Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: Filo on December 09, 2010, 05:17:24 pm
-
whether tuition fees are right or wrong at least 2 lib-dems have got the guts to stand by the pledge they signed, and resigned from their ministerial position in protest which is more than can be said for their turncoat leader!
-
Filo wrote:
whether tuition fees are right or wrong at least 2 lib-dems have got the guts to stand by the pledge they signed, and resigned from their ministerial position in protest which is more than can be said for their turncoat leader!
Fair play to them, whether politicians make the decisions we want or not, if they stick to the principles we voted them on then we cannot really complain.
Though I don't think these students are being at all fair with using that as an excuse for their moronic behaviour. For allegedly clever people they're acting stupid by not realising the thing actually means they'll be better off.
-
Did anyone see the rioting santa on the news??
Made me laugh (im easily amused).
-
The bloke who abstained from the vote should resign as well. It's a complete cop out when your duty as an MP is to vote for what you believe in, regardless of whether it upsets your party or not.
-
VikingJames wrote:
The bloke who abstained from the vote should resign as well. It's a complete cop out when your duty as an MP is to vote for what you believe in, regardless of whether it upsets your party or not.
If you mean Huhne, he was in Mexico.
The rebels were: Annette Brooke (Dorset Mid & Poole North), Sir Menzies Campbell (Fife North East), Michael Crockart (Edinburgh West), Tim Farron (Westmorland & Lonsdale), Andrew George (St Ives), Mike Hancock (Portsmouth South), Julian Huppert (Cambridge), Charles Kennedy (Ross, Skye & Lochaber), John Leech (Manchester Withington), Stephen Lloyd (Eastbourne), Greg Mulholland (Leeds North West), John Pugh (Southport), Alan Reid (Argyll & Bute), Dan Rogerson (Cornwall North), Bob Russell (Colchester), Adrian Sanders (Torbay), Ian Swales (Redcar), Mark Williams (Ceredigion), Roger Williams (Brecon and Radnorshire), Jenny Willott (Cardiff Central), and Simon Wright (Norwich South).
Good to see other Lib Dems sticking to their principles.
Even some bloody Tories voted against - Six Tories voted against the government. They were: Philip Davies (Shipley), David Davis (Haltemprice and Howden), Julian Lewis (New Forest East), Jason McCartney (Colne Valley), Andrew Percy (Brigg & Goole) and Mark Reckless (Rochester and Strood).
-
Shouldn't this happen more often, I think towing the party line is part of the reason many get frustrated at politics. Only a few years ago Labour put the current policy of 3000k+ into place from the old system and they even initiated the review that recommended this, suddenly they're all against it. Amazing what difference being in opposition makes isn't it?
-
RedJ wrote:
VikingJames wrote:
The bloke who abstained from the vote should resign as well. It's a complete cop out when your duty as an MP is to vote for what you believe in, regardless of whether it upsets your party or not.
If you mean Huhne, he was in Mexico.
Nope, I meant Simon Hughes. Liberal Democrat MP for Bermondsey and Old Southwark and deputy Lib Dem leader.
-
VikingJames wrote:
RedJ wrote:
VikingJames wrote:
The bloke who abstained from the vote should resign as well. It's a complete cop out when your duty as an MP is to vote for what you believe in, regardless of whether it upsets your party or not.
If you mean Huhne, he was in Mexico.
Nope, I meant Simon Hughes. Liberal Democrat MP for Bermondsey and Old Southwark and deputy Lib Dem leader.
That man's as spineless as the man he's deputy to.
-
The only thing that concerns me is the Tories are bringing a ghastly rule into education, and yet there is no heat on them whatsoever.....it's all been taken away from them by the Lib-Dems. Camster and Gidders must be pissing their pants on all the Bolli they are now drinking.
They argue that the new payments will favour the poor. They can f**k right off on that score. When say poor they mean the desperately low income. How many low income lot get through their social background and up-bringing to make it to Uni. It's the mass working class lot like the majority on this Island who will shit their pants at having to pay what could be 9k a year over 3-4 years. That's 36 f**kin grand and that's before living costs et al. All it's doing is putting education and a good job/career out of the reach of the ordinary folk and leave it to the Public School brigade who will simply fill the available places and continue to get the best jobs.
This is putting the country back many years. I really despair
-
CusworthRovers wrote:
The only thing that concerns me is the Tories are bringing a ghastly rule into education, and yet there is no heat on them whatsoever.....it's all been taken away from them by the Lib-Dems. Camster and Gidders must be pissing their pants on all the Bolli they are now drinking.
They argue that the new payments will favour the poor. They can fcuk right off on that score. When say poor they mean the desperately low income. How many low income lot get through their social background and up-bringing to make it to Uni. It's the mass working class lot like the majority on this Island who will shit their pants at having to pay what could be 9k a year over 3-4 years. That's 36 fcukin grand and that's before living costs et al. All it's doing is putting education and a good job/career out of the reach of the ordinary folk and leave it to the Public School brigade who will simply fill the available places and continue to get the best jobs.
This is putting the country back many years. I really despair
Cussie lad, you've said it more eloquently than I've ever managed to do.
We've had 40 years of expanding Higher Education to the working classes. We had a wonderful aspiration of sending kids from our area to University instead of down the pit. The Right fcuking hated this approach. It threatented the entrenched advantages that the middle-middle-and above classes have always had in this country.
Over the last decade, have you ever read ther letters pages in The Telegraph or the Mail? Regularly full of letters saying, \"Why are we sending poor kids to University when what we need is more plumbers and brickies?\" The Comment pages were saying the same thing.
All with the intention of softening us up. All with the intention of making the subliminal argument that poor kids should be fixing OUR houses instead of getting above themselves and trying to displace us.
And now this. With barely a whimper from the lower classes of the country, the prospect of University education has been put out of the reach of all but the very bravest or most foolhardy working class kids. THE single most socially regressive act in 50 years of UK politics has been passed tonight, with the connivance of a bunch of cnuts who got elected on the ticket that they would move heaven and earth to oppose it, then ignored that promise once a couple of ministerial offices were dangled in front of them.
If I were an 18 year old working class lad today, I'd be preparing the Molotov Cocktails.
They have been pushed out of Higher Education. If they DO go to University, they have a crippling debt. If they graduate, there are few graduate level jobs. If they get a job, the pension arrangments are shite. And they can't afford to buy a house.
That's the legacy left to them by a middle-class, middle-aged elite that heave had EVERY thing go their way, and who are now pulling up the rope ladder behind them. It fcuking well stinks.
