Fox Ulike Posted 13 February 2018 Posted 13 February 2018 6 minutes ago, Strokes said: It doesn’t have to go as far as a shortage but we could definitely categorise which ones are of value to the country and which ones are more for vanity and not likely to achieve a return. How do you define value to the country? Would you axe courses in History and English Literature for example?
Guest Posted 13 February 2018 Posted 13 February 2018 4 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said: How do you define value to the country? Would you axe courses in History and English Literature for example? I was about to at this. What about fine art. Why is educating actors, film crew etc a weak just because it isn't academic?
Strokes Posted 13 February 2018 Posted 13 February 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said: How do you define value to the country? Would you axe courses in History and English Literature for example? Personally I wouldn’t no, I’ve stated many times I think all education should be free, both higher and further education but I’m saying that waiting for something to get to the point of being a shortage is daft. If you did need to cost courses based on need, I would say all courses that lead directly to employment should be of equal value, rather than those in short supply. Courses that are for personal fulfilment would be more difficult to justify. Edited 13 February 2018 by Strokes
Bryn Posted 13 February 2018 Posted 13 February 2018 1 hour ago, Fox Ulike said: How do you define value to the country? Would you axe courses in History and English Literature for example? Of course they are of value, to certain standards and with limits on numbers. It's not right that there are graduates of good institutions in those kinds of fields with good degrees who struggle to find work because the value of their degree has been diluted. Pulling back on thrusting every young person into highest education without aim would of course need to be associated with an increase in their options in general and better investment into inclusive and diverse education at younger ages too. We need better access to employment outside of university too, those 16 to 18 year olds who want to get out of education and into work and training should also receive support and encouragement. 2
Guest Posted 13 February 2018 Posted 13 February 2018 (edited) What gets me is that the tory voters always focus on engineering and similar and dismiss anything that doesn't have direct monetary value they can easily imagine. Somebody doing a drama course and going on to earn the UK millions producing a worldwide hit is beyond their comprehension. Perhaps that's the difference between left and right - the right has a complete lack of imagination and belief in their fellow men. Plenty of engineering graduates fade into nothingness. Edited 13 February 2018 by Guest
Guest Posted 13 February 2018 Posted 13 February 2018 The number of police officers in England and Wales has fallen by 1,213 in six months and is now 16% below its 2009 peak, official figures have shown. The latest Home Office statistics put the number of officers in the 43 police forces in England and Wales on 30 September last year at 121,929, down from 123,142 on 31 March last year and from 144,353 in 2009. In evidence submitted to the police remuneration review body last week, the Home Office made clear that no more central funding would be available for the pay settlement, describing the recruitment and retention of officers as “stable”. But Labour said that was out of touch with reality, given the figures. The shadow policing minister, Louise Haigh, said: “Once again we see how out of touch the Conservatives are with the lives of people across this country. Over 1,200 officers lost in just six months, more than 21,000 in total under this Tory government, against a backdrop of the highest rises in recorded crime in a decade.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 14 February 2018 Author Posted 14 February 2018 Hold fire on the topic of tuition fees! That’s the topic that my feature article assessment is on, which I’m in the middle of researching / gathering interviews etc. Still need to fix a date with the Tory MP in the next door constituency ? and then write it up before the end of next week. Naturally I’ll share a link to my copy on here when done - at which point discuss away! Seemed a good idea initially (my choice of topic), what with it being 20 years since tuition fees where introduced (legislation wise - first fee paying year was 1999/2000), but my god is it a monster of a subject. I was having a look at systems in other countries under the working title “is there a better way” - the likes of Australia and the US have massive cost differences in between course and institutions, which make it a massively confusing situation to get your head round and basing a comparative cost on averages pointless given we have a fixed fee system (although I note some are willing to draw that very comparison if it suits their argument). It also seems most most of the stuff I’ve read on the merits of a graduate tax as an alternative say it’s a shit idea! The other thing I need to do is go through the recently passed legislation with a finer toothcombe, because my first read of it gave me a sense there’s some controversy to it which hasn’t really attracted a lot of attention.
