Look, I am a school student so I am not saying this from personal experience. However, many university students claim that student culture has been damaged since the introduction of optional fees. Student Unions aren't just representative bodies, they are place in which students can come together for music, sports and other services. It also has made it harder for Students to have their voices heard in the community. Action is harder to manage without a strong union voice. I think Campus life is important, and it's needs funding to exist. (Many student newspapers have been forced to accept private advertising in their magazine just to exist).
I beleive campus culture contributes to the whole experience of University much more then the markes you recieve. I understand the argument of the right to choose the services we pay for. However, I think its important that all University students are given the benefits of these services without having to pay for each one individiually. These fees are a small price to pay for the benefits they provide for students.
That accusation is an exaggerated one that only far-left university students espouse. The hundreds of neutral and apathetic, as well as the libertarian and right-wing university students have not expressed any suffering from the so-called 'loss' of these student services. Ask the many university students who still hang out on this site. Campus culture is not so much afforded by the student union, but by whoever groups they hang out with, and whatever activities they wish to partake in. Students are happy to pay for the events that they believe are worthwhile paying for, while the events that appeal to no one will suffer the wrath of the marketplace, and rightfully so, as they are unable to fulfill the desires of the student body.
If students want to participate, they can. Of course it benefits some people, but those who benefit should pay. The reason why I believe this is because the cost will
always be there, it's just a matter of who should pay. However, a decision should ultimately rest on whether the benefits outweigh the costs. The best test for this is to use the marketplace. It is easy for a student union to make errors in this evaluation, but if you leave the decision to each individual student making their own decision based on their own values and preferences, then the events and services
must tailor the needs of the student body, or else they would not receive any business!
To argue that VSU has destroyed student services is not only a false belief, but it actually is the opposite. Instead, now we have student services that must cater to the student body, rather than the will of the bureaucrats in charge of the union.
And so what if newspapers rely on private advertisment? That is an efficient way to do things. The newspapers benefit from the funding (more importantly, the students who subsidised it benefit the most), and the private advertisers benefit. Is there something wrong with this?
Home
Help
Search
Login