-
A little off topic but: The same is stangely true of the civil and family justice systems in that there is a bizarre three tier system which is the preserve of the very rich (as they can afford it) or the very poor (as they are granted legal funding) whereas the middle tier of the working and lower-middle classes simply cannot afford the legal fees. The lower working class used to get legal funding too (albeit they'd have to pay a contribtuion or have it charged against their home if they owned it) but our wise government has decided this should be brought to an end too.
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
CusworthRovers wrote:
Over the last decade, have you ever read ther letters pages in The Telegraph or the Mail? Regularly full of letters saying, \"Why are we sending poor kids to University when what we need is more plumbers and brickies?\" The Comment pages were saying the same thing.
.
That's a very revealing comment. Presumably you think plumbers and brickies are of lower value than, say, accountants or estate agents. Or is it because most of them come from Eastern Europe now and \"we British\" should be above jobs like that?
I sometimes wonder if I'd have been better off if at 16 I'd gone to the Technical College and done my City and Guilds in plumbing, rather than A-Levels and an arts/ humanities degree. I don't regret the course I took, but I reckon if I'd gone down the other road, I'd have earned a darned sight more money!
-
The Red Baron wrote:
I sometimes wonder if I'd have been better off if at 16 I'd gone to the Technical College and done my City and Guilds in plumbing, rather than A-Levels and an arts/ humanities degree. I don't regret the course I took, but I reckon if I'd gone down the other road, I'd have earned a darned sight more money!
It`s not as simple as that though is it?
I left school at 16 and did an apprenticeship, I have City and Guilds in Shipbuilding, City and Guilds parts 1,2 & 3 in Mechanical Engineering, a Certificate of Craftsmanship from the shipbuilding training board, I am a qualified Marine Engineer, at 21 I was made redundant, I could n`t get a job in my profession because I lacked experience, I spent 3 years on the dole before landing a job at a glass factory, I spent 23 years at that glass factory working in the warehouse, made redundant again and i`m now driving Taxi`s. My 4 year apprenticeship and qualifications count for nothing, and with hindsight I wasted 4 years of my working life on low wages learning a trade, I sometimes wonder if I would have been better off going to the pit. Education is not everything, it`s what life throws at you and the decisions you make along the way that counts!
Does that make any sense? :unsure:
-
Is this the look of a man who`s political party is staring down the barrel?
(http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/dec2010/1/7/nick-clegg-pic-pa-528353147.jpg)
He knows he`s shit on the people that voted for him and he knows that the Lib-Dems will be obliterated at the next election, the price of glory eh?
-
The Red Baron wrote:
That's a very revealing comment. Presumably you think plumbers and brickies are of lower value than, say, accountants or estate agents. Or is it because most of them come from Eastern Europe now and \"we British\" should be above jobs like that?
That is not what I mean at all.
Of course those jobs are valuable. But it's a well establised fact that, in general (not always- there are always exceptions), education is a way for people from poorer backgrounds to become more socially mobile. And that's before you even start to consider the REALLY important aspect of Higher Education - learning how to think, being exposed to new ideas and new people and becoming a more rounded person (and again, I'm nit saying that thus doesn't happen fir people who don't go to University, just that it is much less likely.)
Of course, it's interesting that the middle classes don't aspire for THEIR kids to become bricks and plumbers. Those are jobs that \"somebody else's kids\" can do, and we're not going to pay higher taxes to send somebody else's kids to University are we? THAT is the core of why the current debate is repellent. A class and a generation that reaped the rewards of state funded university education, a class and a generation that made themselves socially and economically comfortable that way us now saying \"f**k you\" to the kids of parents who weren't that lucky. The middle class families, with their fat pensions and over-inflated house values can find the money themselves to fund their kids' University fees. So it won't be a gamble for their kids. It'll be a big f**king gamble for a bright kid from Denaby to find £60k for a University course though, won't it.
-
Although Politics and Government plays a part in shaping society, people need to forget which party they support and forget the political economics here......take a very big step back and have a good look at the social implications this will cause for now and the future.
It's creating discrimination, it's putting up a massive class divide and worse than all, it's going to split the working class masses all over the place. That's exactly what it will do, the working classes who will take the gamble, find the money, think their child is a superstar, will become distant from the ones who don't adopt that attitude.....and like BST has said, it's one hell of a gamble for somebody to fork out what could be £50k and then f**k up. The pressure is immense on the working class student on themselves and their parents. Watch the suicide rate go through the roof
-
I teach in relatively 'affluent' Newbury and the number of intelligent, talented kids who are now not even considering University is scary. Yes they will do well in whatever field they choose, but the system will stop them accessing the careers and jobs in which they would excel, due to lack of a degree. Whilst relatively talentless upper class twits will take over the running of the country because of the school they went to due to Dadddy's wealth. Its nothing to do with the economy its ideology and protecting their own.
-
ReadingViking wrote:
Whilst relatively talentless upper class twits will take over the running of the country
Too late mate, it`s already happened! :laugh:
-
CusworthRovers wrote:
Although Politics and Government plays a part in shaping society, people need to forget which party they support and forget the political economics here......take a very big step back and have a good look at the social implications this will cause for now and the future.
It's creating discrimination, it's putting up a massive class divide and worse than all, it's going to split the working class masses all over the place. That's exactly what it will do, the working classes who will take the gamble, find the money, think their child is a superstar, will become distant from the ones who don't adopt that attitude.....and like BST has said, it's one hell of a gamble for somebody to fork out what could be £50k and then fcuk up. The pressure is immense on the working class student on themselves and their parents. Watch the suicide rate go through the roof
It's that age old rule of keeping a thick, slave-like working class and an educated (although not in this case, clearly) ruling elite. f**k off back to Eton, Dave.
-
Filo wrote:
Is this the look of a man who`s political party is staring down the barrel?
(http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/dec2010/1/7/nick-clegg-pic-pa-528353147.jpg)
He knows he`s shit on the people that voted for him and he knows that the Lib-Dems will be obliterated at the next election, the price of glory eh?
William Gladstone must be spinning in his grave.
-
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Shouldn't this happen more often, I think towing the party line is part of the reason many get frustrated at politics. Only a few years ago Labour put the current policy of 3000k+ into place from the old system and they even initiated the review that recommended this, suddenly they're all against it. Amazing what difference being in opposition makes isn't it?
Just thinking the same myself, also noticed that prat Milliband won't have any truck with the suggestion of reversing the decision.
The left-wingers on here are obviously targeting Clegg and the Lib-Dems to derail the Coalition.
ALL parties at ALL times break pre-election pledges or haven't some of you noticed. It depends on the circumstances, how on earth can everybody expect the very minor party in a Coalition to have a huge influence on policy.
Break up the Coalition and a new General Election would give the Conservatives even more power along with the seats against a very weak and obviously struggling Labour Party.
