Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
It flashed up on CNN that Biden has apparently told allies that he is intending to run in 2024
MRDA surely? Otherwise he'd become a lame duck overnight.
Google is no help in me trying to solve your acronym.
Mandy Rice-Davies applies, from an answer she gave in court during the Profumo Affair – he would say that, wouldn't he.
Fair enough - that's a pretty obscure ref if you ask me.
The point you're making is of course correct.
MRDA is often used on pb, like QTWAIN, AICMFP and, well, pb.
The Profumo Affair should be part of British folklore. A spy scandal with comic elements. A vengeful Establishment driving Ward to suicide. Walk-on parts for a slum landlord later to be notorious in his own right. The Home Secretary acting ultra vires. Two iconic moments: *that* photograph of Christine Keeler, and MRDA, which is where we came in, answering what may have been the most ill-considered question ever put in cross-examination. And the whole thing ruthlessly weaponised by Labour to end 13 years of Tory hegemony.
POBWAS is an adaptation of an acronym used on this site when Gordon used to embarrass himself on a regular basis
I'm not sure that's correct although I know PODWAS did evolve to certain circumstances.
I don't what AICMFP is though.
AICMFP = and I claim my five pounds. Newspapers used to run competitions where readers could win money by recognising a reporter at a seaside resort and approaching him with the words, "You are (Lobby Ludd) and I claim my five pounds." (This was a plot device at the start of Brighton Rock.)
It flashed up on CNN that Biden has apparently told allies that he is intending to run in 2024
MRDA surely? Otherwise he'd become a lame duck overnight.
Google is no help in me trying to solve your acronym.
Mandy Rice-Davies applies, from an answer she gave in court during the Profumo Affair – he would say that, wouldn't he.
Fair enough - that's a pretty obscure ref if you ask me.
The point you're making is of course correct.
MRDA is often used on pb, like QTWAIN, AICMFP and, well, pb.
The Profumo Affair should be part of British folklore. A spy scandal with comic elements. A vengeful Establishment driving Ward to suicide. Walk-on parts for a slum landlord later to be notorious in his own right. The Home Secretary acting ultra vires. Two iconic moments: *that* photograph of Christine Keeler, and MRDA, which is where we came in, answering what may have been the most ill-considered question ever put in cross-examination. And the whole thing ruthlessly weaponised by Labour to end 13 years of Tory hegemony.
POBWAS is an adaptation of an acronym used on this site when Gordon used to embarrass himself on a regular basis
I'm not sure that's correct although I know PODWAS did evolve to certain circumstances.
I don't what AICMFP is though.
AICMFP = and I claim my five pounds. Newspapers used to run competitions where readers could win money by recognising a reporter at a seaside resort and approaching him with the words, "You are (Lobby Ludd) and I claim my five pounds." (This was a plot device at the start of Brighton Rock.)
Nowadays, AICMFP is used satirically on pb.
Thus demonstrating that the median age of PB posters is 87.
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
It flashed up on CNN that Biden has apparently told allies that he is intending to run in 2024
MRDA surely? Otherwise he'd become a lame duck overnight.
Google is no help in me trying to solve your acronym.
Mandy Rice-Davies applies, from an answer she gave in court during the Profumo Affair – he would say that, wouldn't he.
Fair enough - that's a pretty obscure ref if you ask me.
The point you're making is of course correct.
MRDA is often used on pb, like QTWAIN, AICMFP and, well, pb.
The Profumo Affair should be part of British folklore. A spy scandal with comic elements. A vengeful Establishment driving Ward to suicide. Walk-on parts for a slum landlord later to be notorious in his own right. The Home Secretary acting ultra vires. Two iconic moments: *that* photograph of Christine Keeler, and MRDA, which is where we came in, answering what may have been the most ill-considered question ever put in cross-examination. And the whole thing ruthlessly weaponised by Labour to end 13 years of Tory hegemony.
POBWAS is an adaptation of an acronym used on this site when Gordon used to embarrass himself on a regular basis
I'm not sure that's correct although I know PODWAS did evolve to certain circumstances.
I don't what AICMFP is though.
AICMFP = and I claim my five pounds. Newspapers used to run competitions where readers could win money by recognising a reporter at a seaside resort and approaching him with the words, "You are (Lobby Ludd) and I claim my five pounds." (This was a plot device at the start of Brighton Rock.)
Nowadays, AICMFP is used satirically on pb.
Cool - thanks for helping. I knew the provinance of claiming 5 pounds.
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
Yeah, Cameron and Osborne screwed up! Boris cleaned up!
lolz aside, there's a line I've seen somewhere about where the 2015 election was won being these suburban seats in the midlands and inching north, and that people didn't spot the significance at the time.
May, while winning that most pyrrhic of victories, also got a lot of the seats won in 2019 close to the line to then be considered winnable.
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
Yeah, Cameron and Osborne screwed up! Boris cleaned up!
lolz aside, there's a line I've seen somewhere about where the 2015 election was won being these suburban seats in the midlands and inching north, and that people didn't spot the significance at the time.
May, while winning that most pyrrhic of victories, also got a lot of the seats won in 2019 close to the line to then be considered winnable.
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
Yeah, Cameron and Osborne screwed up! Boris cleaned up!
With the hindsight afforded by Brexit and Scotland, we can now see Cameron as an arrogant and incompetent campaigner who failed to win an outright majority against Brown against the backdrop of the GFC. (And 2015 came courtesy of the SNP.)
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
Yeah, Cameron and Osborne screwed up! Boris cleaned up!
lolz aside, there's a line I've seen somewhere about where the 2015 election was won being these suburban seats in the midlands and inching north, and that people didn't spot the significance at the time.