Rogstanley Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 (edited) Edit post was more appropriate in a different thread Edited 14 February 2018 by Rogstanley
Popular Post David Guiza Posted 14 February 2018 Popular Post Posted 14 February 2018 21 hours ago, Bryn said: I'd want a review of all degree courses and a demonstration of their direct link to revelant employment, and axing of any courses not contributing anything to its graduates beyond parties and debt, before I went anywhere near nursing training. But more students means more money for universities, presumably this means a bigger economy with no tangible improvement in the quality of life of the population as a whole. The notion that people should only go to University for the sake of their definitive next career step is such nonsense, or that they should have to prove a direct link between the subject and projected career. University can be more than just a means to an end and not everybody knows age 16-25 exactly what they want to do with their lives. Half of the cabinet studied for degrees that have no direct relationship with being a politician. I happened to be googling Steve Backshall the other day, as you do, and noticed that he studied drama at University - in your world he would perhaps never have gone on to become a published writer and make the difference that he is for the animals and conservation. Python wouldn't have come about as John Cleese would be a retired solicitor after being stifled into leaving the career as post graduate, neither would Blackadder as Rowan Atkinson would be in Electrical Engineering . Though, on the plus side, Coldplay may never have existed thanks to Chris Martin Ancient World Studies being cut as an unnecessary degree and his life taking a different trajectory. The desire to stifle creativity and to turn Universities into a conveyor belt for core subjects is such a backward step. University can be an utter waste of time and money and there are degrees out there which mean absolutely nothing to one, but 'axing' courses that do not necessarily contribute something directly to the graduate's career is nonsense. 5
Bryn Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 (edited) 53 minutes ago, David Guiza said: The notion that people should only go to University for the sake of their definitive next career step is such nonsense, or that they should have to prove a direct link between the subject and projected career. University can be more than just a means to an end and not everybody knows age 16-25 exactly what they want to do with their lives. Half of the cabinet studied for degrees that have no direct relationship with being a politician. I happened to be googling Steve Backshall the other day, as you do, and noticed that he studied drama at University - in your world he would perhaps never have gone on to become a published writer and make the difference that he is for the animals and conservation. Python wouldn't have come about as John Cleese would be a retired solicitor after being stifled into leaving the career as post graduate, neither would Blackadder as Rowan Atkinson would be in Electrical Engineering . Though, on the plus side, Coldplay may never have existed thanks to Chris Martin Ancient World Studies being cut as an unnecessary degree and his life taking a different trajectory. The desire to stifle creativity and to turn Universities into a conveyor belt for core subjects is such a backward step. University can be an utter waste of time and money and there are degrees out there which mean absolutely nothing to one, but 'axing' courses that do not necessarily contribute something directly to the graduate's career is nonsense. I don't disagree but there are too many young people being told their only option is University and they're being charged a lot of money for something which ultimately they're not benefiting from and I think it would be for the greater good if there was a reduction in the overall number of degrees courses and a focus on widening access to higher quality training and education in general. As I've said I wouldn't slash everything non-vocational but the status quo is benefiting the universities and noone else. In principle I think higher education of all kinds should be free and ubiquitous but in practical terms thats very challenging to provide and it's a major issue that so many people are feeling compelled to pay thousands and have little to show for it afterwards. Edited 14 February 2018 by Bryn 3
Rogstanley Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 56 minutes ago, David Guiza said: The notion that people should only go to University for the sake of their definitive next career step is such nonsense, or that they should have to prove a direct link between the subject and projected career. University can be more than just a means to an end and not everybody knows age 16-25 exactly what they want to do with their lives. Half of the cabinet studied for degrees that have no direct relationship with being a politician. I happened to be googling Steve Backshall the other day, as you do, and noticed that he studied drama at University - in your world he would perhaps never have gone on to become a published writer and make the difference that he is for the animals and conservation. Python wouldn't have come about as John Cleese would be a retired solicitor after being stifled into leaving the career as post graduate, neither would Blackadder as Rowan Atkinson would be in Electrical Engineering . Though, on the plus side, Coldplay may never have existed thanks to Chris Martin Ancient World Studies being cut as an unnecessary degree and his life taking a different trajectory. The desire to stifle creativity and to turn Universities into a conveyor belt for core subjects is such a backward step. University can be an utter waste of time and money and there are degrees out there which mean absolutely nothing to one, but 'axing' courses that do not necessarily contribute something directly to the graduate's career is nonsense. I don't disagree that education of any sort can be beneficial, but doesn't the fact that those examples went on to be successful in things not related to their degree actually prove the degrees were pointless? Butterfly effect notwithstanding, Rowan Atkinson would still have been a talented comic without his engineering degree, Chris Martin would still have had an aptitude for producing generic pop songs without his Ancient World Studies degree. How many people have gone to study liberal arts and by doing so missed their true calling as a world class engineer?