Btw these students who are protesting by destoying/defacing national monuments and buildings do themselves a massive disservice in the public eye. There is never a situation where gratuitous violence and destruction have a place in a modern democratic society. Enough is enough, I have no problem at all with peaceful marches and protests but get greatly concerned when many of those marching have to cover their faces up. This protest has been hijacked by far Left wing activists. :angry:
-
CusworthRovers wrote:
It's creating discrimination, it's putting up a massive class divide and worse than all, it's going to split the working class masses all over the place. That's exactly what it will do, the working classes who will take the gamble, find the money, think their child is a superstar, will become distant from the ones who don't adopt that attitude.....and like BST has said, it's one hell of a gamble for somebody to fork out what could be £50k and then fcuk up. The pressure is immense on the working class student on themselves and their parents. Watch the suicide rate go through the roof
Although not defending the fees policy per se, I have to point out that no-one will have to \"fork out\" £50K or whatever in order to go to University. They do not have to find the money up front. That's not to say that people wouldn't be worried by the prospect of having high debts (although that doesn't stop people taking out mortgages on houses.)
It is such a common misconception (which I saw voiced by at least one student demonstrating peacefully on the local tv news) that students will have to find their fees up front before being admitted to university, that I suspect some black propaganda.
-
Filo wrote:
Is this the look of a man who`s political party is staring down the barrel?
(http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/dec2010/1/7/nick-clegg-pic-pa-528353147.jpg)
He knows he`s shit on the people that voted for him and he knows that the Lib-Dems will be obliterated at the next election, the price of glory eh?
I have often voted Lib Dem in the past, inlcuding the last election. The stock reply was \"why bother, they promise everything but they can afford to because they know they'll never get in.\" My train of thought was: OK, they don't stand much chance of getting in but they talk sense and should they get a sniff of power they will be able to either take a fair chance to demonstrate the substance bhind their policies in which case we all benefit or they will show their lack of mettle and we will know that they're not worth bothering with again.
The first chance they get to stand up and be counted, they throw away. They've acted not as the kingmakers of the coalition so much as Cammy and Gidders' dorm-room fags thus entirely discrediting the party as a viable force in British politics.
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
-
hoolahoop wrote:
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Shouldn't this happen more often, I think towing the party line is part of the reason many get frustrated at politics. Only a few years ago Labour put the current policy of 3000k+ into place from the old system and they even initiated the review that recommended this, suddenly they're all against it. Amazing what difference being in opposition makes isn't it?
Just thinking the same myself, also noticed that prat Milliband won't have any truck with the suggestion of reversing the decision.
The left-wingers on here are obviously targeting Clegg and the Lib-Dems to derail the Coalition.
ALL parties at ALL times break pre-election pledges or haven't some of you noticed. It depends on the circumstances, how on earth can everybody expect the very minor party in a Coalition to have a huge influence on policy.
Break up the Coalition and a new General Election would give the Conservatives even more power along with the seats against a very weak and obviously struggling Labour Party.
Btw these students who are protesting by destoying/defacing national monuments and buildings do themselves a massive disservice in the public eye. There is never a situation where gratuitous violence and destruction have a place in a modern democratic society. Enough is enough, I have no problem at all with peaceful marches and protests but get greatly concerned when many of those marching have to cover their faces up. This protest has been hijacked by far Left wing activists. :angry:
We're not used to coalitions in the UK, but this is the reality of them. Parties do have to ditch some of their policies. The problem for the Lib Dems, of course, was that opposing tuition fees was one of their big selling points. Take that away and you're left with- well, not much, actually (especially as they've also agreed to a replacement for Trident)!
As for the violence- massive own goal. It is all very well to blame it on a minority of professional agitators and troublemakers, but just as when hooligans riot at a football match, the majority will be tarred with the same brush. The NUS leadership needs to rethink its strategy on demos.
-
Do some of you not understand the basis behind this policy?
I've seen comments saying this hits the working class, if anything it benefits the working class more than the richer people in society. It's a fairly simple system to understand.
Some of the comments heard on the radio in the past few days are ridiculous.
\"how can I save up 9k a year for my kid?\" Answer you do not have to. The youngster goes to uni and basically pays nothing until they can afford to.
Look at it this way, instead of starting to pay back at 15k it's now 21k. 21k before you even start. How is that hitting the poorer in society most? I've asked about 5 times for people to give me real reasons why the actual policy affects people going to uni and had no realo answer. The fact is it doesn't. The only aspect of it that will is the basic misconception around that you have to pay it up front and will be crippled by debt etc. When you think that Sky TV costs the same as the amount someone earning 25k a year would pay back per year on their student debt it makes you realise, it probably isn't that bad. Just step back from your political beliefs and look at the policy, it's a bloody good thing for those earning less than 20k after graduation that's for sure.
-
There was plenty more worth considering in their manifesto i.e. the pupil premium and this they have achieved. I will definitely vote for them again and it was refreshing to see some voting for and against this policy.........democracy at work not 'whip' politics. That I thought was commendable , I can remember many times in the past when there have been major dissenters from the Govt. policy of that time and they have simply voted as their 'whips' have instructed them too.
Being part of a Coalition is never an easy place to be and they can only do their best to dilute radical right-wing policies....time will tell.
As for the students , quite simply they have lost most of the public sympathy they had in just a week or so.
Finally I agree that stating that students have to 'stump up' the money up front is more than misleading , it's a downright lie.
-
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Do some of you not understand the basis behind this policy?
I've seen comments saying this hits the working class, if anything it benefits the working class more than the richer people in society. It's a fairly simple system to understand.
Some of the comments heard on the radio in the past few days are ridiculous.
\"how can I save up 9k a year for my kid?\" Answer you do not have to. The youngster goes to uni and basically pays nothing until they can afford to.
Look at it this way, instead of starting to pay back at 15k it's now 21k. 21k before you even start. How is that hitting the poorer in society most? I've asked about 5 times for people to give me real reasons why the actual policy affects people going to uni and had no realo answer. The fact is it doesn't. The only aspect of it that will is the basic misconception around that you have to pay it up front and will be crippled by debt etc. When you think that Sky TV costs the same as the amount someone earning 25k a year would pay back per year on their student debt it makes you realise, it probably isn't that bad. Just step back from your political beliefs and look at the policy, it's a bloody good thing for those earning less than 20k after graduation that's for sure.
You come out with up to 3 times as much debt as you would under the old system. That is what will put people off.
-
Nice to see a still optimistic Lib Dem voter Hoola. You're a rare breed these days.
Let's look at what 'coalition' has actually meant in practice.
The Coalition has nailed its colours to the following policies in direct contravention of the Lib Dem manifesto.
