You're talking absolute bollox as usual. No-one has said scrap the system because of the abusers, the consensus would be more 'Stop the abuse and the scroungers to protect the network for those who really need it'
Tory Monopoly (6 Viewers)
- Thread starter Grendel
- Start date
You're talking absolute bollox as usual. No-one has said scrap the system because of the abusers, the consensus would be more 'Stop the abuse and the scroungers to protect the network for those who really need it'
SkyblueBazza
Well-Known Member
Disagree. I was born & raised on what people (I am suspecting) such as you would sneer at. I went to a comprehensive school. Did very well as did a fair few of my peer group. Have friends that went to the local Grammar School too...some did well, some haven't.
Education is no different to anything else...if you are allowed to cherry-pick then you get the best cherries. In an environment where measured outcomes are possible - the cherry-pickers are always generally going to get better outcomes.
Discipline is probably the main difference...parental first & foremost, then school teacher ability to keep control of the class (often meaning actually engaging the pupils).
So just like the NHS - maybe politicians should keep their noses out of it as far as possible. Provide every school a budget per pupil...with a factorised add on (according to attractiveness of the area - thus encourage best teachers to go to deprived areas if they want the best pay). Maintain buildings from a central budget.
THEN standards will rise on their own...but it will take generations.
...onwards & upwards PUSB
Last edited:
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Sorry I forgot to mention what makes him a typical socialist.
He benefitted from the system he now wants to abolish.
Johnnythespider
Well-Known Member
I suspect they all benefitted from free tuition fees and student grants, hasn't stopped them lumbering future generations with huge personal debt though.
Where does he say that? See this forum is alive and well with making stuff up closed season
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Students have no personal debt. It's a myth. This system isn't a loan system but a tax on future earnings. It's actually estimated that 50% of the debt will never be paid but will fall to the taxpayer to pay for.
The point about grammar education though is that it encouraged aspiring working classes into politics. Many, many labour politicians have been through the system. True Burnham and Cooper appear to have managed to come through but the vast majority don't. The irony is that the more left you are the better you seem to have benefitted from the education system.
As for Corbyn I've looked into his background and he seems a distantly unpleasant chap. While UK citizens were subjected to a reign of terror in the 80's by the Irish anarchists Corbyn seemed disturbingly close to the IRA. He also has very strange friends in Hamas and in South America.
Every dog has his day and it will be very amusing to watch this rather unsavoury individual enter the adult world of politics. I'll give it 5 minutes before he's shown the exit door.
mrtrench
Well-Known Member
IMO, Labour committed themselves to years in opposition the day they voted in Ed Miliband over his brother David. The Tories would have a shoe-in with Boris in 2020 but appear now to be moving behind Osborn, who despite having managed the train crash of an economy that Balls left him very well, lacks the charisma to pull in the votes at a General Election.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Is this based on the writings of Leo McKinstry from the Daily Mail?
Houchens Head
Fairly well known member from Malvern
Who's Tony Monopoly? Are we signing him?
Australian crooner. Not really my generation though Houch :guitar2:
Grendel
Well-Known Member
No I don't know who he is. The information was from searching him on Google.
lewys33
Well-Known Member
Corbyn will be a major car crash for Labour if he wins. It will no doubt guarantee the future success of the tories. No matter what you believe in. I think Liz is the best candidate for the labour leadership, but I seriously doubt she will win. We all know that the unions have the power in the labour party and that is what is killing them.
Would be interesting to see if Gordon Brown lined up in this leadership.
As for the welfare cuts - what did people expect? It is quite simple. We can't continue spending vast amounts of money on it. The introduction of workplace pensions should help this area eventually. The majority of benefits are for OAPs/pensions. So yes you can watch channel 4 and channel 5 and complain about the scroungers or the immigrants but realistically that isn't actually a major cost in the overall welfare budget.
The student loan thing is also laughable in my opinion. Why shouldn't you have to pay for your education past 18? People just seem to be angry that others are getting *more* handouts than themselves. It is all about self-worth for me.
Would be interesting to see if Gordon Brown lined up in this leadership.