Fox Ulike Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 19 hours ago, Strokes said: Personally I wouldn’t no, I’ve stated many times I think all education should be free, both higher and further education but I’m saying that waiting for something to get to the point of being a shortage is daft. If you did need to cost courses based on need, I would say all courses that lead directly to employment should be of equal value, rather than those in short supply. Courses that are for personal fulfilment would be more difficult to justify. Well, obviously it won’t be ‘free’. I assume you mean that the Government should pay – as per Labour’s manifesto’s promise? I don’t want to lump all the right-wingers into the same basket, but it wasn’t that long ago on here that there was opposition to the idea of the Government paying for 5 year olds from poor areas to have breakfast at school. Not sure how that is consistent with then paying for absolutely everyone to go to University. Also, for those in favour of letting the ‘free market’ rule. Shouldn’t employers who recruit graduates be paying for tuition fees in courses where there are labour shortages?
Steven Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 16 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said: Also, for those in favour of letting the ‘free market’ rule. Shouldn’t employers who recruit graduates be paying for tuition fees in courses where there are labour shortages? Not while they can recruit someone from overseas. If/when that ends then I suspect the cleverer ones might.
Strokes Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 23 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said: Well, obviously it won’t be ‘free’. I assume you mean that the Government should pay – as per Labour’s manifesto’s promise? I don’t want to lump all the right-wingers into the same basket, but it wasn’t that long ago on here that there was opposition to the idea of the Government paying for 5 year olds from poor areas to have breakfast at school. Not sure how that is consistent with then paying for absolutely everyone to go to University. Also, for those in favour of letting the ‘free market’ rule. Shouldn’t employers who recruit graduates be paying for tuition fees in courses where there are labour shortages? If you can find inconsistencies in my views by all means pull them up. I’ve never once stated all labour policies or ideas are rubbish and the only issue I took with the breakfast was it replaced free school meals for under 7’s iirc. 1
Fox Ulike Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 11 minutes ago, Steven said: Not while they can recruit someone from overseas. If/when that ends then I suspect the cleverer ones might. Sounds like just another fallacy of Brexit. Free market principles should dictate that business gets access to the best candidates to fill these roles - regardless of whether they’re British or Foreign? Brexit will just create another unnecessary hurdle that they have to jump though – thereby harming British business. Mind you, when you think about it, should most right-wing free marketeers actually be Remainers if they are true to their principles?
Fox Ulike Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 1 minute ago, Strokes said: If you can find inconsistencies in my views by all means pull them up. I’ve never once stated all labour policies or ideas are rubbish and the only issue I took with the breakfast was it replaced free school meals for under 7’s iirc. Not at all Strokesy. As I said I didn't want to lump you all in the same basket. Ironically considering the strength of your views, you do seem to be the one right-wing representative on here whose views aren't clouded by dogma and right-wing propaganda. Fair play to you Sir! 2
Innovindil Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 2 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said: Sounds like just another fallacy of Brexit. Free market principles should dictate that business gets access to the best candidates to fill these roles - regardless of whether they’re British or Foreign? Brexit will just create another unnecessary hurdle that they have to jump though – thereby harming British business. Mind you, when you think about it, should most right-wing free marketeers actually be Remainers if they are true to their principles? No.
