Support NeoGAF

[zomgbbqftw]

I don't lack understanding at all, it is my understanding that things are exactly as you say which leads me to believe we need to move away from a dependency on the financial sector. Like you say, how that happened, who is to blame, and what can or could possibly be done about it, is another topic altogether...

I think we need to move away from that model as well, but no government can magic it into existence it takes time and a lot of work.

I believe you're wrong. I believe you are naive to believe that this is a meritocracy. It seems you are basing that belief on your own personal experiences, which believe me - I do respect and admire. But come back in the next life as a child on a run down council estate and attend the only crap school you can get into, full of crap teachers and troublemakers, and try and make yourself what you are today. I'm betting it'll be even more difficult..

Yes, maybe I do place a certain amount of importance on my own experience but I do believe if I can do it others can as well. Education I will address later in the post.

I don't doubt that some people erect their own personal barriers to progress, but it's worth considering what might cause them to do that. And in any case, personal commitment is only one variable:

• Geographical factors most definitely come into play, as not all regions perform on an equal footing, or enjoy equal local economies and services.
• There are hereditary factors that affect a persons upbringing - both tangible and intangible: genes, phsyical health, access to resources (financial resources, books, computers, the internet)...
• Environmental factors affect a child's outlook and confidence too: parenting, peer networks, the local community.

Schools are not made equal, and parents do not have much of a choice in them. People are stuck wherever they can manage to drag themselves onto the housing ladder. They send their kids to local schools, often parish schools with a limited set of places.. people take whatever they can get for their child and try to do their best by them, but whats on offer isn't always great. Anyone can attend a decent college and University if they get the grades, especially now that students do not pay fees up front -- but even with University fees taken care of in some way, there are other costs. Food and board, travel expenses, supplemental course costs. Family finances and employment opportunities will therefore affect a persons' ability to afford such things.

On schools I completely agree. I went to a grammar school which was two bus rides and a train ride away (my parents had to make sacrifices to afford my travel costs to school), but it was well worth the effort. Everything I do is down to the education I received from my school. It is recognised as one of the best state schools in England. What I don't understand is the notion that grammar schooling is bad and that selection is bad, we had so many kids from estates and around a quarter of kids at the school were on free school meals (just like every other school in London). If you stayed on for 6th form at my school you would definitely end up at one of the country's top universities and it's not like these opportunities were only available to rich or middle class kids. My best friend from school grew up on a council estate and now he runs his own technology business which he is about to sell to Google for around £1m.

I believe the education a person receives from age 11-16 is the most important stage in a person's life which brings me onto the education reforms that the government are planning. The new reforms will bring more choice to the parents and competition into the schools sector. Crap schools will have to reform their ways or lose students to newly formed academies nearby. This is going to leave a golden legacy of education in the country, the next generation of kids who go to the new academies are going to be all the better off for it.

Studies by organisations like ISER have clearly found that children from poorer backgrounds do worse than their richer counterparts; they have found that children rarely attain jobs that are better than the positions their parents held. Now to me, sounds like a glass ceiling, not a meritocracy. People in their late 20s/early 30s earn more than their parents did, but thats more a measure of the economy, not a measure of their social mobility. Social mobility has improved in the time that I've been alive, but by no means do I think that things are perfect now or that this is a meritocracy. Would you have us believe that all the struggling people in the country at the moment are struggling and unhappy purely because they just don't try hard enough? Do you have any idea how many millions of people you are insulting if that is the case?

Social mobility has got worse for the last 20 years. The education system was reformed and grammar schools like mine were closed down or turned into comprehensives and every smart but poor kid was fucked. I was lucky enough to be in the catchement area of a good grammar school, but other kids aren't as lucky as I was. I think it is very, very unfair that rich and middle class parents can pay for the choice to send their kids to private schools just because they can afford it and kids from poorer backgrounds are just stuck with whatever is nearby. They have to be win the postcode lottery and hope there is a decent grammar school in their area to get the same level of education as middle class kids get in the private sector.

I wasn't proposing doing away with central London tomorrow, although honestly, I would welcome armageddon if it meant we could be without rich, grumbling, tax averse snobs who don't know how good they've got it.

