|
|
| Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User
|
|
| Support uws |
 |
|
|
|
|
| [RDC] WPIRG referendum petition being circulated |
Contributed by: lawrence on Sunday, December 05 2004 @ 09:09 AM CST
|
Students on campus are circulating a petition to hold a referendum on the refundable WPIRG fee next term.
The Petition Reads:
In accordance with Bylaw XIII.A.3 of the Constitution of the University of
Waterloo Federation of Student (Feds), we petition Feds to hold a referendum on
the following question:
(Preamble) - Currently each full-time undergraduate University of
Waterloo student pays $9.50 for every 8 month academic year to
Waterloo Public Interest Research Group (WPIRG).
(Question) - Do you support the termination of the WPIRG levy?
WPIRG's response:
• DON'T SIGN THE PETITION!
There is a petition being circulated on campus calling for a referendum on our fee with the question "Do you support the termination of the WPIRG levy?". This question will force students who support WPIRG to campaign with "Vote NO for WPIRG!" -- yo, how confusing is that? How about a referendum with a fair question and appropriate rules? Read more on our petition page and a report by a Feds committee in March 2003 addressing the issue of refundable fees and referenda, the report was fully supported by WPIRG but never finalized with by Feds! MOREOVER, WPIRG ROCKS! Check out our site to see just some of the things we've been up to!
|
| |
|
|
|
| Authored by: mo' money on Monday, December 06 2004 @ 12:25 AM CST |
Interesting, from what I heard/remember from 2003, the organizations that were part of that fee refund discussion (WPIRG, Imprint and CKMS) were supposed to work with Feds to make refunds easier to get, but also improve education about the service, so perhaps students would learn more and decide to not refund their money (such an idea included days in the SLC with booths set up for information and refunds).
I know Edey looked at this, but I don't think he made much progress (not for lack of trying).
Then again, who would want to enocourage people to get refunds and cut off revenue. Very capitalist thinking for a socialist organization.[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: anon on Monday, December 06 2004 @ 01:59 AM CST |
| To be fair since WPIRG's website is up, go to www.wpirg.com if you want to sign petition. I'm not involved with this, but I got it forwarded to me. I cannot understand why wpirg deserves to get automatic payment from each student and it is our responsibility to get our money back. WPIRG does not represent the political views of all (I'd argue most) students and should get the same treatment as any other campus club. [ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: not confused on Monday, December 06 2004 @ 09:01 AM CST |
| I don't get how they (WPIRT) are arguing the question is confusing? Anyone with a basic knowledge of english (and apparently nobody at WPIRG knows english) will understand what the question is asking. If it's so confusing then make it plain kindergarten english for all the wpirg supporters(as wpirg clearly thinks their supporters are not intelligent) to: "Do you want to keep paying the WPIRG fee on your tuition?" and if that is still confusing to wpirg and its supporters then maybe they should take some english classes...... [ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: saforrest on Monday, December 06 2004 @ 09:37 AM CST |
Is this response truly from WPIRG?
I'm surprised that they object so strenuously to the wording and would prefer a system in which to support WPIRG you would vote "yes". This rationale could be just as easily directed at the 1995 Quebec referendum: how crazy was it that you had to vote "Non" for Canada?
The system they propose may even be hurtful to their cause. In my experience, there are a reasonably large number of people who will always opt for the status quo, whatever it is. This means voting 'NO' to any proposed change. Clearly it is in the interests of WPIRG to take advantage of this fact, since it favours the the status quo.
Now, WPIRG probably shouldn't accept the wording of the question exactly as set down by some random group circulating an anti-WPIRG petition. But a 'vote "YES" for WPIRG' system may have unintended consequences.
Lastly, the wording of the pro-WPIRG email was unorganized and rather brash (e.g. "WPIRG rocks!"). WPIRG's volunteers may understand the case for keeping the fee alive, but the argument has to be put to the student body as a whole, not just to WPIRGers. WPIRG's case would benefit from a calm, clear summary of the benefits it provides to campus life.[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: anon on Monday, December 06 2004 @ 10:18 AM CST |
Oh good, yet more WPIRG bashing from the campus conservatives, and yet more whining from WPIRG itself.