As for the welfare cuts - what did people expect? It is quite simple. We can't continue spending vast amounts of money on it. The introduction of workplace pensions should help this area eventually. The majority of benefits are for OAPs/pensions. So yes you can watch channel 4 and channel 5 and complain about the scroungers or the immigrants but realistically that isn't actually a major cost in the overall welfare budget.
The student loan thing is also laughable in my opinion. Why shouldn't you have to pay for your education past 18? People just seem to be angry that others are getting *more* handouts than themselves. It is all about self-worth for me.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
We need to stop this obsession with everyone going to university. There's too many people doing degrees that have zero chance of leading to a job. It can't be that hard to work out how many graduates need to be recruited every year and in what fields. That should roughly equate to the number of places available.
If you did that it becomes more feasible to cover the cost of education or have students sponsored by bigger companies on the promise of going to work for them when they graduate.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
It just sounded like him that's all. The IRA thing I think bothers him because he's from Northern Ireland (Leo Mckinstry that is) and I'm fairly sure is off the protestant faith but don't hold me to that. You could argue though that Corbyn was a visionary in that respect where the IRA was concerned. Afterall the good friday agreement most likely wouldn't have happend unless John Major was willing to publicly and openly hand out the olive branch to the likes of Adams & Mcguinness. Would talks have started without that leap of faith?
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
I'm a lone voice here, I know, but I actually think he will be the best thing to happen to the Labour Party. To be honest the Tories are going to be in for years now anyway regardless of who is Labour leader. I'd rather not have a closet Tory wearing a red tie running the party like Burnham or the rest of them.
Since Blair the line between the Tories and the Labour party have become too blurred for my liking. JC will at least fight for his corner and for the corner of the working people of the country, rather than just rattling Cameron's cage in PMQs before voting for all his policies.
Since Blair the line between the Tories and the Labour party have become too blurred for my liking. JC will at least fight for his corner and for the corner of the working people of the country, rather than just rattling Cameron's cage in PMQs before voting for all his policies.
Last edited:
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Some might argue that talking to mass murderers and terrorists should never have happened. I see Corbyn sees Hammas as his friends as well. I'm convinced if Bin Laden had hid in his cave for a bit longer he would have ended up with tea and sandwiches at number 10 and a recommendation for the Peace Prize.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Agree with this, at least we might start to see some distinction between the parties. At the moment it pretty much all merges into one. I've always voted but the last election I really wasn't sure if I was going to vote or not as there just didn't seem any option worth voting for. There unknown is the 40% who aren't voting, if Labour (or any other party) can get a decent chunk of them onside things might liven up a bit.
Think the bigger problem for Labour is the press. Labour only have The Guardian and Mirror on side. Everyone else, barring the Independent is to the right. We all know how the press can spin things and how many people take headlines as statements of fact, if the majority of the population are being fed one sided information its near impossible for Labour to counter that.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Well I can't talk about anywhere else in the world but my family is from Northern Ireland, I've been travelling there all my life both long before and long since the good Friday agreement and the contrast is startling. Based on my own experience I would say it's imperative to talk to terrorist because the gun will never bring piece until it's put down. That only happens by talking.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Even the Indie was starting to become a little Torified at the end of the last campaign. There was a bit of a backlash on Twitter about it.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
As an aside, as investment in education makes a country more competitive with foreign competitors, raises wealth of the country and, as graduates tend to earn more than non graduates and thus on average pay higher tax... that's why education should be funded past 18.
People should be encouraged to reach the best level they can, be it plumbing, post-structuralism, physics or policing.. That's the very essence of a civilised society and the benefits come in to everyone.
Invest in the future and reap the benefits, or see it crash and burn down the line.
As for welfare cuts... what I expected was a less blunt policy. Who, after all, has to pay people's unemployment benefit if they end up out of work? And I repeat... what's wrong with actually paying a higher rate of tax to pay for the services many expect and take for granted?
People should be encouraged to reach the best level they can, be it plumbing, post-structuralism, physics or policing.. That's the very essence of a civilised society and the benefits come in to everyone.
Invest in the future and reap the benefits, or see it crash and burn down the line.
As for welfare cuts... what I expected was a less blunt policy. Who, after all, has to pay people's unemployment benefit if they end up out of work? And I repeat... what's wrong with actually paying a higher rate of tax to pay for the services many expect and take for granted?
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
As a general principle I'd tend to agree.