Seriously I think you are underestimating how bad things would be if 20% of taxes just disappeared. We are in such a shitty position now because tax revenues have crashed by 8%. The scale of cuts would be unimaginably bad and the tax rises for everyone else would crush the poor. It's a situation the government has avoided so far and I hope they rebalance the economy eventually so that the UK isn't so dependent on financial sercives.

 

[radioheadrule83]

The two things I mentioned (AV and tax threshold) where the two things I was most bothered about so that's why I'm pretty pleased so far.

What I am pissed off at is the Labour people coming out against AV.

Some of the Unions coming out against it pisses me off, its in their best interests to maintain the status quo, but not necessarily their members best interests. The change would have the effect of giving the Liberal Democrats and other parties more say on the left of politics, and they seem to prefer their position of influence over the one major left leaning player, the Labour party.

 

[godels rotating universe]

You only really have to look at the current cabinet to disprove the claim that the UK is a meritocracy.

 

[kharma45]

Policeman critical after bomb in Omagh

http://www.u.tv/News/PSNI-officer-critical-after-Omagh-car-bomb/5503650b-b0ee-4c5f-8ac7-34fcadfa38e6

I just don't get why people are still doing this, there is no popular support for this, nor the bomb scares on Friday in Belfast and Londonderry, or the actual bomb outside the courthouse last Sunday in Derry, they're actually cunts.

 

[Dark Machine]

I just don't get why people are still doing this, there is no popular support for this, nor the bomb scares on Friday in Belfast and Londonderry, or the actual bomb outside the courthouse last Sunday in Derry, they're actually cunts.

That's the most positive thing to come out of the last UK government's tenure, they actually turned the people of N.I. against terrorism. Both sides. Primarily by negotiating and giving both sides a bit of what they wanted instead of being standoffish eijits like the Tory governments had been. I actually sincerely hope N.I. is eventually democratically returned to Ireland.

 

[Sage00]

I actually sincerely hope N.I. is eventually democratically returned to Ireland.

Not happening. That Labour policy was dropped along with the rest of their principles in 97.

 

[Zenith]

Policeman critical after bomb in Omagh

http://www.u.tv/News/PSNI-officer-critical-after-Omagh-car-bomb/5503650b-b0ee-4c5f-8ac7-34fcadfa38e6

I just don't get why people are still doing this, there is no popular support for this, nor the bomb scares on Friday in Belfast and Londonderry, or the actual bomb outside the courthouse last Sunday in Derry, they're actually cunts.

die-hard fanatics who are past the point of no return and people who can't accept they have to go back to driving delivery vans instead of being "freedom fighters".

 

[kharma45]

I actually sincerely hope N.I. is eventually democratically returned to Ireland.

That I feel here would be the worst thing over here and would destabalise what general peace that has been achieved thus far.

 

[Dawb]

That I feel here would be the worst thing over here and would destabalise what general peace that has been achieved thus far.

There's also the fact that the democratic will of the people of NI is to remain in the UK.

 

[Dark Machine]

Ahem, the two key words in my sentence were 'democratically' and 'eventually' jeeze.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

That I feel here would be the worst thing over here and would destabalise what general peace that has been achieved thus far.

Agreed. The status quo is preferable while the peace is won I would have thought.

 

[Meadows]

I am royally pissed off at the end of the post-university job-seeking visa.

Previously, foreign students at UK universities were allowed 6 months to 2 years to find a "sponsored" job, after their student visa (that lasts the duration of their studies) ends.

This has been cut completely and now my girlfriend only has about 4 months to find a sponsored job here after her degree is over before she gets chucked out back to Taiwan. This is disgraceful because it is retrospective. If it were the case, as with the rise in tuition fees, that this would come into force in 3 years plus (I.E. when people who came here under the guise of previous laws are still at university) then I'd understand, but this isn't fair to her, she came here thinking she'd have time to find a job after, but now is basically being told to fuck off.

Oh, and she pays £13,000+ a year for her degree. So they also took £39,000 out of her pocket too.

 

[Ashes]

You only really have to look at the current cabinet to disprove the claim that the UK is a meritocracy.

Ice cold.

 

[Dark Machine]

I am royally pissed off at the end of the post-university job-seeking visa.