Is there any campus controversy more boring than the WPRIG fee?[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Colan Schwartz on Monday, December 06 2004 @ 12:59 PM CST |
WPIRG, YOUR MEMBERSHIP, AND ITS MESSAGE:
After your initial three weeks of term, you have automatically pledged your
membership to WPIRG; membership dues for WPIRG make part of a mandatory, though
refundable, group of per-term student fees.
Your dues buy you a share in the operating principles of WPIRG, which is
committed to a mandate of anti-racism and other issues of social justice. That
is reassuring, until we realize that WPIRG is defining racism in a way quite
contradictory to common sensibilities about trust, tolerance, and
dialogue-building.
WPIRG defines "racism" in its official pamphlet by the same name: "Racism:
It's Everyone's Problem". There, WPIRG expressly defines "racism" to be the
combination of privilege and power, explicitly independent of ethnicity and
oppression:
"racism = PRIVILEGE + POWER"
"Racism is
discrimination based neither on ethnicity nor place of origin but solely on
colour. This makes it the most basic form of discrimination because it is so
obviously visible."
That definition may seem to be acceptable in some contexts until it
is applied to WPIRG's treatment of Jewish students, who are considered by WPIRG
to be "white" unable to experience racism and, when they are acting in
solidarity, unable not to be racist.
That position became dramatically clear in Spring Term of 2003, when WPIRG
sponsored a lecture by Norman Finkelstein. Jewish students, independently and
through Jewish Students Association, and other concerned undergraduates and
members of Waterloo's community appealed to WPIRG not to sponsor the event.
Norman Finkelstein authors generalizations which stoke eruptions of
anti-Jewish sentiments: "American Jews courageously put unruly Blacks in their
place. Lording it over those least able to defend themselves: that is the real
content of organized American Jewry's reclaimed courage." That type of message
explains why he is quoted on Zundelsite (an illegal hate site by decision of
Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in 2002).
Students didn't ask that WPIRG either cancel or protest the lecture, but
they were adamant that WPIRG should not encourage perceptibly anti-Jewish
choices when other options were available. WPIRG's Board Of Directors
unanimously overruled its sole Jewish member and proceeded, in spite of heavy
protest, to fund and to promote the event.
In the course of his lecture, Finkelstein associated Jews with Nazis and
thus was confronted not surprisingly by Jewish members of the audience in the
question and answer period. Dr. Finkelstein neither apologized for, nor
qualified, nor retracted his comments; he instead volunteered that the Jewish
students were weeping "crocodile's tears", were hiding behind The Holocaust,
and were afraid of the truth. WPIRG was, in turn, challenged to explain the
lecture in terms of anti-racist respect nurturing dialogue, which WPIRG's
sponsorship is supposed to guarantee.
In response, WPIRG released a formal statement. It was another opportunity
for WPIRG to refine its distinction between racism, which WPIRG says Jewish
audience members provoke, and anti-Jewish sentiment, which is different from
and less important than anything resembling racism. WPIRG lists problematic
occurrences at the lecture to be, in order, "malicious heckling by the
audience", "racism [against Palestinians and by the audience]",
"anti-Jewishness", and, finally, "inappropriate comments by the lecturer, Dr.
Finkelstein, to audience members (e.g. calling them Nazi-like)".
Notwithstanding pledges to the contrary, WPIRG has yet to retract its
literature in which Jewish people are not racially recognized and has never
issued a formal statement affirming the reality of discrimination which ethnic
Jews confront as a people.
The persistent denial of a legitimate racial identity to Jewish students is
at the foundation of WPIRG's inherently anti-Jewish attitudes.
If you don't share the same idea about racism, you don't share
WPIRG's idea of social justice, and you probably should not be sharing either
your membership, your money, or the support which they entail.