The biggest reduction in state spending in living memory. (The Lib Dem manifesto said -verbatim- \"To boost the economy and create jobs for those who need them, we will begin our term of office with a one-year economic stimulus and job creation package.\")
Replacing Trident (The Lib Dem manifesto said - verbatim - \"We will strive for global nuclear disarmament, showing leadership by committing not to replace the Trident nuclear weapons system\")
Trebling student fees (The Lib Dem manifesto said - verbatim - \" We will scrap unfair university tuition fees so everyone has the chance to get a degree, regardless of their parents' income.\")
A huge increase in nuclear power (The Lib Dem manifesto said - verbatim - \"We will reject a new generation of nuclear power stations\")
And that's just from a cursory look at their manifesto.
Basically, a Lib Dem vote is a non-vote for people who don't really think too hard about the politics. It is a vote that says, \"You look like nice harmless chaps, so I'll put my faith in you to decide which of these manifesto pledges you don't really believe in and will reject within six months of taking office. When you then come on the telly and argue passionately that your sudden change of mind is the right thing to do (Clegg on the deficit, Cable on tuition fees, Huhne on nuclear power, etc, etc) I won't really care too much because I didn't really think about it that deeply in the first place.
They are a bunch of unprincipled amateurish cnuts who have had rings run round them by the Tories. They have attracted votes from the centre-left and are now the standard bearers for the sort of right-wing policies that even Thatcher wouldn't have dared to countenance.
This week, an opinion poll put them on 8%. I'm fcuking gobsmacked that even THAT many people still give them any credence whatsoever. They have fcuked up for a generation now. They will not get a whiff of power again until we're all in the grave. And even more stupidly, they gave utterly emasculated themselves in this coalition. Their support having collapsed, the very last thing they can do now is to play Billy Big b*llocks and face down the Tories. If the Lib Dems threatened to make a stand and riski bringing down the Govt, they would be wiped out in an election. So the Tories have them by the knackers. They dance to the Tories' tune. Look at the example of Cable. Three months ago, he tried breaking cover by announcing that he believed in a graduate tax. Clegg said fcuk all in support and the Tory big guns shot Cable down instantly. So you then get the result of Cable being forced to go up and down the country claiming that actually he believed in Trebling tuition fees all along.
Utterly and totally inept. They got into Government under false pretences and they will reap the reward by going back to their previous irrelevance at the next Election.
-
It's exactly the same in the rail industry at the moment. Guys who have done the job for years are being overlooked for management jobs in favour of graduates who haven't got a clue in how the railway should be run. All they see is facts, figures and pound signs and not what's actually out there. Under this new regime, which is already in by the way, people's lives will be put at risk because they don't want to spend the money on maintaining the railway properly. They tell us that they are and that safety is their passion, yet we were told to go and knock off icicles in tunnels which had 3 inch of ice underfoot and the lines were still open. But if one of us were to slip and crack open our heads, it would have been down to the Controller of Site Safety and he would have had the book thrown at him. Safety when it suits. These w**kers couldn't give a toss about the safety of the lads out there, just as long as there aren't any train delays.
-
I haven't got the time or the energy to dissect the pre-election manifestos of the previous Governments but you know as well as I do that the same criticisms could be levelled at all of them.
There is little point in going through all of this again as your ideas and bitterness are so deeply entrenched that it would be a one-sided debate i.e. Billy is ALWAYS right!
Incidentally I couldn't help but chuckle at your comment ''They have fcuked up for a generation now''........remind me how we got into this financial situation again please.
I would be interested to on why our schools are failing so dismally in the European league tables and why the NHS is struggling having had the benefit of extra £billions whilst the Party that you so fervently support has been in power.
Pot and Kettle spring to mind here fella, the Labour Party has squandered and frittered money away faster than a Chinaman in a casino!!
I would however be interested in your views re. the recent protests
-
The money is not paid up front as in I need 36k (for example) now to go to Uni....however it is still 36k that will have to be paid back (isn't that with interest too). Effectively you will need to find 36k at some stage to pay back to the government. I cannot think of a worse scenario than any young kid fresh out of education and ready for the big bad world who is instantly saddled with a massive massive debt. The very fact that you will have to pay a considerable amount back over a period of time is off-putting enough. In all honesty I don't want my kids to start out their adult life with that noose around their necks, yet I cannot afford to pay for it.
My belief is that education should be free per se. That way all kids of any background get the same chance. Is that not a just society?. How will we pay for that I hear you cry?; then tax either everyone or the wealthy.
The helping of the kids who come from parents with a less than 21k salary. Again, how many will actually qualify for that out of the millions and millions? And then how many kids from that type of background will actually be geared towards University education from the up-bringing they have had?
Same old same old, it's the masses who are being punished in every aspect of government legislation ie mums and dads both work or dad earns a decent screw so mum doesn't have to work. That's the mass in our society and they are being hit constantly, they are the easy pickings....and this isn't political party specific either, as both the tories and labour do it constantly. It's time we either hit the chuffin rich very hard and take back our industries into public control or hit the spongers very hard or both. Stop hitting the easy pickings and focus on the real root problem of this country
-
if I'd been there I'd have been in there throwing the Molotov cocktails. But I wasn't - though I did walk down Victoria Street mid morning. And you know what was scaring to me? Not the people arriving for the demo. They were out for a laugh, a demo and to make a point. No. The scary thing was to see the vast - and I do mean fcuking VAST - hordes of tooled up, face hidden, baton wielding plod. A lot of you will know that it is my belief that the policing we employ is the cause of a pretty significant amount of the troubles we experience. You can see it, any week you like, at and around football grounds. I stood and watched, appalled, the police in action during the miners strike. I am being serious about this: the plod were actively and continuously provoking trouble. I saw 'em do it. At Rosso pit for one. At Markham Main for another (and that was downright criminal that was). I could give chapter and verse, but I won't here. Those coppers down Victoria Street yesterday were doing exactly the same thing. And why might they do that, I hear you ask? For two reasons: one, the majority of plod are not intelligent beings. They enjoy a scrum. You ever talked to plods about the highlights of their life? Try it. And two? Two, because when they succeed in provoking an incident, a riot, they, and the smug gits behind them can point to it and say it's all the fault of the students/miners/steel workers etc etc etc. It provides the justification for ever more overt, bullying and heavy handed policing. And that entrenches the establishment ever more strongly.
Agendas run deep. Far, far, far deeper than 95% of people in this country ever realise. There is rarely, rarely ever an action without a reason somewhere behind it. Yes. That applies to both sides in most disputes of course. But for goodness sake don't ever think that the establishment is innocent. It is not. I'll have to dig out some ISBN's for you all to have a look at won't I?