Previously, foreign students at UK universities were allowed 6 months to 2 years to find a "sponsored" job, after their student visa (that lasts the duration of their studies) ends.

This has been cut completely and now my girlfriend only has about 4 months to find a sponsored job here after her degree is over before she gets chucked out back to Taiwan. This is disgraceful because it is retrospective. If it were the case, as with the rise in tuition fees, that this would come into force in 3 years plus (I.E. when people who came here under the guise of previous laws are still at university) then I'd understand, but this isn't fair to her, she came here thinking she'd have time to find a job after, but now is basically being told to fuck off.

Oh, and she pays £13,000+ a year for her degree. So they also took £39,000 out of her pocket too.

Tories gotta keep out the brown peoples. Even if it's bad for the University business. But WAIT! They've found a way round that! They'll just act like a bank and open an international office/campus in Dubai! Anyone else catch Dispatches on Channel 4 tonight? If I'd known my uni's Pro-VC was on £250,000 a year and working another job making £50,000 on top. I'dve protested. Seriously, the explosion of wealth at the top 5% of society (chief execs etc.) has just ruined it for the rest of us. If he'd been on just £50,000 and £200,000 went to library books or a few new lecturers, I think that would benefit society and the students (who are THE most important people at university according to faggot-Willets) more.

 

[Dambrosi]

Hey, Meadows. Hey. Hey.

Hey.

Spoiler

Serves you right for voting for them

Anyway, enough schadenfreude. Has anyone not seen this on BBC news yet?

Nxtgen - Andrew Lansley Rap (TOSSAH!)
A searing indictment of failing Con-Dem Coalition policy if ever there was one.

 

[phisheep]

Tories gotta keep out the brown peoples. Even if it's bad for the University business. But WAIT! They've found a way round that! They'll just act like a bank and open an international office/campus in Dubai! Anyone else catch Dispatches on Channel 4 tonight? If I'd known my uni's Pro-VC was on £250,000 a year and working another job making £50,000 on top. I'dve protested. Seriously, the explosion of wealth at the top 5% of society (chief execs etc.) has just ruined it for the rest of us. If he'd been on just £50,000 and £200,000 went to library books or a few new lecturers, I think that would benefit society and the students (who are THE most important people at university according to faggot-Willets) more.

Well, it isn't at all clear - whoever you talk to - what the cause of that is, but from where I sit it looks like the unintended consequence (amplified by inflations and so on) of punitive Labour tax rates in the 1970s. Marginal top rate tax was 98%. 98%. THat means to get £1 a week extra you needed an extra £2600 a year - which at the time and on its own was a damn good starting salary. Because of that, employers had to massively increase top rate salaries to attract the right people, and when the tax rate went down, the people got to keep it.

Biggest cause of social division in the country - and people complain about Thatcher.

 

[iapetus]

I voted Lib Dem and don't feel betrayed. Some people seem to be under the illusion that the Lib Dems were going to get all their policies acted upon/made law which was never going to happen when they're a junior partner in a coalition.

I voted Lib-Dem, and don't regret it in the slightest. Labour are a discredited mess, they have not rectified that as yet, and I didn't want a pure Tory manifesto being enacted.

Nice to see sanity prevailing.

 

[Your Excellency]

Well, it isn't at all clear - whoever you talk to - what the cause of that is, but from where I sit it looks like the unintended consequence (amplified by inflations and so on) of punitive Labour tax rates in the 1970s. Marginal top rate tax was 98%. 98%. THat means to get £1 a week extra you needed an extra £2600 a year - which at the time and on its own was a damn good starting salary. Because of that, employers had to massively increase top rate salaries to attract the right people, and when the tax rate went down, the people got to keep it.

Biggest cause of social division in the country - and people complain about Thatcher.

I've not heard about this before, pretty interesting. Any websites or news articles which cover it in more detail?

 

[Gowans]

My local council are bonkers.

A BUSINESSMAN has hit out after it emerged South Tyneside Council footed almost the entire bill for a new multi-million pound BT business centre in South Shields.

The complex, nearing completion at Harton Staithes, is seen as a key element in the town’s riverside regeneration.

But it has now been revealed that BT has contributed just a fraction towards the building costs – with the council taking out a loan to meet the rest.