YOUR MEMBERSHIP DOLLARS ARE CURRENTLY AT WORK FOR
WPIRG, ITS PRIORITIES, AND ITS PERSPECTIVES.
WPIRG, YOUR MONEY, AND YOUR MESSAGE:
For fee-paying undergraduates at University Of Waterloo, at exclusively one
time per term is WPIRG unequivocally accountable, in a way independent of
interpretation from WPIRG's Board Of Directors. Throughout the beginning three
weeks of term, students may request refunds on and cancellations of their
memberships to WPIRG.
Please take the time for a visit to WPIRG's office at Student Life Centre
and carefully consider your refund. Here are some considerations.
You may take your refund and re-invest the money in a different
organization either which better serves your interests or which less offends
against your conscience. Many organizations and initiatives which have some
association with WPIRG are independently accessible, for financing and for
other participation.
You may wish to target what you support and to exclude some of
the distasteful things which WPIRG is otherwise empowered to do on the
collective behalf of students.
You may wish to support WPIRG in theory but nevertheless be wary
of some recent trends in its practice. That is best done through a strategy of
effectively retroactive funding. WPIRG sells memberships throughout the year;
they may be bought voluntarily after WPIRG has satisfied, by your standards,
its expressed commitments against racism and in favour of other issues of
social justice and environmental responsibility. A year-long membership is
$15.00, which is slightly more expensive than three instalments each of $4.75
per term, but the difference of 75 cents is a worthwhile investment in the
fiscal and ethical accountability of an important campus-wide organization.
That is better than the surrender of your membership dues with every term, in
which different Board members may bring specific and relatively unfriendly
agenda for budgetary expenditures.
If you elect to withhold your membership dues and WPIRG does
conduct itself honourably, remember to reward its change of character with a
year-long membership, yet if you not be here. Otherwise, the dues are not
effectively retroactive. Naturally, you may at some point be leery of this
approach, which equally amounts to advanced funding.
If WPIRG fails to win your trust, you may wish to reconsider a
refund, pure and simple.
Finally, you may wish to be actively involved in a change at
WPIRG. Many responsible students are committed to the idea of an honourably
run, student-driven, and campus-wide force for the community. Some of them are
turning their energy and optimism into a position on WPIRG's Board Of
Directors, and others are hoping to redirect WPIRG's resources into projects
and action groups more in line with community-strengthening and
bridge-building.
That kind of involvement requires a membership, which should be
an active investment in a new and better WPIRG.
CONSIDER WHAT WPIRG CONSIDERS TO BE SOCIAL JUSTICE;
PLEASE RECONSIDER YOUR MEMBERSHIP AT WPIRG.
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Political Analyst on Monday, December 06 2004 @ 06:07 PM CST |
Something that tends to annoy me is the concept that the FedS don't have the 'right' to call a referendum on WPIRG since it is an external corporation.
The only group allowed to represent the University of Waterloo Undergraduates as a whole is the Federation of Students. The FedS are not (would not be) calling a referendum on WPIRG, they are simply holding a referendum to poll their constituents to determine their opinion on a particular matter (namely should the WPIRG fee be on the fee statement). This is their absolute right (and obligation in some cases). The University of Waterloo Board of Governors recognizes the FedS as the sole organization able to present the official viewpoint of the Undergraduate population, and as such, if a referendum was run and passed to rescind a fee (or add a new one) they would (in almost all cases, we can't rescind tuition) follow through with the wishes of Undergrads (as shown by their representative organization).
Yes, this means that the Federation of Students can cause the vast majority of an external corporation's funding (such as the WPIRG fee) to vanish, they can't cause WPIRG to stop existing directly, but they can take away their funding from the fee statement. Similarly the FedS could theoretically hold a referendum to ban Coca Cola on campus, despite the fact that they are an external corporation.
There are reasons to have the referendum, there are reasons not to.
There are reasons to vote in support of WPIRG in such a referendum, and reasons to vote against WPIRG.