Fox Ulike Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 Just now, Innovindil said: No. ..... and that is because.........???
Innovindil Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 1 minute ago, Fox Ulike said: ..... and that is because.........??? The eu isn't a free market. Didn't think it needed explaining tbh. An example that's all the rage right now, if I want to buy cheaper chicken from America right now, I can not.
Carl the Llama Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 Not sure what the best thread for it is but I guess this one'll do: Yesterday at work I had an old guy offer me a Scottish tenner so naturally I couldn't resist declaring it legal tender which triggered him into going full blown Scotsman on me, responding with "oh aye it's legal tender alright" then going off on a rant about Brexit. Think I'll move to Scotland when I get to retirement age because spending time around their old folk seem much more fun than having openly racist discussions about brown doctors.
Izzy Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 8 minutes ago, Carl the Llama said: Not sure what the best thread for it is but I guess this one'll do: Yesterday at work I had an old guy offer me a Scottish tenner so naturally I couldn't resist declaring it legal tender which triggered him into going full blown Scotsman on me, responding with "oh aye it's legal tender alright" then going off on a rant about Brexit. Think I'll move to Scotland when I get to retirement age because spending time around their old folk seem much more fun than having openly racist discussions about brown doctors. I was with the family in Portsmouth doing the tour around the historic dockyard yesterday (brilliant btw). I tried to pay for lunch with a Scottish tenner and it was refused. I explained it was legal tender etc. but the lady on the till was having none of it. I couldn’t be arsed to argue so gave up. Then later we were at the amusements by the pier and I put the Scottish tenner in the change machine but it was rejected. I know Portsmouth is a long way from Scotland but I just can’t get rid of this fvckin thing!
Buce Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 Completely off topic but humour me. I have recently switched to a different browser (firefox) and occasionally when someone posts an image, I'm not seeing the image, rather a description of that image. For example, in the post by Fox Ulike, four up from this one, I assume you are all seeing an image of Debating for Dummies: what I am seeing is the words, 'Image result for debating for dummies' (my quotation marks). Can anyone offer an explanation for this?
Buce Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 3 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said: I was with the family in Portsmouth doing the tour around the historic dockyard yesterday (brilliant btw). I tried to pay for lunch with a Scottish tenner and it was refused. I explained it was legal tender etc. but the lady on the till was having none of it. I couldn’t be arsed to argue so gave up. Then later we were at the amusements by the pier and I put the Scottish tenner in the change machine but it was rejected. I know Portsmouth is a long way from Scotland but I just can’t get rid of this fvckin thing! Post it to me, mate. Sorted. 2
Jimothy Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 8 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said: I was with the family in Portsmouth doing the tour around the historic dockyard yesterday (brilliant btw). I tried to pay for lunch with a Scottish tenner and it was refused. I explained it was legal tender etc. but the lady on the till was having none of it. I couldn’t be arsed to argue so gave up. Then later we were at the amusements by the pier and I put the Scottish tenner in the change machine but it was rejected. I know Portsmouth is a long way from Scotland but I just can’t get rid of this fvckin thing! The cash counting machine at work won't accept them. It's annoying as I then have to swap them from my petty cash, and then when I give them out to employees as parking money, the ****ers find any way not to spend them! 1
Carl the Llama Posted 14 February 2018 Posted 14 February 2018 3 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said: I was with the family in Portsmouth doing the tour around the historic dockyard yesterday (brilliant btw). I tried to pay for lunch with a Scottish tenner and it was refused. I explained it was legal tender etc. but the lady on the till was having none of it. I couldn’t be arsed to argue so gave up. Then later we were at the amusements by the pier and I put the Scottish tenner in the change machine but it was rejected. I know Portsmouth is a long way from Scotland but I just can’t get rid of this fvckin thing! Tbf it's very suspicious seeing an Englishman with Scottish money. Akin to standing next to a playground without your kids. 1
Recommended Posts