BT, the borough council’s strategic partner, has paid £470,650 for the complex that will house up to 500 of its staff.

And the council has borrowed the remaining £8.9m needed to make the scheme a reality.

Details of the deal came to light after borough businessman Colin Campbell submitted a Freedom of Information request to the council.

A response to his request says: “BT are contributing five per cent towards the initial building cost.

“They have signed a lease for 14½ years for the building, during which time they have guaranteed rental income that will fund 100 per cent of the council debt repayments for the building during this period, as well as contributing an estimated £2.9m further additional funds.”

Today Mr Campbell, owner of Tyne and Wear Properties, said he was “flabbergasted” at the details of the deal.

He added: “This is a council which is complaining about coalition cuts and the impact that they have.

“And yet they go behind the public’s back, and borrow £10m to build this monstrosity. The public will be the ones left to foot the bill for generations to come.”

Mr Campbell is now seeking further clarification from the council on the monthly cost of the loan.

He added: “I want to know what the APR is on the loan.”

A spokesman for BT South Tyneside said: “BT is committed to a 14½-year lease of the Harton Staithes building and has been since we signed the tenancy agreement in late 2009.

“As we have said in the past, BT is committed to and believes in the future prosperity of South Tyneside.

“Investment in this new building, coupled with the proud traditions and work ethics of this area, will help us to attract other organisations and potentially jobs to the borough of South Tyneside.”

Coun Michael Clare, lead member for jobs, enterprise and regeneration, said: “The business centre is a prestigious building that will house BT’s local government headquarters.

“It will bring hundreds of quality jobs to the borough, boosting trade in South Shields town with the new office workers using the shops, services and leisure facilities.

“We have never made any secret of the fact that we are acting as site developer, and in May 2009 we made an announcement to this effect.

“We made another announcement in January 2010 to confirm that BT had signed a 14½-year lease to occupy the building.

“By stepping in, the council has ensured that this vital scheme can go ahead at a time of difficult market conditions, kick-starting the regeneration of the South Shields riverside and attracting much-needed employment opportunities to the borough.”

http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/fury_over_8_9m_funding_of_new_bt_building_1_3207122

 

[radioheadrule83]

I don't think the developer knows enough about the deal to make this claim:

“And yet they go behind the public’s back, and borrow £10m to build this monstrosity. The public will be the ones left to foot the bill for generations to come.”

How are the public footing the bill if BT's rent and commital to rent it for 14 years covers 100% of the loan repayments?

edit:
Just read that Colin Campbell ran as an independent against Labour in the last election, I think he's just trying to discredit the council. The agreement sounds above board to me... if, as implied, BT ultimately funds 100% of the loan.

 

[Chinner]

I am royally pissed off at the end of the post-university job-seeking visa.

Previously, foreign students at UK universities were allowed 6 months to 2 years to find a "sponsored" job, after their student visa (that lasts the duration of their studies) ends.

This has been cut completely and now my girlfriend only has about 4 months to find a sponsored job here after her degree is over before she gets chucked out back to Taiwan. This is disgraceful because it is retrospective. If it were the case, as with the rise in tuition fees, that this would come into force in 3 years plus (I.E. when people who came here under the guise of previous laws are still at university) then I'd understand, but this isn't fair to her, she came here thinking she'd have time to find a job after, but now is basically being told to fuck off.

Oh, and she pays £13,000+ a year for her degree. So they also took £39,000 out of her pocket too.

I'm sorry Meadows, that's pretty horrible and I hope everything works out for you.

 

[louis89]

I am royally pissed off at the end of the post-university job-seeking visa.

Previously, foreign students at UK universities were allowed 6 months to 2 years to find a "sponsored" job, after their student visa (that lasts the duration of their studies) ends.

This has been cut completely and now my girlfriend only has about 4 months to find a sponsored job here after her degree is over before she gets chucked out back to Taiwan. This is disgraceful because it is retrospective. If it were the case, as with the rise in tuition fees, that this would come into force in 3 years plus (I.E. when people who came here under the guise of previous laws are still at university) then I'd understand, but this isn't fair to her, she came here thinking she'd have time to find a job after, but now is basically being told to fuck off.