There is no reason that the FedS would not be the appropriate body to hold such a referendum.[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: John Ying on Monday, December 06 2004 @ 11:10 PM CST |
| Everyone whip 'em out. The guy with the shortest one will have it cut off to ensure that we don't have yet another generation of teeny-weenys. [ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Shaun T on Tuesday, December 07 2004 @ 04:09 AM CST |
| They chop off parts of baby's genitals. How more barbaric can you get? [ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Todd Davis on Tuesday, December 07 2004 @ 08:01 PM CST |
I don't understand how wpirg can be opposed to a vote?
How is it wrong for students to vote on whether or not
we want this fee. They should be asking students to
sign the petition. Unless they believe they are unpopular
and would lose a referendum. I applaud the efforts of
Nic Weber and his petition team. Waterloo needs people like you guys.[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: C.H. Thomas on Wednesday, December 08 2004 @ 05:42 AM CST |
I signed the petition and I will be donating my WPIRG refund to the petition group. I did some research into WPIRG and I want to clarify the facts for everyone
WPIRG says "we are a team of volunteers"
WPIRG spends $90,000.00 on two staff, more than $20,000.00 on rent/office, $8,000.00 on dues to PIRG (money that leaves UW and never comes back, and about $20,000.00 on other admin costs. Then they say that they collect $167,000.00 from students... the reality is that they spend MOST of student money on themselves and a SMALL amount on the cause.
WPIRG says "we have no political ideology"
Check their website. They take extreme political views on a number of issues. I don't mind embracing the environment, but do we really have to protest free trade? WPIRG has slanted political views, something that a universal student levy supported organization can't afford to have.
WPIRG says "we are popular among the student body"
More than 90% of UW students have no idea what WPIRG is. This has probably changed slightly since Dilts covered the Weber petition. But still, most students have no idea what it is.
WPIRG says "we don't want a referendum"
...I wonder why?
C.H.T.
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: read everything on Thursday, December 09 2004 @ 01:57 PM CST |
It is clearly stated on the WPIRG website that "WPIRG's student Board of Directors welcomes a referendum with accurate and fair wording."
So they are not "against a vote."[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Concerned UW Student on Thursday, December 09 2004 @ 06:53 PM CST |
In case you have not recieved this email, it has been circulating with a link to an online petition!
------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your time. This email is a message from a group of concerned University of Waterloo students. We are asking that you sign a petition that will force a referendum on one of the many student fees we all pay. The fee in question is $9.50 for every 8 month academic year and is paid by each full-time undergraduate student. The
fee is paid to a group known as the Waterloo Public nterest Research Group (WPIRG).
If you wish to sign, please visit:
www.WPIRG.com
to sign the petition electronically.
The fee is paid with every full-time student's tuition, appearing on the fee statement as WPIRG. Most students are unaware that the fee is refundable within the first three weeks of every term if you visit the WPIRG office and ask. Only 1.7% of students actually exercise this option as most students pay this fee blindly, and are unaware what WPIRG does, where their office is located, or that the fee is even
refundable. Many students that we have spoken with believed the fee was for a UW service and was strictly mandatory. This is not the case; WPIRG is a group independent of the University Administration and independent of the Federation of Students.
WPIRG is an organization that gives like-minded individuals an opportunity to organize campaigns on issues they consider to be in the public interest. The purpose of this petition is not to tarnish the work WPIRG does, but to give students an opportunity to decide if they wish to continue paying this fee.
The onus should not be on students to ask for their money back, the onus should be on organizations like WPIRG to ask for students' money to begin with. This is the ultimate motivation of this campaign: to give students an opportunity to decide if they want to continue paying
this fee in the manner they do. This is something that has not happened in over thirty years. Having a referendum will force WPIRG to speak out to the student body and actively educate students on what they are doing with our money. Remember, signing this petition will help force a referendum on the question above, not force the termination of the WPIRG fee immediately. The fate of the fee is for
students to decide at a referendum, when they have a chance to hear all the facts.
We do encourage that you learn more about WPIRG before the referendum. Please visit www.WPIRG.org to learn about the organization, or www.OPIRG.org to learn about OPIRG, the umbrella group WPIRG belongs to.
