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'
No, thoe wh use the exceptions to disregard the absolute need for a support system are those who are naive.
Sometimes, people need to walk a mile in others' shoes before judging and stereotyping and using lazy sensationalism.
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.At least Corbyn is a typical socialist,
He is totally opposed to grammar school education - far better to condemn the working classes to the cesspit of the comprehensive system.
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
I suspect they all benefitted from free tuition fees and student grants, hasn't stopped them lumbering future generations with huge personal debt though.Sorry I forgot to mention what makes him a typical socialist.
He benefitted from the system he now wants to abolish.
And every person who claims benefits is exactly the same as that woman, are they? Every SINGLE person? Yes or no?
FFS.
I suspect they all benefitted from free tuition fees and student grants, hasn't stopped them lumbering future generations with huge personal debt though.
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.
Who's Tony Monopoly? Are we signing him?
Is this based on the writings of Leo McKinstry from the Daily Mail?
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.
No I don't know who he is. The information was from searching him on Google.
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.
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?
Since Blair the line between the Tories and the Labour 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
It wasn't even Blair, it was John Major.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
Mandela was a terrorist due to a racial policy that is not acceptable in society.
.
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?