Oh, and she pays £13,000+ a year for her degree. So they also took £39,000 out of her pocket too.

Don't you usually apply to graduate schemes before graduating?

I agree that it shouldn't be retroactive though.

 

[phisheep]

I've not heard about this before, pretty interesting. Any websites or news articles which cover it in more detail?

Absolutely no idea. I'm doing that from memory as I lived through it - it was in "the olden days, when you were alive Daddy" as my children revel in saying to me!

 

[Linkified]

Oh, and she pays £13,000+ a year for her degree. So they also took £39,000 out of her pocket too.

Wait, did she not learn anything thats what she is paying for she can use those skills anywhere in the world so its not like she has been trickled out of nearly £40k.

 

[Zenith]

Cabinet office minister Oliver Letwin has become embroiled in a row over alleged comments he made about not wanting Sheffield families to afford cheap holidays.

It is alleged that during a conversation with Mr Johnson about new airports, Mr Letwin said: "We don't want more people from Sheffield flying away on cheap holidays."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-12972517

As someone who lived in Sheffield for 4 years I can say he is a total scumbag. Dispels any notion of them not being the same old Tory snobs. "Poor people should stay at home where they belong!"

 

[Meadows]

Wait, did she not learn anything thats what she is paying for she can use those skills anywhere in the world so its not like she has been trickled out of nearly £40k.

she would have gone to another country with lower tuition fees if it weren't for the UK's post graduate work scheme.

 

[Meadows]

Don't you usually apply to graduate schemes before graduating?

I agree that it shouldn't be retroactive though.

yeah, but that leaves no parachute to fall back on, if that doesn't work she's out.

Current plan is if she can't find a job, then to go to Taiwan for a few years and teach English, before possibly (after about 3 years there, we'd be together for 6 years at that point) getting married if we're still together/want to stay together (officially/paperwork only, no ceremony, we'll do that later if we want) and getting her a UK passport so she actually gets treated like a human being by the government.

It would be very sad if it came to that. Truly.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Was just catching up on the week's news.

Lansley has to go. The man is complete wanker. Get him out, put Hammond in charge of the DoH, get Huhne to the Transport brief and replace Huhne with pro-nuclear power person as the energy and climate change secretary.

I've been reading up on the health reforms and they are a complete disaster. Lansley went into the election saying no top down reorganisation of the NHS and a year later we are discussing a top down reorganisation of the NHS.

Dave needs to reshuffle the cabinet. Get rid of Spellman, Warsi, Letwin and Lansley, bring in Priti Patel, Grant Shapps, David Laws and Theresa Villiers as their replacements in the cabinet while promoting others to take their place.

The four people I have mentioned will do more damage to this country than any other people. Spellman had the forests debacle, Warsi had the dinner table racism comments, Letwin has a Sheffield problem and Lansley is a complete tool.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

I am royally pissed off at the end of the post-university job-seeking visa.

Previously, foreign students at UK universities were allowed 6 months to 2 years to find a "sponsored" job, after their student visa (that lasts the duration of their studies) ends.

This has been cut completely and now my girlfriend only has about 4 months to find a sponsored job here after her degree is over before she gets chucked out back to Taiwan. This is disgraceful because it is retrospective. If it were the case, as with the rise in tuition fees, that this would come into force in 3 years plus (I.E. when people who came here under the guise of previous laws are still at university) then I'd understand, but this isn't fair to her, she came here thinking she'd have time to find a job after, but now is basically being told to fuck off.

Oh, and she pays £13,000+ a year for her degree. So they also took £39,000 out of her pocket too.

I feel for you dude, and your gf. That kind of stuff really sucks. I think the immigration reforms are woefully inadequate, they got it all wrong. We need highly skilled workers and businesses need to fill positions that local people can't do. Our education system has been destroyed over the last 20-30 years and we get candidates from the state sector who can't spell properly, their maths and reasoning skills are very limited. We want to hire locally, nd the new laws pretty much say we have to hire locally but the number of poor candidates is unimaginable. I'm sure an immigrant from east or south Asia would be a better fit but now we can't.

The government have got the immigration laws all wrong. They need to make it so that highly skilled workers can come over, and specifically for your situation, they need to bring back the 18 month period where you can find a job after completing education.