Thank you.
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: CJ on Friday, December 10 2004 @ 12:58 AM CST |
The average full-time undergrad attends for two 4 month terms each year. Therefore it makes sense to say that they pau $9.50. However, Nic Weber went further in his clarification. He says "8-month academic term". In other words if you can't do division 8/2 = 4 months. Therefore if you go for four months which is NOT the majority you pay $4.75. If you go for twelve months which is also NOT the majority you pay $14.25.
WPIRG is just using the "wording problems" as an excuse. Look at their record on referendums they have fought against them.
Its time for the students to speak, its time for democracy at Waterloo. [ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: NoCEO on Friday, December 10 2004 @ 02:27 PM CST |
What if, as a compromise, the WPIRG fee still comes off your tuition, but tuition statements (both on paper and on QUEST) MUST explicitly identify which fees are refundable and include instructions (in a separate sheet, perhaps, like the payment instructions) that tells you how and when to get them back?
That way, WPIRG, Imprint, CKMS, etc., don't have to rely on the initiative of apathetic students for funding (a move that could be disasterous for some organizations), but students don't end up paying for something they don't support simply because they're ignorant of the fact that they're supporting it in the first place?
Eh? Eh? There's an idea. Discuss![ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: saforrest on Friday, December 10 2004 @ 06:01 PM CST |
I get the sense that a lot of the posters on this topic aren't aware of the prior discussion on this issue, even on UWS.
A lot of the same arguments are being made that were made then; the debate now might benefit from past perspectives. Here's a few links to UWS stories on the topic of WPIRG specifically and refundable fees generally:
WPIRG referendum blocked by one-vote margin, 8 Jan 2001
uwstudent.org/article/2001/01/08/130821000
Process for decisions on non-Feds fees still to be considered, 7 Mar 2002
uwstudent.org/article/2002/03/07/175433000
Council will consider pre-striking fees, 7 Jan 2003
uwstudent.org/article/2003/01/07/180704000
Committee opposes online strikable fees, 12 Mar 2003
uwstudent.org/article/2003/03/12/093715000[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: anon on Saturday, December 11 2004 @ 02:10 AM CST |
You guys just want to hold this referendum because you want to see WPIRG itself -- and everything it stands for -- go away. (Either that or you're super-lazy.)
Otherwise you'd be pretty happy just getting the refund, and wouldn't care in the slightest about whether other students get their refunds.[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Franco Columbo on Saturday, December 11 2004 @ 07:43 PM CST |
People can whine all they want about how WPIRG should stay, but regardless, what you are all forgetting is that the Governor of California is Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Here are some links:
www.joinarnold.com
www.muscleandfitness.com
www.5in9.com/graphics/arnold_schwarzenegger_p12.jpg
Lets see how many girly men can reply to this post. Come on all you pencil pushers. Lets do this!
I will personally bench press the first one of you to post one of your weak insults.
Step up and show your girliness! DO IT NOW![ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Giant Space Hamster on Monday, December 13 2004 @ 12:58 PM CST |
What's the money trail like for these refundable fees?
Is it:
1. I pay UW, and UW pays each group.
or
2. I pay UW, UW pays Feds, and Feds pays each group.
or something else?
If it is the second case (and I think it is), the Feds should hold a Refund Centre at the start of each term in the SLC. You could go, get a form listing all the refundable fees you pay, and check off the ones you want a refund for. Then Feds could total everything up, cut the individuals a check (like the Bookstore does) and send the remaining money to the group .[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Alex Sloat on Tuesday, December 14 2004 @ 03:16 AM CST |
I doubt anyone who knows me will expect this to come out of my mouth, but I am opposed to this referendum - and I say that as the person who started kicking this idea around a few months ago, as well as someone who hates just about everything the group stands for. Yes, that's right, I think that WPIRG should remain on the fee statement. I'll explain:
First off, there's the form of the question. I'm not totally sure who drafted it, but it's ridiculously worded. Referring to anything but the per-term fee is disingenouos in the extreme - why not just start quoting $38 for an academic career, or $872 for Chen-Wing? I know it's technically accurate, but it's still really bad form.
