Best Of

Its important to point out, without resorting to insults, that my generation (i’m 30 in a few months) have been told our whole lives that the route we must take was GCSEs - ALevels - Degree - Job. We did what we were told and now we’re met with “you went to Uni? What a stupid move you entitled lazy so and so.”

And now we’ll potentially have to repay our loans for another 10 years of compounded interest?

I’m personally (although I may be in a minority amongst my peers) do not oppose the loan system, but that was under the proviso that the understanding was not messed with at the whim of the prevailing wind.

An additional graduate tax for 40 years is a very different proposition to one for 30 years. A repayment threshold at 21k is a very different proposition to one at 26k.

It would be unconscionable, in my view, to apply these material changes retrospectively. If they are done prospectively then the next generation will need to weigh more carefully whether a degree is really worth it.

We have a moral duty as a society to give them proper information to make that choice. So, for example, every theatre study or film study course should be obliged to state the percentage of their graduates who are making a living in these areas 5 years after graduation. They should also be obliged to confirm the average earnings of their graduates 5 and 10 years out, with government assistance if necessary. This should apply to every subject of course.

We also need to develop alternatives such as apprenticeships. If young people still want to have the time of their lives at Uni (as I did) and think its worth the price good luck to them. But it needs to be an informed choice. I think that this would have 2 useful effects. Firstly, some would be usefully diverted. Secondly, those who went would be a lot more insistent on getting their monies' worth.

But isn't that exactly what is rumoured?

It will apply to those who have already graduated, it is why Martin Lewis is up in arms about it

It is and it would be wrong.

I am very happy to have a discussion about funding higher education but I do think very strongly all changes should apply going forwards.

So if they want to change the system from say a year from now then I would not be in favour but they could justify it but how can you change a system which the people going into were doing so on good faith? This is how you destroy faith in the system

But this gang of Tories have done everything possible to destroy our faith in all parts of the system. From elections to justice to the competence and honesty of the authorities.

Its important to point out, without resorting to insults, that my generation (i’m 30 in a few months) have been told our whole lives that the route we must take was GCSEs - ALevels - Degree - Job. We did what we were told and now we’re met with “you went to Uni? What a stupid move you entitled lazy so and so.”

And now we’ll potentially have to repay our loans for another 10 years of compounded interest?

I’m personally (although I may be in a minority amongst my peers) do not oppose the loan system, but that was under the proviso that the understanding was not messed with at the whim of the prevailing wind.

An additional graduate tax for 40 years is a very different proposition to one for 30 years. A repayment threshold at 21k is a very different proposition to one at 26k.

There are no genuine moderates in politics any more on either side of the atlantic, it is a losing strategy and has been since 2016. I think that this is one of the problems with Keir Starmer; he lacks any radical vision.

Biden is a moderate, Trudeau is a moderate, Macron is a moderate, Merkel was and Scholz is a moderate, indeed most elected western leaders at the moment are moderates. Even Boris was a moderate compared to Corbyn

I don't actually see it like that at all. They all have a radical edge. Looking at Trudeau for instance, he is a radical on cultural issues. So is Biden, he is sleepwalking in to a radical woke abyss, even if he doesn't realise it. Macron based his political career on setting out a radical third way, although his record is perhaps less so. Merkel is the last of the moderates, I would say; but she is on the way out.

And Boris - can't believe you are saying that. He has just presided over the radical changes to the UK; hard Brexit , changes to state intervention in the economy unthinkable until now.


Whata radical offerings is Starmer offering exactly?

Isn't that the point of Starmer? At time of writing, anyway. He's offering steady, unflashy competence, with a basis of fairness and equality.
That, of course isn't 'sexy' in political terms.

How has he demonstrated "competence" in his time in Parliament?

Was it the way he organised for a People's Vote only to end up voting for Boris's even harder deal?

Was it the way he couldn't spot any antisemitism in the Labour Party until the EHRC reported? Standing with Corbyn until the election not his discriminated against colleagues?

You know what he meant. Anyway I don't think people have much interest in competence any more, it's all about the Vision Thing.

Both the Fat Lying Sack of Jizz and Nippy run governments that have the facade of patriotism pride and hope, but beneath that are cess pools of corruption and incompetence. And people lap it up, willing to look past the chaos and destruction of their own interests whilst cheering them on.

As I always say, you get what you vote for and you always get the correct result. People want shit government.

There are no genuine moderates in politics any more on either side of the atlantic, it is a losing strategy and has been since 2016. I think that this is one of the problems with Keir Starmer; he lacks any radical vision.

Biden is a moderate, Trudeau is a moderate, Macron is a moderate, Merkel was and Scholz is a moderate, indeed most elected western leaders at the moment are moderates. Even Boris was a moderate compared to Corbyn

Johnson WAS a moderate, but he sold his soul to the extremist elements of his party exclusively to become Prime Minister.

Johnson WAS a moderate when moderation was popular, when the wind changed, so did he. As someone said up thread, Johnson is an extreme Johnsonite, nothing more, nothing less.

FPT:

Leon: "I think it is understandable fear and even paranoia. Because of recent history. The lockdowns got increasingly worse even as they kept saying ‘this will never happen again’

I know a lot of people - eg me - who were properly fucked up by lockdown 3. Psychologically. There are others like me on here

We’re scared. Because we have been here before and the optimists were wrong"


Some of us said last March/April that we were more scared of the politicians and public's reaction than the virus itself. That feeling is re-surfacing again isn't it. I'm hoping Javid holds ground - I have more faith in him than I did Hancock.

"Save the NHS" they said at the start - does the NHS need saving now?

If so, after the stunning success and wide take-up of the vaccines, we are in big trouble. Facts don't seem to matter. It is scary. If the national religion says it's in trouble then it is. Rather than the NHS serving us I'm afraid I'm coming round to the view that it has way too much power and we are serving it.