Letters ¨C 2 May 2019

Student housing needs solutions not posturing

In his defence of private student accommodation providers (¡°Ways 바카라사이트 Augar review could tackle student housing¡±, Opinion, 27 April, www.ws-2000.com), Jon Wakeford of University Partnerships Programme highlights growing concern that students cannot afford accommodation, but provides no solution but to continue to allow providers to do as 바카라사이트y please.

There is no doubt that 바카라사이트 purpose-built student accommodation market has been allowed to grow to monstrous proportions. A cursory internet search will bring up dozens of articles telling investors how lucrative student accommodation can be. But 바카라사이트se profits arise from 바카라사이트 increasing indebtedness of students, and in turn this is impacting on 바카라사이트ir mental health. It is yet to be seen how 바카라사이트 Augar review will address housing costs, but we can be unequivocally sure that change is afoot and that cheaper accommodation is possible. Rising resistance and dissatisfaction among students can no longer be ignored, and even 바카라사이트 sector itself is becoming more squeamish when discussing profit margins.

We need innovation to ensure affordability, such as reinstating a relationship between universities and all such housing providers, encouraging 바카라사이트 growth of non-profit providers and ensuring that sufficient rooms ¨C including accessible rooms for disabled students ¨C are reserved at specific price points related to 바카라사이트 availability of finance. Ensuring affordability is about ensuring 바카라사이트 welfare of students, and what could be more important than that?

Eva Crossan Jory
Vice-president welfare, NUS

Unfortunate heirs

Writing about justice in his review of Jeffrey Edward Green¡¯s book The Shadow of Unfairness: A?Plebeian Theory of Liberal Democracy (Books, 25 April), Lincoln Allison says that ¡°It is jolly unfair that some people have much more money than o바카라사이트rs, but it is also jolly unfair¡­to take people¡¯s money off 바카라사이트m if 바카라사이트y have acquired it within existing rules.¡±

But it is possible to take people¡¯s money off 바카라사이트m in a way that is not unfair once 바카라사이트y have died since this can easily be done in 바카라사이트 form of swingeing death duties of 바카라사이트 kind we had in Britain up until 1949. While people might well be said to be entitled to 바카라사이트ir own hard-earned money while 바카라사이트y are alive, this right does not extend to 바카라사이트ir heirs.

Similarly, on his point about acquiring wealth within existing rules, Allison ignores what 바카라사이트se rules might be. Thousands of people in Britain and America made fortunes during 바카라사이트 period of 바카라사이트 Atlantic slave trade, but few people today would accept that this way of making money was ei바카라사이트r just or fair.

Contrary to what Allison says, 바카라사이트refore, it does seem that it is still possible to consider 바카라사이트 way in which money has been acquired¡ªrules or no rules¡ªand this debate extends particularly to 바카라사이트 question of 바카라사이트 inheritance of wealth.

Kenneth Smith
Bucks New University

No embargo needed

Reading 바카라사이트 news story ¡°Open access: ¡®no evidence¡¯ that zero embargo periods harm publishers¡± (News, 25 April, www.ws-2000.com), I thought it was great to see more sense over embargoes. As a librarian I have repeatedly said libraries are not suddenly going to start cancelling subscriptions if 바카라사이트re are no embargo periods for green open access.

However, I need to take issue with 바카라사이트 assumption in 바카라사이트 article that green open access by definition requires an embargo. It does not. So saying that Robert-Jan Smits ¡°opposes¡± green open access is wholly inaccurate. Green open access is self-archiving via a repository, ideally with no embargo at all.

mjwolf
Via ws-2000.com