Secondly, I've started to realize just how futile of a struggle the lefty-righty campus wars are. The left wins on numbers, the right wins on vigour(usually...), and it normally takes like ten or twenty years for a new crowd to be fighting the old war from the same point. The left mobilizes, sets up student groups like crazy(CFS, PIRGs, etc.), and gets complacent. The right gets pissed at the state of affairs, cleans house, de-federates a slew of schools, maybe sets up more reasonable equivalents(CASA), and gets complacent itself, at which point the left steps in and does it all again. And at the end of the day, none of it matters a damn because it costs less to be subjected to either side's idea of fun over their entire time at university than it does to have an average night at the bar for most students. We dedicate our lives to $4.75 - why bother? There's plenty of worthy political goals, but a pittance like that isn't really one of them.
Third, WPIRG is safe. They've been around for a hell of a long time, and, here's the important part, they don't do anything on the political front. I've been at this school for three and a half years, and the only times I have actually seen WPIRG even come close to mobilizing were two years ago when ALW's petition ran, and today with the current one. Most of the stuff they do is misguided but irrelevant, or in a few cases, not even misguided - I may laugh at the fact that they only give away vegan food to homeless people, but they're feeding them, and that's not something I can oppose. I don't know how well their carpool thing works, but that looks like another brilliant one - it's a great service for people, and it has some very nice consequences too(I do agree that pollution is a bad thing, even if I think some of the claims are wild exaggeration). Given the downsides and the upsides, I don't see anything worth massive opposition there, and there's the unknown factor of trying to figure out what the campus left might actually be capable of if we kick over their little sandbox and make them start doing things that matter. It might not be pretty, and I'd rather avoid asking the question. The WPIRG crowd won't go away even if the money dries up, they'll just be active to raise money, active to raise awareness, and both of those activisms will be more likely to ve visible and effective than their current anemic attempts - I don't want that. A sleeping opponent is a good one, because I know that campuses go socialist if that sleeping giant ever awakens.
And fourth, mentioned mostly for context and comedy, is good, old-fashioned spite. I was pushing for the whole-hog strikable fees referendum(three parts - strikable fees for WPIRG/CKMS/Imprint, regular referenda on all campus-wide refundable fees, and lowering the threshold to add a new fee to a 5% petition), so when nobody was willing to back my push and I had to drop it, I was a little annoyed, and more so when I saw that the push was going to be for the most short-sighted effect of the whole package. I suppose it's the natural way of things, the biannual attempt on WPIRG, but that actually wasn't my goal, to be honest.
Oh, and a side note: I never really said this before I left before, but it was a hell of a lot of fun being on UWS when I was a regular two years ago(and for reference, I don't expect to be back, this is a one-off thing). This is where I cut my teeth on Web debates(which I've largely gotten out of again so I have enough time to actually pass my courses, but still), and it actually shaped my views a lot more than might be expected given my general pig-headedness on such things. I've dropped the hard libertarian bent - I still generally feel that way, but I finally clued in that it's no panacea(plus, reality of a different sort set in - there's no way in hell we'll ever see privatized healthcare, let alone privatized roads and waterways, so why bother trying?). Anyways, to Rob E., Yaacov, SSS, and others, thanks for all the debates - it was fun, and I still have trouble finding opponents half as intelligent as you guys(or half as willing to go for crazy hour-to-read posts ;) ).
---
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" - P. J. O'Rourke[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: undergraduated on Tuesday, December 14 2004 @ 11:19 AM CST |
On the whole I think WPIRG is a good thing. Recycle Cycles (one of WPIRG's spin-offs) is itself worth the price of admission. They're now in downtown kitchener, they make getting and maintaining a bike *really* easy and way cheap (look there if you need one) :
www.theworkingcentre.org/tools/cycles/cycles.html
Food Not Bombs is a WPIRG group that gives out free vegan meals to those who need it:
pirg.uwaterloo.ca/fnb/
They also made a carpool matching site that has lots of rides around KW/toronto/southern ontario:
www.carpooltool.com/
These are the ones I know about and like. I'm sure there's more.