BobG
-
Double post. Sorry.
BobG
-
BobG wrote:
I stood and watched, appalled, the police in action during the miners strike. I am being serious about this: the plod were actively and continuously provoking trouble. I saw 'em do it. At Rosso pit for one. At Markham Main for another (and that was downright criminal that was).
In both incidents, the students and the miners were battoned by the same force, the Met, and like you say Bob, they are itching for it to kick off every time, also in both instances it was the Tories in government, but yet you see the PM on the news condemning violence, they are hypocrites and are terrified of the masses, the only way they know is to beat the living daylights out of em, we saw it with Thatcher (spit) and now we`re seeing it with Cameron!
-
Aye, mate. And it goes back a hundred years and more now. As Billy has said on several occasions, it was Churchill himself, as Tory Home Secretary, who ordered the army in to sort out those rascals in South Wales who'd been locked out of their pits in 1910. Tonypandy it's called.
BobG
-
What a load of crap Bob. So you are blaming all the violence on the police then? Dear me.
The cause of the problem is the mindless idiots who are hell bent on causing damage and destruction. Just remember which party introduced tuition fees. These riots are nothing more than an anti coalition bandwagon and the real message has been long lost.
-
Filo wrote:
BobG wrote:
I stood and watched, appalled, the police in action during the miners strike. I am being serious about this: the plod were actively and continuously provoking trouble. I saw 'em do it. At Rosso pit for one. At Markham Main for another (and that was downright criminal that was).
In both incidents, the students and the miners were battoned by the same force, the Met, and like you say Bob, they are itching for it to kick off every time, also in both instances it was the Tories in government, but yet you see the PM on the news condemning violence, they are hypocrites and are terrified of the masses, the only way they know is to beat the living daylights out of em, we saw it with Thatcher (spit) and now we`re seeing it with Cameron!
Too young to remember the SPG then? By the way, an awful lot of the \"policemen\" at the miners demos were army, and some of them special forces, I have since met lads from the forces who told me about being there.
-
hoolahoop wrote:
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Shouldn't this happen more often, I think towing the party line is part of the reason many get frustrated at politics. Only a few years ago Labour put the current policy of 3000k+ into place from the old system and they even initiated the review that recommended this, suddenly they're all against it. Amazing what difference being in opposition makes isn't it?
Just thinking the same myself, also noticed that prat Milliband won't have any truck with the suggestion of reversing the decision.
The left-wingers on here are obviously targeting Clegg and the Lib-Dems to derail the Coalition.
ALL parties at ALL times break pre-election pledges or haven't some of you noticed. It depends on the circumstances, how on earth can everybody expect the very minor party in a Coalition to have a huge influence on policy.
Break up the Coalition and a new General Election would give the Conservatives even more power along with the seats against a very weak and obviously struggling Labour Party.
Btw these students who are protesting by destoying/defacing national monuments and buildings do themselves a massive disservice in the public eye. There is never a situation where gratuitous violence and destruction have a place in a modern democratic society. Enough is enough, I have no problem at all with peaceful marches and protests but get greatly concerned when many of those marching have to cover their faces up. This protest has been hijacked by far Left wing activists. :angry:
Absolutely spot on, the protest was hijacked by neo-stalinist, far left wing communist, anarchists. The same rent-a-mob who go to anti globalisation and anti capitalist marches. Alot of students WERE involved in the violence, like that cambridge history student, the Pink Floyd star's son swinging from the Union flag on the cenotaph. 'oooh how very Che Guevara' he should be booted out of uni and do community service cleaning the mess up. I didnt think the students had a leg to stand on, and this has really pissed alot of people off that I have been talking to. Especially the SCUM that defaced the cenotaph, Churchills monument and attacked the heir to the throne. They have done nothing to help their cause.
In no way shape or form in this time of austerity, can you say the tax payer should fork out for micky mouse degrees that do the country no good. Just so they can have 3 years on the piss.
Oh and who pays for the clean up, and the police costs?, yep its the tax payer again!
-
So let's make it illegal to protest or demonstrate or disagree with government policy then. North Korea must be your nirvana.
-
MrFrost wrote:
What a load of crap Bob. So you are blaming all the violence on the police then? Dear me.
The cause of the problem is the mindless idiots who are hell bent on causing damage and destruction. Just remember which party introduced tuition fees. These riots are nothing more than an anti coalition bandwagon and the real message has been long lost.
They can't see past their nose end mate. The police did an absolutely brilliant job under enormous pressure in controlling those idiots. Remember those police didnt go to uni, and dont earn alot of money. But when some of those protesters graduate and atart 'running' the country, the same police will still be on the streets dealing with all the shit that society's idiots throw at them.
-
Sorry boys, I'm generally in agreement, but look at what was happening.
Hordes of idiots intent on violence were quite evident. Nothing you can say will convince me otherwise. I know what I saw and heard and it needed stopping. What would you have us do, allow them to wreck every statue in London, burn every bus shelter, smash every window, destroy/damage all the history of this great nation. The Police were there to restore order as I saw it. Had they not been there, then god knows what would happen. What do you want our Police service and Army to do...tickle their opponents with feather dusters. Half the little tommy ten men in their balaclavas looked like they needed a clip round the tabs to be honest.
Let's say an angry vicious mob were intent on destroying your street and your house for whatever reason. I bet you'd both be ringing for the Coppers then.
Bob mi old fruit, I would suggest what was going on fits nicely with your anarchic viewpoints, but each to their own.
-
Barmby Rover wrote:
So let's make it illegal to protest or demonstrate or disagree with government policy then. North Korea must be your nirvana.
There's nothing wrong with peaceful protest- but that's not what we saw in London the other day. Up in Birmingham the students mounted a protest outside the Town Hall. They were noisy, but there was no violence and no-one got hurt.
Personally I'd give the police power to arrest anyone who turned up to one of those demos with their face covered. They're there to cause trouble, and probably have a criminal record as long as your arm.
-
At last someone talking some sense.
I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. Uni to many these days is nothing more than a social fashion statement
-
The increase in the proportion of people going to do Uni I do think was a mistake, but then employers still use the degree to discriminate between employees when considering promotion, jobs etc. If you then restrict that to the rich and the upper middle classes who can afford to take on such large loans for their education how should people react?
Maybe we should all be like Ronnie Corbett in the famous sketch, saying \"I know my place!\"
Large scale unrest of ANY kind has always been suppressed by the state in this country, and it has always had it's knockers, usually from those whose attitude is \"I'm all right Jack, so shut up\"
-
Large scale unrest seems to work in places like France
-
Where there is a healthy disrespect for their politicians and a history of winning important rights through protest. It is when I see the old chestnut of \"why bother, nothing is going to change\" attitude that I despair of others who can't see what the problem is.
