system has for 30 years been a skills-based education system.

    He should simply let people get the skills where they get them.

  11. saveNZ 11
    13 May 2017 at 7:27 am

    Does their control freakery have no bounds?

    The Natz hatred of the arts, and low wage economy mantra is making NZ a banana republic full of poorly educated, hang em up and arm them mentality citizens, that incresingly our government sees NZ future in the service sector as a nation of petrol attendants and restaurant managers, farm and construction workers and bureaucrats.

    Funny enough – one of our richest and successful teenagers is a musician who’s mother is a poet.

    ” 20-year-old Lorde has taken the No. 1 spot on People With Money’s top 10 highest-paid singers for 2017 with an estimated $46 million in combined earnings.”

    from Wiki.

    In November 2013, Lorde was included in Time’s list of the most influential teenagers in the world, with Mark Metcalfe from the publication commenting that she was “forging her own path”.[108] In January 2014, Forbes placed Lorde on their “30 Under 30” list of young people “who are changing our world”.[109] She was the youngest individual to be featured on the list.[110] In October of that year, Lorde was included in the list “The 25 Most Influential Teens of 2014” by Time.[111] Featuring Lorde in its 6 September 2013 cover story, Billboard named Lorde “your new alt-rock heroine”.[5] Britney Spears is an admirer of Lorde, commenting that her music “[is] really different and cool.”[112]

  12. saveNZ 12
    13 May 2017 at 8:21 am

    I guess Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William degree and study in History of Art be considered a waste of time by our philistine government.

    • Incognito 12.1
      13 May 2017 at 8:32 am

      I don’t think Williamson actually said that degrees in art history are “a waste”. He said that the country might not need as many as 10,000 and that maybe 500 would/could be sufficient. We can pick those numbers to bits and argue against his (National’s) ‘reasoning’ but we shouldn’t put words in his mouth.

  13. ropata 13
    13 May 2017 at 12:01 pm

    Any education in the humanities is a threat to the corporate project. Our betters in the National party demand vocational training only to feed the money making machine. The last thing they want is an educated public with historical or philosophical awareness of the dictatorship playbook

  14. Cemetery Jones 14
    15 May 2017 at 9:56 pm

    Silly Nats. Emmanuel Macron studied philosophy, but ended up as one of Rothschild’s most high ranking bankers. You just can’t predict who will make themselves useful to the ruling class in spite of their background!