 

[godels rotating universe]

I feel for you dude, and your gf. That kind of stuff really sucks. I think the immigration reforms are woefully inadequate, they got it all wrong. We need highly skilled workers and businesses need to fill positions that local people can't do. Our education system has been destroyed over the last 20-30 years and we get candidates from the state sector who can't spell properly, their maths and reasoning skills are very limited. We want to hire locally, nd the new laws pretty much say we have to hire locally but the number of poor candidates is unimaginable. I'm sure an immigrant from east or south Asia would be a better fit but now we can't.

The government have got the immigration laws all wrong. They need to make it so that highly skilled workers can come over, and specifically for your situation, they need to bring back the 18 month period where you can find a job after completing education.

It's almost as if a lot of government policy is based on crowd-pleasing and not on what makes sense.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Indeed. I don't think unrestricted immigration like we had under Labour works, but the new highly restrictive system doesn't work either. We need a system where unskilled workers discouraged from entry, but highly skilled migrants are able to support the economy are able to come over. The new system restricts the wrong group from entry.

 

[Dr Frasier Crane]

Clegg has been scapegoated for what's going on completely. The media seem set on that narrative for the timebeing, just as they are at portraying Ed Milliband as clumsy and useless.

I voted Lib-Dem, and don't regret it in the slightest. Labour are a discredited mess, they have not rectified that as yet, and I didn't want a pure Tory manifesto being enacted. I knew a hung parliament was a likelihood going in. I think it would be a good thing for politics if in 4 years time, we look back and think - hey, that coaltion actually did a decent job.

The AV vote is a big thing for me too.

Quoted for true justice (and said as a Politics Mature Student!)

 

[Dark Machine]

We need highly skilled workers and businesses need to fill positions that local people can't do. Our education system has been destroyed over the last 20-30 years and we get candidates from the state sector who can't spell properly, their maths and reasoning skills are very limited.

So damn true. Seriously, I'm tempted to take a picture of the piles of government directives that my mum has accrued over the last 20 years (which she's forced to keep) and are completely useless. If people want I'll write a 'diatribe' of what's been wrong with education in this country based on the experience of a long serving, target-exceeding and damn brilliant Head of Dept. Teacher in English. Here's a clue on the basics though, Marketisation and 'freedom of choice' in an essential sector like education is a bad idea. Just like it has been in the NHS. This is not to say that you shouldn't have 'private schools' but sending your kids to state schools many many miles away in the suburbs just because of where they are, not based on results etc. has ruined education here at least.

As an example, my mum's school is in an inner city. They used to have pretty good results and at least 10 admitted to Oxbridge every year. Freedom of choice and the 'market' came in, and 'aspirational' parents sent the 'good' kids to the richer suburbs, the schools there were shite, but the location was good and it made the parents feel better. What happened? Those shite schools improved, and mum's place was left with the kids of drug addicts, prostitutes and psychos. (I'm not exaggerating).

 

[Zenith]

Nick Clegg: I cry to music and even my sons ask why everyone hates me

Clegg says that he attempts to lead a relatively normal life but doesn't always get the balance right, which leaves him "quite miserable". In the evenings, he likes to read novels and "cries regularly to music".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...d-even-my-sons-ask-why-everyone-hates-me.html

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/04/clegg-tennis-cameron-deputy

Sweet Jesus. I'm all for our politicians being human and honest, but my god does that paint a very unflattering picture.

 

[War Peaceman]

Terribly misguided interview there. He is ridiculously out of touch with people if he thinks this is going to create sympathy..

Also, this whole NHS reform stuff is nonsense. I just cannot understand how the Conservatives can think they have the mandate to do something so vast and impactful when it contradicts a significant part of their manifesto. Not to mention, they didn't even get a majority...

 

[Songbird]

Not to mention, they didn't even get a majority...

It's all okay! Clegg will just roll over and cry himself to sleep!

 

[Your Excellency]

Zomg, what do you make of this:

Business chiefs who backed coalition cuts raise fears for UK economy

Entrepreneurs and executives who supported chancellor's aggressive measures now concerned about weak growth

They seem to be saying it's due to inflation, not cuts, though.