-
MrFrost wrote:
At last someone talking some sense.
I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. Uni to many these days is nothing more than a social fashion statement
See. One of THE most important things that gets hammered into you at University is that just because you say something repeatedly, it doesn't automatically become correct. You have to marshall facts, evidence, examples. You have to craft an argument. You have to consider how the argument looks from the other side and consider the alternatives. If you just state an opinion and leave it at that, you look like a right f**king dick. And quite rightly - the world progresses by sensible, reasoned, fact-based discussion, leading to conclusions that are more likely than not to be correct.
So, in that spirit, tells us what the evidence is for your claim that University is just a fashion statement?
-
hoolahoop wrote:
I haven't got the time or the energy to dissect the pre-election manifestos of the previous Governments but you know as well as I do that the same criticisms could be levelled at all of them.
There is little point in going through all of this again as your ideas and bitterness are so deeply entrenched that it would be a one-sided debate i.e. Billy is ALWAYS right!
Incidentally I couldn't help but chuckle at your comment ''They have fcuked up for a generation now''........remind me how we got into this financial situation again please.
I would be interested to on why our schools are failing so dismally in the European league tables and why the NHS is struggling having had the benefit of extra £billions whilst the Party that you so fervently support has been in power.
Pot and Kettle spring to mind here fella, the Labour Party has squandered and frittered money away faster than a Chinaman in a casino!!
I would however be interested in your views re. the recent protests
Hoola. Poor feasible facts again.
If you voted Lib Dem, you really OUGHT to have known what was in their manifesto. Otherwise, what did you base your decision on?
For the record, every Party in Government makes compromises with what they promise. Of course they do. But never in history has a party jettisoned so many core promises and core BELIEFS within 6 months of taking office. It's entirely unprecedented, and is of course the reason that their support has fallen by 3/4s since May (also unprecedented). Folk have woken up to what was obvious to some if us- that voting Lib Dem is pointless. You will get either Tory or Labour Governments, so vote for whichever if those is preferable to you. If you vote for the Lib Dems, you are abdicating responsibility for affecting the shape of the Government - you leave the decision to the whim of whichever gormless, immature chuff happens to be in charge of the Lib Dems.
As for manifesto promises, given that the Lib Dems have shed them like autumn leaves, presumably the Tories have equally compromised? Struggling to think if anything major at the moment, but I'm sure there's something.
Nope, it's not coming to me.
Oh aye. Proportional Representation. And because the Lib Dems are now so unpopular, they will also lose that referendum.
Finally, I've already told you what my take on the student protests is. I think the way the comfortable middle aged middle class gas f**ked all over the young generation is a disgrace. The middle aged, middle class are the ones who f**ked up, with over inflated house prices, over valued pensions and a refusal to pay sensible amounts if tax. Now they are passing the bi to the next generation. It f**king stinks, and if I were 20, I'd set up a Molotov Cocktail factory.
PS. One day, you'll look at the facts and stop trotting out this rubbish about Labour having a spending splurge. They didn't. By 2007, the Govt was spending less than Major's Govt in 1996. What hit our economy was NOT reckless Govt spending. It was a collapse in tax revenue from the banks. A shame that the facts don't mesh with your prejudices, but facts are notoriously unhelpful to prejudice.
-
BST my argument is based on the fact that off the top of my head I can think of ten people I know personally who openly admitted the fact that the only reason they went to uni was to get pissed and get laid and the offer of a degree was a bonus.
-
I can't fault the protests, my only concern is that the council workers, the railway workers, nurses, firemen and whoever else is getting shafted by the fat cats massive cocks, weren't there to help smash the place up some more. You wait until petrol prices rise again in january, hopefully the refinary guys and farmers will show us the way and blockade every petrol station and every slip road on every major motorway. This country is in shit state and it it's about time that everybody stood up against these Kitsons. I hope all the big unions get their heads together and arrange one massive week long protest and strike.
-
BillyStubbsTears wrote:
hoolahoop wrote:
As for manifesto promises, given that the Lib Dems have shed them like autumn leaves, presumably the Tories have equally compromised? Struggling to think if anything major at the moment, but I'm sure there's something.
Nope, it's not coming to me.
Oh aye. Proportional Representation. And because the Lib Dems are now so unpopular, they will also lose that referendum.
BST- you need to try harder- although I dare say the Tory manifesto isn't regular reading in your abode.
How about repeal of the Human Rights Act- dropped. Scrapping of inheritance tax for all estates under £1M- dropped. Repatriating powers from the EU- \"forgotten about.\" Building more prisons- Clarke intends to reduce prisoner numbers. Carry a knife and you go to jail- dropped. No plans to raise VAT- VAT up to 20% in the first Budget.
Just like Labour's promise to hold a referendum on the European Constitution- and no doubt plenty of others they'd have broken if they'd got in.
I'm no fan of the Lib Dems, but they're by no means unique in breaking promises.
-
Nudga wrote:
I can't fault the protests, my only concern is that the council workers, the railway workers, nurses, firemen and whoever else is getting shafted by the fat cats massive cocks, weren't there to help smash the place up some more. You wait until petrol prices rise again in january, hopefully the refinary guys and farmers will show us the way and blockade every petrol station and every slip road on every major motorway. This country is in shit state and it it's about time that everybody stood up against these cnuts. I hope all the big unions get their heads together and arrange one massive week long protest and strike.
That's democracy is it Nudga ? Sounds like Communist shite to me similar to Bob's , Barmby's and BST's crap.
So we don't like who the people have voted into power eh ? Do the usual just set the Unions on to them, put the common man at a total inconvenience, let Companies go to the wall and this will solve it........?
NO IT WON'T. :angry:
The 'wooly' thinking behind some of your suggestions are frankly fookin bizarre , set the people onto the people, totally mad. I await your next 3year Stalinist plan with baited breath. :blink:
-
My opinion would have been the same with whatever party was in power at the moment. Are you happy that the price of everything is rising at the moment? i give you the petrol price rise again, is it right that the petrol that is already in the pumps can have a price rise when it was bought 12 months ago? When are energy firms gonna get their hands slapped for the same thing? They won't because governments get their share of the pie. All this has a knock on effect on such things like the price of food. I wish our government would be brave and do the right thing by it's own people, ALL of it's people.
-
\"I wish our government would be brave and do the right thing by it's own people, ALL of it's people.\"
That's a cracking statement Hoola. It raises the question of just what, and who, Government is actually for? It's a question that has become more relevant every single year since the early 1980's. And it's a question that no one, no one at all, ever asks. This country gets what it deserves. Because it hasn't got the bottle, or the intelligence, to ask questions in any meaningful manner.