Mandela was a terrorist in the eyes of many for many years too, of course.
You don't have to agree with someone to spread a message of peace, but there are many people across history who get judged somewhat differently with hindsight than they did at the time... for both better and worse.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
You forgot to mention his objection to the mass murderer Pinochet (but being a Thatcherite I'm not surprised you failed to mention that), he's also anti-apartheid and campaigned against South Africa for many years. As for the IRA thing; didn't he want to discuss a ceasefire 15 years before Blair was lauded for it?
Didn't he have one of the lowest expenses claims out of all 650 of them too?
Easy to pick out one or two bits and ignore the rest. As you're not a Labour supporter I'm not sure why it bothers you so much.
Didn't he have one of the lowest expenses claims out of all 650 of them too?
Easy to pick out one or two bits and ignore the rest. As you're not a Labour supporter I'm not sure why it bothers you so much.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
It wasn't even Blair, it was John Major.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Yeah, Blair got lucky in the early years, didn't he? The death of Diana and the Good Friday Agreement really set him up fora good few years.
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
And got out when he knew everything was going to shit.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Am ambivalent about Blair.
We see in this leadership contest the problem he's caused, even if unwittingly, for his party however. There's always a desire to make people into Blair clones - hell, Brown's USP by the time he became leader was he *wasn't* Blair, he was a man with his own principles and a strong background who had weighty ideas and a strong background of intellectual strength... but he allowed his party to make him do the things Blair did, except less well!
In that respect, it would be the worry with Corbyn that instead of standing or failing for being himself, he ends up being compromised by his own party... and thus looking insincere as a result.
There's a certain argument and a certain 'purer' politics that says you stand by your own principles and either succeed or fail on those alone. It would be nice if across the parties we could start moving towards that once more, rather than who is most likely to win an election. You never know, it might increase a disillusioned electorate's engagement with politics again, as a result.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
The economic outlook was excellent also. Thanks to the good work of John Majors government. It was widely considered the most important election in decades because whoever won was guaranteed at least two terms of prosperity guaranteeing a second term election victory for Blair, in fact Blair must have worked really hard to fuck it up as badly as he did and then got out just as the wheels were about to fall off hoping no one would notice it was because of decisions made on his shift. I always sort of felt sorry for Brown because the writing was on the wall the minute he took the job.
Similarly I feel sorry for John Major. Personally I think he was the best PM of my lifetime, he just couldn't get his party to unite behind him and that killed his chance of reelection and took the conservative party years to recover. Not so different to where Labour currently find themselves.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I'm not a Tory and not a Thatcherite.
You'd have to certainly be a Tory to want a main political party become a laughable protest group for the few - which will happen if Corbyn gets in.
mrtrench
Well-Known Member
IMO, almost everything in the last budget was about growing the UK's economy for everyone and getting more people into work. I would make the argument that limiting benefits in the way that has been done is good for the country and good for the individuals affected. We cannot have a country where people can feel well off on benefits, absolving themselves of responsibility to look after themselves to others. By reducing the maximum they can get from benefits it will give them a further nudge to go out and get a job and make people think twice about having more children unless they can afford them.
What is wrong about paying more tax is that more people will evade it, many by moving abroad. Corbyn said the other day that he wouldn't rule out the top rate of tax going above 70%. Generally, people who have this level of income are resourceful and they'll vote with their feet. Tax revenue will reduce and so taxes go up again, borrowing goes up, gilt yields go up and soon the UK will be in a right old two 'n' eight.
On the other hand, reducing Corporation Tax is really smart. More companies will choose the UK, so there are more jobs, both corporation and income tax revenues increase and we have a virtuous circle instead of a vicious one.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Mandela was a terrorist due to a racial policy that is not acceptable in society.
The likes of Adams and his thug in arms mcguiness are just murderers whose only cause was to inflict pain and misery. Peace was and always will be bottom of their agenda.
mrtrench
Well-Known Member
Mandela was a fantastic example of how imprisonment can really work. He never reoffended once released.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
100% agree with all of that.
It's interesting the media compares this pipsqueak to Atlee and Bevan. Both were fierce Patriots and would have recoiled in horror at how the welfare state now supports a lifestyle choice and has created an underclass.