I understand that some people think wpirg should be doing some things differently... you know as a member you can start a new project, or add to existing ones. or simply request a refund.
I heard some people saying they dont like how wpirg seems to take sides on certain issues... like Palestine for example. I know there have been jewish students on the wpirg board before as well, and they were very critical of any events or speakers that came across as anti-jewish. and rightly so.
but if thats the issue, the palestine/israel issue, why not address that issue, instead of trying to pull the plug on a host of other non-divisive good work?
by the same token, why do we support imprint? when was the last time i read an imprint paper and felt it was worth my time (and money)? some of the columns in that paper are so bad they make me sick.
but again, i think it would be wiser (but more work of course!) to join imprint and add that content which i would like to see, than to campaign for their elimination.
its always easier to destroy than build. and it always takes less courage, less thought.
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Giant Space Hamster on Tuesday, December 14 2004 @ 01:06 PM CST |
Slightly off-topic, but does anyone know why the Sandford Fleming fee (for Engineering) went up? It used to be $4, but is now $6.
I looked at the minutes from the Board of Governors, and all it says is that the fee increase was approved. I know SFF does good work, but I'd like to think that an organization would need to justify a 50% increase in the fees levied.
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: undergraduated on Tuesday, December 14 2004 @ 03:41 PM CST |
Your corrections are not correct. From the recycle cycles homepage:
"Recycle Cycles was established in 1993 as a WPIRG project. It is now located at The Working Centre's 43 Queen St S. building. Recycle Cycles is run by volunteers and is dedicated to cycling and cycling issues."
Food not bombs: poor or homeless people are pretty much driven away from waterloo, because there are few if any services here offered to them, so you will find them in kitchener not waterloo. thus it makes sense to distribute the food there. As for the vegan/meat issue, i cant argue with your food preference, but vegetables are generally cheaper and lower impact on the environment.
Carpooltool.com -- no you dont need a car to use it. Thats kind of the point. People with cars who commute alone offer seats in their car, people without cars seek rides. so you can share the cost of the commute. helps people without cars, helps people with cars, makes better use of our limited (and many would say war-inducingly limited) resources. try it if you have a long commute to uw or a coop job.
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Allan on Tuesday, December 14 2004 @ 08:21 PM CST |
Food Not Bombs is not a good use of student funds by WPIRG. Since WPIRG can only spend less than 30% of the money we give them because their staffing costs are so high. They should not be wasting it on Food Not Bombs.
Kitchener already has a food bank and a kitchen downtown that feeds people. Food Not Bombs is not needed. Even if it was needed, we should be helping people not making them dependent.
I would much rather see a program that teaches people the skills they need to get their own food and succeed. Not a program that breeds dependence. Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime. WPIRG should take a lesson from this saying.
With a fair number of UW students using the Food Bank I think WPIRG should be serving these meals in the SLC and not at Kitchener City Hall where students can't access them. Kitchener City Hall has a fulltime food destination called St. John's kitchen that provides free meals. To my knowledge there is no place on campus that provides free meals.[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: smartass on Wednesday, January 19 2005 @ 11:22 PM CST |
it's stated in the undergraduate calendar that the fees are given to the organisation and that you can get a refund within three weeks of the start of the school term.
if you had a bit of sense, you would use the time you spend on uwstudent.org to learn more about your fee statement and read the undergraduate calendar so that you can be more informed about it.
you should have read the undergraduate calendar and learnt about fees when you applied to uw. that would seem like a sensible thing to do, no? and if ou had done that and you didn't like the fee arrangements, you shouldn't have come here. that was your opportunity for "direct consent."
in any case, u obviously don't belong here cause u're a dumbass that hasn't done or doesn't understand any of the above.
[ Parent ]
|
| |
|
|
|
