The monarchy are figureheads only. While they have power in theory, they do not exercise it; they're well aware that attempts to interfere with the country's democracy wouldn't go down well.

FuzzyLobster wrote:I was about to go all indignant rage - then I realized that it wasn't in my country. XD

Ours did increase, but not that much. I think by a thousand.

Sentynel wrote:The monarchy are figureheads only. While they have power in theory, they do not exercise it; they're well aware that attempts to interfere with the country's democracy wouldn't go down well.

So, getting back to my point, what the protesters in the article did was pretty much completely useless?

Nero wrote:Ours did increase, but not that much. I think by a thousand.

*indignant rage* WHAT THE HELL. Screw this, I'm going to college. There's no reason for it to be that high.

*grumbles* I was going to go to sleep, but now I'm going to have to look this up...

FuzzyLobster wrote:

Sentynel wrote:The monarchy are figureheads only. While they have power in theory, they do not exercise it; they're well aware that attempts to interfere with the country's democracy wouldn't go down well.

So, getting back to my point, what the protesters in the article did was pretty much completely useless?

Well, Charles and Camilla are pretty annoying...

They deregulated fees in my program a long time ago. My friend does an equivalent program called AFM at another uni and they call it All my Family's Money. Also, our protests do nothing

My fees are pathetically low, even by Indian standards. Doesn't cross $100 a year. And sometimes, that might include thick notebooks, lab coat and practical material. For people from backward castes (they make up a big number)- however rich they are- the fees is $45 per year. Because my university is funded by the government (government funds quite a few higher education universities and institutes). It also provides free train travel passes to girls living in any corner of the city. So, if there is an increase, you wouldn't find me protesting. I might actually agree with the decision.
Edit: Oh, and something I realized only lately; people from backward caste who do arts get good-quality education at a mere $2-3 a year. I'm not sure if this fees is for junior or senior college though. Science is costlier because we have lab for 3 hours minimum daily.

Sentynel wrote:

FuzzyLobster wrote:

Sentynel wrote:The monarchy are figureheads only. While they have power in theory, they do not exercise it; they're well aware that attempts to interfere with the country's democracy wouldn't go down well.

So, getting back to my point, what the protesters in the article did was pretty much completely useless?

Well, Charles and Camilla are pretty annoying...

Is it bad that when I saw this photo



And other ones of Camilla scared, I didn't really feel pity?

nathanielandbartimaeus wrote:My fees are pathetically low, even by Indian standards. Doesn't cross $100 a year. And sometimes, that might include thick notebooks, lab coat and practical material. For people from backward castes (they make up a big number)- however rich they are- the fees is $45 per year. Because my university is funded by the government (government funds quite a few higher education universities and institutes). It also provides free train travel passes to girls living in any corner of the city. So, if there is an increase, you wouldn't find me protesting. I might actually agree with the decision.
Edit: Oh, and something I realized only lately; people from backward caste who do arts get good-quality education at a mere $2-3 a year. I'm not sure if this fees is for junior or senior college though. Science is costlier because we have lab for 3 hours minimum daily.

Jealous. I'm working 30 hours a week to save up for uni.

That is hard. And um, I think my parents have saved up for my education already. I'm not talking about my B.Sc fees which, like I said, is very less. M.Sc. and Ph.D would cost a lot more, especially if done from a private institute. My parents have saved enough for my sister and me to do at least Ph.D from good institutes (given a choice, they would want us to get even a post-doctorate degree). Most parents here are rather like that, always saving for higher education.
But that doesn't mean I would like it do it with their money. I might consider a job after my M.Sc. and try and fund my own Ph.D (presuming I want to do it).

rubberchickenben wrote:I'm working 30 hours a week to save up for uni.

Don't you get student loans and stuff in Canada?

David Cat wrote:

rubberchickenben wrote:I'm working 30 hours a week to save up for uni.

Don't you get student loans and stuff in Canada?

He's presumably going to be paying off all those loans that way. And plus the government doesn't pay for your living style.

But all in all it's nice to have a cushion. Plus the government doesn't pay for everything. You still need to pay some tuition.

Nero wrote:

David Cat wrote:

rubberchickenben wrote:I'm working 30 hours a week to save up for uni.

Don't you get student loans and stuff in Canada?

He's presumably going to be paying off all those loans that way. And plus the government doesn't pay for your living style.

But all in all it's nice to have a cushion. Plus the government doesn't pay for everything. You still need to pay some tuition.

Our student loans cover tuition fees and living expenses. It seems like a bit of a strange system to provide loans that... don't cover everything.

Sentynel wrote:

Nero wrote:

David Cat wrote:

rubberchickenben wrote:I'm working 30 hours a week to save up for uni.

Don't you get student loans and stuff in Canada?

He's presumably going to be paying off all those loans that way. And plus the government doesn't pay for your living style.

But all in all it's nice to have a cushion. Plus the government doesn't pay for everything. You still need to pay some tuition.

Our student loans cover tuition fees and living expenses. It seems like a bit of a strange system to provide loans that... don't cover everything.

Well I'm not completely sure, but I'm sure our loan amount get handed out based on the total family income.

We get grants based on family income, but the loans cover the full tuition fees plus a fair amount for living expenses regardless of income.

I think that you can get bank loans for the full amount, but OSAP only goes up to 7,000 dollars (or something like that), and it's based on financial need. I for example probably can't get it.

Also, keep in mind that loans aren't free money. You have to pay them back with interest. Maybe RCB doesn't want to have to deal with all of that as much. I certainly don't (but probably will short of winning the lottery).

Our loans were interest free - we just paid inflation. But now they've changed the rules and are charging interest on top. Wankers.

There is this joke here that interest rates for car loans are cheaper than for education loans.
And my little googling seems to confirm this. Education loans are over 12% and car loans over 8%.
Sigh.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 79972.html

Hmm. Another Canadian. First Omar Khadr, now this.

I'm thinking of this big dilemma.

Does Canada be faithful and support one of its citizens through this time of ordeal against a foreign nation? Or do we realize that any commitment to terrorism will deserve no support?

If we choose the former, and he is found guilty (and I mean overwhelmingly guilty), Canada will appear to support such acts of violence. On the other hand, if we choose the latter then we are seen to always abandon our citizens in their time of need, or whenever the US wants to push us around.

The Canadian government choose the latter choice with Khadr. While he was found to be guilty, this was only because a deal was struck after he pleaded guilty. As I do not know law in depth nor this specific case, I'm not too sure how to react to our government's position.

So, what are your opinions?

If there is overwhelming evidence against the guy, it makes little sense for the government to support him (though really, what do you mean by support here? I'm assuming it means something more than providing a fair trail and going beyond whatever the law requires the government to do. It is always the duty of the government to fully and completely ensure that their citizens are not maligned or wrongly accused and that they get a proper chance to defend themselves). It has got little do with nations and more to do with doing what is right. And a commitment to rule of law.
Try seeing it like this. If an American guy had been arrested in US over plans to kill Canadian soldiers in Iraq (or had taken part in some attacks against them), you wouldn't like it if the American government dithered in prosecuting him.

nathanielandbartimaeus wrote:Try seeing it like this. If an American guy had been arrested in US over plans to kill Canadian soldiers in Iraq (or had taken part in some attacks against them), you wouldn't like it if the American government dithered in prosecuting him.

Though I would definately want justice for our troops, I would respect the fact the US can stop in its blind witchhunt for terroists if there is the slightest doubt.