I'll give you a just a few examples of why I reckon this should be THE question of the next decade;
1) the database and surveillance state. Who, exactly, profits from its existance?
2) the traditional 'working man'. Who, exactly, looks out in his interest?
3) pay and bonuses. Just who is the current system designed to benefit? And why?
There are a million similar issues that this country does its level best to ignire. But anyone with a brain and 2 minutes to refelct will understand the point.
Oh. And Mr Frost. When you learn to read, I'd be very happy to debate issues with you. But until you do, there's no point replying to posts I, or anyone else make, since you seem incapable of doing anything other than inventing statements by those people. Read my post again. If you can. and then compare it to what you said in reply. You must live in a fantasy world because you attribute statements and opinions to me that are nowhere to be seen in what I wrote. You simply reinforce your position as the leading dick on this site.
BobG
-
The Red Baron wrote:
BST- you need to try harder- although I dare say the Tory manifesto isn't regular reading in your abode.
How about repeal of the Human Rights Act- dropped. Scrapping of inheritance tax for all estates under £1M- dropped. Repatriating powers from the EU- \"forgotten about.\" Building more prisons- Clarke intends to reduce prisoner numbers. Carry a knife and you go to jail- dropped. No plans to raise VAT- VAT up to 20% in the first Budget.
Just like Labour's promise to hold a referendum on the European Constitution- and no doubt plenty of others they'd have broken if they'd got in.
I'm no fan of the Lib Dems, but they're by no means unique in breaking promises.
You'd be surprised what I read. As Sun Tzu said all them years ago, \"Know Thy Enemy\" and all that.
I'll give you Inheritance Tax, The Human Rights Act and knife crime. There's a couple of sops to Liberal consciences that the Tories could quite well chuck into the pot (especially since Ken Clarke, the most left wing of all Tories is taking the rap for one of those decisions).
As for the others, there was not one, single, solitary mention of VAT in the Tories' manifesto. Not one. So, no promise broken there. And on repatriation of EU powers, the Tory manifesto was fuzzy in the extreme, and very, very carefully spoke about \"seeking a mandate to negotiate.\" So that, when they didn't have the mandate, Cameron could face down his own far right Bulldogs and put to bed the one issue likely to split the Tories. Clever politics, that.
All in all, what you are left with is a few scraps that the Lib Dems have been chucked in return for capitualtion on the Great Big Issue. THE biggest one at the Election which was how far and how fast you cut the deficit. The Lib Dems signed up lock, stock and barrel to a Tory policy that was 180 degrees opposed to their own on this one. That is the one that is going to shape the country for the next 20 years. That is the one that has a deeply right-wing ideology behind it - the desire to return us to a Thatcherite Utopia of limited State and unfettered Free Markets being the leitmotif of British Society. THAT is what the Lib Dems have signed up to support, when precious few of their voters cast their ballots for that sort of future. THAT is why Cable has been humiliated into supporting tuition fee rises - it's all part of the same dogma and is the logical consequence of giving up the argument on the big issue.
-
I see you haven't addressed the last but one paragraph of the Red Baron's post, convenient as usual. Lots of blurb, double standards and tosh as usual.
Yes Billy that was one of many broken Labour promises. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
And just to hammer home the message, Lord Ashcroft has tonight published results of his own private polling into Lib Dem voters' attitudes.
The results include the following (and, think on, these are the opinions of folk who VOTED Lib Dem in May):
1) 28% of Lib Dems voters believe that the Lib Dems have mitigated the worst of the Tories' spoending cut plans.
2) 11% of Lib Dem voters think that having the Lib Dems in Govt has improved the outcome on tuition fees.
3) 18% of Lib Dem voters think that having the Lib Dems in Govt has improved the outcome on Trident.
And it goes on. On every question, the overwhelming majority of Lib Dem voters think that the Lib Dems' presence in Govt has either had no effect on the Tories' policies, or has even made it worse.
And here are the real killers.
49% of folk of voted Lib Dem in the last election agreed with the comment \"The Liberal Democrats have shown they don’t really have any principles, they are just going along with what the Conservatives want in return for some jobs in the government.\"
41% of folk who voted Lib Dems agreed with the statement \"My view of the Liberal Democrats has changed for the worse\".
And, to cap it all, 51% of folk who voted Lib Dem at the last election said that they would like to see Labour in power after the next election.
Kind of backs up what I have been saying. The Lib Dems won their moment in the sunshine under false pretences. Judgement Day for them will be harsh and long-lasting.
-
hoolahoop wrote:
I see you haven't addressed the last but one paragraph of the Red Baron's post, convenient as usual. Lots of blurb, double standards and tosh as usual.
Yes Billy that was one of many broken Labour promises. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
I'll give you that one (in 13 years) Hoola. And they were quite rightly castigated for it.
List me the others...
Oh aye. And while you're at it, grow up and stop spouting this \"Commie\" shite. It's Soooooooo passe.
-
Yet again when Bob doesn't like something he resorts to name calling and insults. It's ok though. He can do that though. He's got a higher IQ than me.
-
I came across this earlier today. Posted elsewhere by someone called 'Pearl Handel'. I suppose quite a few on here won't like it at all, but the message, and the erudition, are clear. Don't bother reading it Frosty. You won't understand it. And for those puzzled by the reference in the title, the biggest library in the ancient world was in Alexandria. It was famous. It stood for about 300 years. Until people - Romans - enforced a new orthodoxy and burnt it to the ground in about 48BC. It's a cracking metaphor right now. The penultimate paragraph just blows me away....
\"New Alexandria
Sheets of paper, sheets of flame. The Romans are burning the Great Library again. Today the Liberals and Tories, the British ruling class’s oldest parties, are voting on their own plans to eat the young. Like the Labour government before them, they have realised that educating working-class youth is an unnecessary expense. University fees must rise, subsidies to support teenagers through school must go, and there need be no more pretence that education is for the benefit of anything other than capital.
While the MPs are voting, students will be protesting and resisting heroically, as
they have been over the last few weeks, and the ruling class will once again send squads of riot police against them. Schoolkids whose future educations are being stolen from them will instead receive extra lessons in applied batons and horse charges.
As revolutionary Surrealists – and as students, ex-students and education workers, and people who have been taught to read and write – we hardly need to say that we are viscerally opposed to this assault on youth and education. We will fight these education cuts with all the means at our disposal. But we will not do so in the name of defending education. Britain’s education system in its current form is frankly not worth defending.
Cringing Liberals have been pointing to the post-1992 expansion of higher education to justify the fee hikes, arguing that the massive increase in student numbers has made the system unsustainably expensive. Many of those who oppose the rise in fees – including the so-called left wing of the very Labour Party which introduced tuition fees in the first place – say that this newly accessible university is precisely what must be ‘defended’.
