Acoomodation protest

[Guest]

[s]Cola Cube wrote on 13:41, 29th Apr 2003:
The problem I have with the halls is at they *seem* to be favouring the rich and privaliged.

Especially as increasingly, the halls are filling up with people who clearly have a lot of money, and people with less have nowhere to go. Because as we all know, the accommodation people care only for first years.

They suck 'em in and spit 'em out.


Surely most of the 'rich and privaleged' live in private flats (which are more expensive than hall)?

[Guest]

[s]munchingfoo wrote on 15:48, 29th Apr 2003:

If everyone in low cost halls did that, do you think they'd kick all of us out, come on don't be so silly. We have more power than you obviously think. Similar protest have been applied at other uni's with astonishing effect. Don't forget, we are customers and they are suppliers, without customers they are nothing.


If you're short of cash and the debts are piling up, the last thing you can afford is have to restart university because you were booted out of this one.
The university know this.
How many people will actually carry on demonstrating if they started to throw people out for, say, non payment of rent as part of a protest?

[Cola Cube]

[s]Unregisted User wrote on 16:41, 29th Apr 2003:
Surely most of the 'rich and privaleged' live in private flats (which are more expensive than hall)?


Well you'd think, but no. Instead they're taking up places in halls that other people *need* because they (the other people) cannot afford private accommodation and in some cases cannot afford university owned flats either.

[Dj Balloon]

how does that make sense?

[Guest]

[s]Cola Cube wrote on 23:48, 29th Apr 2003:

Well you'd think, but no. Instead they're taking up places in halls that other people need because they cannot afford private accommodation and in some cases cannot afford university owned flats either.




40% of people live in private flats, how many rich and privaleged people are there?

[Cola Cube]

In St Andrews, a lot.

[munchingfoo]

it does depend on what you mean by rich and privelaged. I come from a single parent family with a very modest job. This kinda makes almost every student here rich and privelaged in comparison to me. I forcast that i will get a very good degree which is good news for the uni's end of year reports, but if prices continue to rise, it is people like me who are going to be forced to leave.

[hr]Management: The art of writing like you know what you're talking about and making others believe it.

(munchingfoo comprehensive dictionary)

[Prophet Tenebrae]

It's the fact that they're raising rents *AND* cutting back on ammenities. To have to pay extra for the same room is already a travesty (even if we exclude the £90 technology thing) but to have to pay extra for the same room and have fewer amentities (no more microwaves etc.) is just shocking behaviour.

Nothing would please me more than a series of graduates going to the papers and giving this university the bad press it deserves.

[immunodiffusion]

[s]munchingfoo wrote on 12:43, 2nd May 2003:
it does depend on what you mean by rich and privelaged.

I do not come from a rich and privilidged family, and hence get £4000 in student loan and don't have to pay any tuition fees, which more than adequately covers the cost of Halls (after all, once you have paid your Hall fees, there isn't much else compulsory that you have to pay for)

And the cost of living in St Andrews is much lower than most other universities - if you compare the price of halls in St Andrews to, say, Edinburgh, St Andrews is much cheaper, plus, being a small town we don't have to pay for transport around the town.

I think the problem with the rises in accommodation charges is not so much that it drives away poorer students or forces them to go to other universities, but rather that the university does not need to increase the charges - they are only doing it in order to line their own pockets. If they can already run the residences at their present standard at the current prices, the year-on-year increases should only be in line with inflation, which is blatently not what is taking place. What is the extra money going to be used for?

The university should be an educational institution and not a profit-making business. Therefore, accommodation charges should be kept down to the minimum that is needed to provide the service, and not set at commercial rates so as to make a profit.

[Cola Cube]

Rich & privileged: those who can easily afford private accommodation which is where I thought they all lived until this year, where half our hall is inhabited by them.

Not rich & privileged: those who do not have a lot of money, and more specifically those who do not have a lot of money and have been screwed over by the loans company. A significant amount of people fit into this latter bracket, those who can barely afford this years hall rent and have practically kissed goodbye to any social life they once had.