 

[Ushojax]

Zomg, what do you make of this:

I make of it what I made of it before. Nobody knows anything.

 

[DECK'ARD]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...d-even-my-sons-ask-why-everyone-hates-me.html

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/04/clegg-tennis-cameron-deputy

Sweet Jesus. I'm all for our politicians being human and honest, but my god does that paint a very unflattering picture.

It's moments like this when you wish Spitting Image was still going

 

[Zenith]

It's moments like this when you wish Spitting Image was still going

they've started writing new scripts for The Thick of It and it'll have the Cons with Libdems floating around getting in the way.

 

[Ashes]

Zomg, what do you make of this:



They seem to be saying it's due to inflation, not cuts, though.

Those two things are not mutually exclusive entities.

 

[blazinglord]

I am royally pissed off at the end of the post-university job-seeking visa.

Previously, foreign students at UK universities were allowed 6 months to 2 years to find a "sponsored" job, after their student visa (that lasts the duration of their studies) ends.

This has been cut completely and now my girlfriend only has about 4 months to find a sponsored job here after her degree is over before she gets chucked out back to Taiwan. This is disgraceful because it is retrospective. If it were the case, as with the rise in tuition fees, that this would come into force in 3 years plus (I.E. when people who came here under the guise of previous laws are still at university) then I'd understand, but this isn't fair to her, she came here thinking she'd have time to find a job after, but now is basically being told to fuck off.

Oh, and she pays £13,000+ a year for her degree. So they also took £39,000 out of her pocket too.

Out of curiosity, what degree does she do? Because I'm sure I read in The Times that Vince Cable won a compromise so that the whole process was dependent on subjects to avoid the exodus of highly skilled graduates Britain is in short supply of. I was also under the impression that main focus was on those who come here on student visas to do 6/12 months GCSE/AS level courses at sketchy institutions.

As for the immigration cap that others are railing against, I don't know why it is so shocking for a small country like ours to have an annual cap when far larger countries such as America, Canada and the entire continent of Australia all have some form of cap. Not to mention that we will still have an open door policy for those residing within the EU irrespective of accession date. David Cameron is disappointing me on a number of policy fronts his government is pursuing, but this clear manifesto pledge that remains electorally popular - it's a no-brainer. And I sincerely doubt that Labour will campaign in 2015 to repeal it.

 

[DECK'ARD]

Stop the press, Gordon Brown admits making a mistake!*

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13032013

Gordon Brown admits big mistake over banking crisis

The former prime minister told a US conference he had not realised the "entanglements" of global institutions.

He said: "We set up the FSA believing the problem would come from the failure of an individual institution. That was the big mistake.

"We didn't understand just how entangled things were."

Mr Brown said he had to "accept my responsibility" but added he was not the only one who had made mistakes.

Mr Brown told the Institute for New Economic Thinking in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, that he had been under "relentless pressure" from the City not to over-regulate.

"We know in retrospect what we missed. We set up the Financial Services Authority (FSA) believing that the problem would come from the failure of an individual institution," he said.

"So we created a monitoring system which was looking at individual institutions. That was the big mistake.

"We didn't understand how risk was spread across the system, we didn't understand the entanglements of different institutions with the other and we didn't understand even though we talked about it just how global things were, including a shadow banking system as well as a banking system.

"That was our mistake, but I'm afraid it was a mistake made by just about everybody who was in the regulatory business."

Mr Brown said the banking meltdown had forced a rethink of financial regulation "in its entirety".

"I have got to accept my responsibility and I do, and I have been very open about saying we made mistakes on that," he said.

"But in a world where the understanding of what global meant was incomplete, I think many writers as well as many regulators made exactly the same mistake."

The FSA, which Mr Brown established on his first day as chancellor in 1997, was widely criticised for its part in the banking collapse.

The chancellor, George Osborne, has announced plans to break up the FSA and hand more regulatory power to the Bank of England.

*but everyone else made a mistake as well

 

[Chinner]

.

 

[Ashes]

Why are you editing all your stuff out man?