But those of us who have worked and studied on these intellectual factory farms know that education in this country has been nothing short of a disaster, from Key Stage 2 SATS to the Research Excellence Framework. Children fed poetry that’s been reduced to the literary equivalent of Turkey Twizzlers; students told that politically flabby post-New Left bullshit is the way to make sense of ‘culture’; academics chasing ever-decreasing funding by publishing in elitist journals with ever decreasing readerships… Defend that crap? Not on your life.
Where, in all of this, is the beautiful savagery of the mind? Where are the things that are appalling to know, that score the flesh with their uselessness and wonder? Learning is no commodity: it’s an acid to burn money. Bound in human skin, it’s the toxic arcane to be championed, explored, succumbed to, seduced by, conquered. It’s traced in golden words of fire that fall blazing from the page, flaring and dying as we read them, gone in an explosion of unknown suns.
The only library that we defend is the one that’s set alight by its own blazing. Sheets of paper, sheets of flame. The Great Library will burn down Rome.\"
BobG
-
What's with the insults Bob? Come on, a man with your intellect can do better surely. Come on Bob, you can do better than that.
-
I can see both sides of the coin here and would argue that there is certainly more than a degree (no pun intended!) of truth in Frosty's opinion of university as a fashion or lifestyle choice for many. There is also a case to be made for the quality of education and contribution made to society by those who use university as an institution for personal betterment. The problem is that the two have converged more so than ever before over the last decade or so and the effect of gaining a degree has been watered down with so many people now spending three years of their lives drinking, shagging and having a great old time then waving a piece of paper and placing letters after their names at the end of it. And I should know; I'm one of them!
I didn't really want to go to university at the age of 18. I was sick and tired of the education system and wanted to get out there and earn some money, buy a car, get on the property ladder and get stuck into a career. I have always lived somewhat in my brother's shadow academically speaking after he earned a string of top grades and tootled off to Oxford so I came under a great deal of pressure from my family to go and further my studies too. I caved in to the pressure, picked up a prospectus for Nottingham Trent and stumbled across a telling statistic: Female to male student ratio of roughly 3:2. Bingo.
At the time I was interested in pursuing a career in journalism so I picked a rather generic media related course (BA Communication Studies) and looked forward to my schedule of 6 hours per week in the lecture theatre with a further 4 hours or so of seminars. Of which I must've attended roughly 50% in my entire three year sojourn. The rest of the time was taken up with working in the Trent Bridge Inn and spending my wages back over the various bars of Nottingham, screwing a string of birds (of various merit!), sampling the city's restaurants and a couple of times a year when the loan cheque cleared, spending an evening at the casino.
I suppose I've always been fairly lucky inasmuch as I have managed to blag my way through life on a wing and a prayer so I duly \"earned\" myself a degree at the end of three years of fun. I really shouldn't be entitled to it in return for the lack of any sort of effort whatsoever but I've got my degree and so have thousands of others in a similar situation. Therein lies the problem with opening up higher education to the masses in order to meet government targets.
I am absolutely opposed to higher education becoming an elitist institution open to only those with the most financially priveleged upbringings. I do however believe that it should be shamelessly elitist in terms of admitting only those with the best academic achievements behind them.The funds saved could then be used to invest in the standards of state schools to ensure that gifted students stand a fair chance of attaining the grades necessary to earn their university places.
As a postscript I'd like to point out that during a conversation with my wife yesterday I said that I'd love the chance to take on further studies now. I have a thirst for knowledge and I know I'd really enjoy the reading necessary for a \"real\" degree or professional qualification. I certainly don't feel like I wasted my time at university as I had the most fantastic time there but I really didn't make anywhere near enough of the opportunity to expand my knowledge.
-
A heart warming tale Mike.
You're a decent chap with a wife and child so it's not all bad news.
Happiness is more important than any formal qualifications.
-
Thanks Stu, and very happy I am too. Now if only this bloody football team could find a bit of winning consistency....
-
big fat yorkshire pudding wrote:
Do some of you not understand the basis behind this policy?
I've seen comments saying this hits the working class, if anything it benefits the working class more than the richer people in society.
Just step back from your political beliefs and look at the policy, it's a bloody good thing for those earning less than 20k after graduation that's for sure.
Do you really believe that the caring Tory party really root for the common working class man? As in them just announcing they are scrapping the EMA, which the earners of less than 16k get, to assist with education in the 6th form or college. You know, that cheeky little grant to help them get a better chance in education. I'm struggling to see the difference here ie scrap one and help the other (allegedly).
(not just for you this BFYP).....and speaking of education what the f**k is this £600 and odd quid to be given to schools with kids on low income, just to help them with extra tuition. Who says kids on low income are all thick like???
-
I wonder how many \"kids\" use it towards their education or use it to piss it up against the wall.
Maybe it should be replaced with some kind of vouchers that can be redeemed against education facilities?
-
Either way mate, we'll never know, as it's being taken away from next September. That was designed to help the poor kids in education, which makes it worrying when they say they are helping the poor kids in higher education
-
Again a valid point Mr F. The grant is there to help these kids stay on in education rather than dropping out of the system or feeling pressured into a low-paid job to help out with home bills etc. Vouchers to be redeemed against certain product categories in supermarkets to include food, stationery etc but exclude fags and booze would assist those in need. Of course there'd still be some enterprising little buggers flogging them for half face value and spending the 15 quid cash on fags and booze but you can't be all things to all men!
-
However, they aren't giving vouchers out are they
-
Nope. But the idea is a godd 'un. You could even get the big 4 supermarkets to sign up to part fund it and make it exclusively valid in their stores or summat.
-
Not a bad idea that. You could be the new Stuart 'The Brand' Briggs off The Apprentice.
-
Do they still have free bus passes for 6th formers? I heard some kid on the local radio saying he used his EMA to get to and from 6th form. When I went, i'm sure I had a free bus pass.
-
MrFrost wrote:
Do they still have free bus passes for 6th formers? I heard some kid on the local radio saying he used his EMA to get to and from 6th form. When I went, i'm sure I had a free bus pass.
I was in 6th form (college) from 2000-2002 and there were no free bus passes for us then.
Incidently, Doncaster was one of the few boroughs in the country trialling the EMA scheme when I was at college. Was quite funny as most of the kids at college were from North Lincolnshire and weren't entitled to anything :laugh:
-
When I was at Cambridge my Fag used to carry me everywhere. If he disobeyed orders he was held in front of the fire.
Mind you that was in the good old days before the do-gooders banned fag smoking indoors.