Re: 全國研究生助學金 陳情書 (一封公開信)
看板PhD (博士班)作者chingi (Are you brainwashed?)時間19年前 (2005/12/24 21:08)推噓10(10推 0噓 0→)留言10則, 7人參與討論串4/79 (看更多)
As a taxpayer, I don't know see any reason to subsidize graduate
students. The government does not force them to enter a graduate
school. They do not provice any serive to taxpayers, either.
Why do taxpayer need to pay for their living? Furthermore,
these people are likely to earn more in the future. It is unfair
for poeple with less education to subsidize people with more
education.
If these graduate students can contribute to the research of
their professors, the professors should pay for the assistance.
If they can contribute to the teaching in their department,
the department should pay.
If students only study or research for their own future life,
why do taxpayers need to give them stipend?
If taxpayer really want to improve the quality of research in
universities, they shuold give more money to researchers.
(How to allocate money to researchers is another issue.)
Students should receive money only if they contribute to the
researchers.
(Or they can apply for research grants by themselves.)
Of course, if I am a 既得利益者, I don't want my benefits to be
taken away. So, in my view, the GSA is simply an interest group
to lobby for its members.
--
PTT 有個討論芝加哥的版 ---
生活娛樂館 生活, 娛樂, 心情
GlobalView 國際 Σ世界地球村 → 美國/異國旅遊
Chicago 都市 ●芝加哥 Chicagoland
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 199.74.99.98
推
12/24 23:40, , 1F
12/24 23:40, 1F
推
12/25 00:55, , 2F
12/25 00:55, 2F
推
12/25 01:08, , 3F
12/25 01:08, 3F
推
12/25 03:39, , 4F
12/25 03:39, 4F
推
12/25 03:44, , 5F
12/25 03:44, 5F
推
12/25 14:39, , 6F
12/25 14:39, 6F
推
12/25 16:43, , 7F
12/25 16:43, 7F
推
12/25 21:54, , 8F
12/25 21:54, 8F
推
12/28 04:46, , 9F
12/28 04:46, 9F
推
04/27 13:45, , 10F
04/27 13:45, 10F
討論串 (同標題文章)
PhD 近期熱門文章
PTT職涯區 即時熱門文章