The accommodation situation sucks, but I doubt anything can really be done about it.

[The Cellar Bar]

The last meaningful protest worked. Pulled off a few years back what it did do was to freeze the increases they were planning then. Not much but a start.
I'm a graduate of this place and one of the things tha hacks me off is the way it is turning into a business. And at the base of that, is a reluctance to raise a head above the parapet. But it needs done. Otherwise these guys are gonna continue on down the same line. Protests, including an all-night vigil in Quad, worked very quickly the last time around because the fear of the Press appearing did the trick. And regardless of this reeking nonsense of "disciplinary action", everyone has a right to protest about what affects them directly. No-one would be talking to the Press, no-one would be bringing the University into disrepute. They're doing that already.
So just fucking go for it!!

[RichZ]

Maybe we should write a nice letter to our dear rector - isn't that kinda his job - stickin up for us? I may be completely wrong, am I? If it's not his job then maybe our VPR or President could take up the task - fighting for student's rights and all that?

[immunodiffusion]

[s]Cola Cube wrote on 15:05, 2nd May 2003:
Not rich & privileged: those who do not have a lot of money, and more specifically those who do not have a lot of money and have been screwed over by the loans company. A significant amount of people fit into this latter bracket, those who can barely afford this years hall rent and have practically kissed goodbye to any social life they once had.

If peoples' loans do not cover their Hall fees, that means their parents are earning 20-30,000 a year or more. Which means they are pretty rich and privilidged.

[Cola Cube]

Not really. My mum's wage is in that bracket but due to family history the loan is all the money I receive as she cannot afford to pay my parental contribution. I thought my case was uncommon but having talked to other people I find that it isn't.

A higher than average salary does not mean there is cash to spare.

[immunodiffusion]

[s]Cola Cube wrote on 16:38, 2nd May 2003:
A higher than average salary does not mean there is cash to spare.


Obviously there may be specific reasons why this might occur, but if this is the case, surely the problem is with the way in which your local authority / the SAAS calculate your loan, and isn't really the university's fault?

Given that every student is supposed to have an income of £4000, either entirely in loan, or in a combination of loan and parental contributions, I think it is reasonable that they should base their fees on this level of income.

[Cola Cube]

The problem lies with the SAAS as it always has done, but that doesn't stop me being angry with the accommodation people. Many of my friends hardly go out anymore because they simply cannot afford it after they have paid their rent.

There are many people who are short on money, saying that those with less have larger loans does not justify this. Surely with a larger loan needed you'll have even more debt when you leave uni, especially if more of your loan money is being spent on accommodation needlessly.

With less money available they simply point you in the direction of the hardship people who offer to give you....more loans. Great, like that'l solve everything.

[flarewearer]

[s]immunodiffusion wrote on 16:24, 2nd May 2003:

If peoples' loans do not cover their Hall fees, that means their parents are earning 20-30,000 a year or more. Which means they are pretty rich and privilidged.


my mum's a deputy headteacher at a primary school and her wages probabubbly fall into that bracket, but it doesnt neccesary mean rich and priveledged, as cola cube says, it depends on circumstances. Its perfectly feasable to earn a lot and still not be rich or priveledged.

[hr]
* 9 out of 10 cannibals agree;
"vegetarians taste BETTER"

[puzzled]

[s]flarewearer wrote on 16:56, 2nd May 2003:
Its perfectly feasable to earn a lot and still not be rich or priveledged.




Could you define your difference between rich and privileged?

[flarewearer]

check the dictionary. You could be priveledged but be poor, and be rich but not priveledged.

[hr]* 9 out of 10 cannibals agree;
"vegetarians taste BETTER"

[immunodiffusion]

Privilidge - an advantage applying to a person, class or office

eg being the family of someone who already has a degree, is in a middle class occupation, is earning quite a lot

Rich - having much wealth

eg earning 20 - 30K a year.