 

[travisbickle]

In my experience those earning over £150k a year do not get welfare and have private health insurance - two areas that accounts for just under a half of total government spending. The public services you mention, with the possible exception of public highways, are funded for by local government which each and everyone of us contributes to via council tax. Furthermore, cultural services such as libraries, museums etc accounts for a very small proportion of total government spending. I therefore reject your claim that those earning £150k+ are getting their money's worth.

You what!?? You must be hanging around with some of the thickest high-earners in the country!

 

[Meadows]

Out of curiosity, what degree does she do? Because I'm sure I read in The Times that Vince Cable won a compromise so that the whole process was dependent on subjects to avoid the exodus of highly skilled graduates Britain is in short supply of. I was also under the impression that main focus was on those who come here on student visas to do 6/12 months GCSE/AS level courses at sketchy institutions.

BA Management

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Zomg, what do you make of this:



They seem to be saying it's due to inflation, not cuts, though.

It's fair, but I think the government need to show they are in this for the long-haul. The previous government were notoriously short-termist, always worried about the 24h news cycle and media/PR management. It lead to spending commitments without oversight or dissent. If the government bow to media and or other interests and decide to change their deficit reduction plan I think we will be in for a world of shit.

There are already many, many worries about European sovereign debt and the last thing we need is for our borrowing costs to increase. Right now we pay 3-4% interest on 10 year Gilts, all of the Eurozone countries in trouble pay above 6%, Spain pay 5% and Italy just above 4%. Even now the country spends £42bn in interest every year which will rise to £60bn by the end of Parliament. Under Labour's plan we estimate that the debt interest bill by the end of the current session would be closer to £85bn because the money would have to be borrowed at a much higher cost or inflation would be much higher as the BoE would have to print money to keep Gilt yields down.

On the issue of growth, again we need to take a long term view atm. If we borrow more to spend more and stimulate growth our debt would get much worse for very little extra growth. The US federal deficit stands at 11% of GDP and nearly $1 in every $2 is borrowed, the US reported growth of around 3.1% in annualised terms which is around 0.8% in our terms. Our deficit this year is set to be around 8% of GDP and the NISER estimate of growth came in at 0.7%. So, yes, our growth is a bit slower and the path is a bit longer but once the economy is rebalanced and state spending is reduced to a more sustainable proportion of GDP we will be in a much stronger position. The party which inherits the economy in the 2020 election will be a very lucky on indeed, but the pain which everyone will have to endure now is difficult will, IMO, be worth it.

 

[Meadows]

Nurses in overwhelming vote of no confidence in NHS reforms:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13063285

At first I thought these proposals seemed fair, but the outrage at them made me look a little closer and they're actually pretty bullshit, outsourcing some operations and such to private firms. Anyway, nurses know best, they work bloody hard enough!

 

[louis89]

It's fair, but I think the government need to show they are in this for the long-haul. The previous government were notoriously short-termist, always worried about the 24h news cycle and media/PR management. It lead to spending commitments without oversight or dissent. If the government bow to media and or other interests and decide to change their deficit reduction plan I think we will be in for a world of shit.

There are already many, many worries about European sovereign debt and the last thing we need is for our borrowing costs to increase. Right now we pay 3-4% interest on 10 year Gilts, all of the Eurozone countries in trouble pay above 6%, Spain pay 5% and Italy just above 4%. Even now the country spends £42bn in interest every year which will rise to £60bn by the end of Parliament. Under Labour's plan we estimate that the debt interest bill by the end of the current session would be closer to £85bn because the money would have to be borrowed at a much higher cost or inflation would be much higher as the BoE would have to print money to keep Gilt yields down.

On the issue of growth, again we need to take a long term view atm. If we borrow more to spend more and stimulate growth our debt would get much worse for very little extra growth. The US federal deficit stands at 11% of GDP and nearly $1 in every $2 is borrowed, the US reported growth of around 3.1% in annualised terms which is around 0.8% in our terms. Our deficit this year is set to be around 8% of GDP and the NISER estimate of growth came in at 0.7%. So, yes, our growth is a bit slower and the path is a bit longer but once the economy is rebalanced and state spending is reduced to a more sustainable proportion of GDP we will be in a much stronger position. The party which inherits the economy in the 2020 election will be a very lucky on indeed, but the pain which everyone will have to endure now is difficult will, IMO, be worth it.

What do you mean by that?