May, while winning that most pyrrhic of victories, also got a lot of the seats won in 2019 close to the line to then be considered winnable.
With all of the major challenges that business has faced with Covid and is facing still with Brexit, he decides the appropriate tone is make jokes about Peppa Pig.
As Starmer keeps saying, the joke isn't funny any more. I do think this is a good attack line to dismantle the "Boris is a lad isn't he" warm fuzzy bullshit
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
Yeah, Cameron and Osborne screwed up! Boris cleaned up!
With the hindsight afforded by Brexit and Scotland, we can now see Cameron as an arrogant and incompetent campaigner who failed to win an outright majority against Brown against the backdrop of the GFC. (And 2015 came courtesy of the SNP.)
It flashed up on CNN that Biden has apparently told allies that he is intending to run in 2024
MRDA surely? Otherwise he'd become a lame duck overnight.
Google is no help in me trying to solve your acronym.
Mandy Rice-Davies applies, from an answer she gave in court during the Profumo Affair – he would say that, wouldn't he.
Fair enough - that's a pretty obscure ref if you ask me.
The point you're making is of course correct.
MRDA is often used on pb, like QTWAIN, AICMFP and, well, pb.
The Profumo Affair should be part of British folklore. A spy scandal with comic elements. A vengeful Establishment driving Ward to suicide. Walk-on parts for a slum landlord later to be notorious in his own right. The Home Secretary acting ultra vires. Two iconic moments: *that* photograph of Christine Keeler, and MRDA, which is where we came in, answering what may have been the most ill-considered question ever put in cross-examination. And the whole thing ruthlessly weaponised by Labour to end 13 years of Tory hegemony.
POBWAS is an adaptation of an acronym used on this site when Gordon used to embarrass himself on a regular basis
I'm not sure that's correct although I know PODWAS did evolve to certain circumstances.
Its the kids. Boris strikes me as the kind of selfish but charismatic chancer who has always managed to dodge most paternal duties - I don’t mean simply ignoring bastard offspring but always having something more important to do just as the wife needs help with nappies
But this time he can’t dodge. Carrie looks pretty assertive. He’s in the public spotlight. He’s stuck at Number 10. All = a lack of sleep which is ageing him by a decade in a year
I think that's right. Having kids in your 50s isn't that smart because they so disrupt your life.
I am sure they can afford nannies.
One of my late grandfathers had a child in his 50s with a younger wife but again they could afford a nanny at that time. For most people though yes without major child support it can be a burden and even with a nanny you still have to support them through school and maybe university
It’s not the financial issues - tho they are a factor - it’s the physical and emotional demands of parenting. And these are now much greater on fathers than they were.
In Victorian times a rich father could get away with seeing the bairns for 10 minutes a day and maybe an hour at the weekend. Then you packed them off to boarding school at 7. Incredible, really. And cruel
Carrie won’t stand for that. She’s a modern mum. She will expect Boris to pitch in, or else. And it is showing.
Two of our last three Prime Ministers were packed off to boarding school at seven or eight, and probably nearly all the rest before Wilson. Pitt the Younger was home-schooled iirc from the ITV series.
I don't understand parents, esp a mother, who will happily post their children to faraway places when the kids are about 7. And not see them for months, or years
7? It's an adorable age. That's when kids are most fun - from about 6 to 10. Inquiring, amusing, eager, cute, unpredictable, yet still with that precious innocence.
15 or 17 is different, of course.
I am sure plenty of kids benefit from the bracing cruelty of boarding school at age 7. Makes you independent, blah blah
But I have friends who absolutely hated it, and who have blamed and despised their parents ever since
What is the point of having kids and packing them off to boarding school? If you want to have a relaxing time then don't have kids. You are right about the 6-10 age range. My eldest is coming up for 13 and the experience with her is totally different now!
My wife went to several boarding schools primarily because her father was often working in different jobs in Europe and it provided her some stability. There are some circumstances like that where they fulfil a need. In most cases though I feel it is for parents with lots of money so they can carry on living a life as if they didn't have kids for 2/3rds of the year.
I can understand how Boris is knackered. My kids are 12, 8 and 4 and I regularly get woken at 4.30am in the morning by the youngest, work during the day and at the end of the day act as a taxi service for kids activities. Often I don't get in from them until 9pm. I'm often in bed before the oldest one. At least I don't have to worry about being Prime Minister too!
Agreed. I can understand the colonial need for boarding schools, or people in the military etc. But the Empire has gone, and the army is down to 3 people with a rusty grenade
I am friends with one family of four brothers. All went off to boarding school at 7 or 8. Only one of them had a good relationship with his parents (who had no military or colonial excuse for sending the boys away, the Mum just loved horse-riding - I believe that was her actual excuse: "I need to time to ride my horses"). The two others were indifferent to their parents to the point of coldness (both went to live abroad). The fourth is sadly mad and violently loathed his folks (the parents are both dead now)
An extreme case, of course. But illustrative of how it can go wrong
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
But full employment means that half the young people no longer have to move out, as they have done for 2 generations. In Leigh, for example, there are young families moving in. Attracted by cheap housing and reasonable proximity to Manchester. Finding a lack of GP services and school places, mind.
How on earth, have we ended up with this fool as P.M
Ask yourself who the alternative was and who bears responsibility for that?
Jeremy Hunt, Conservative members. Next.
The alternative was Corbyn who Hunt, unlike Boris, would probably have not won a majority against as he would have had less appeal in the RedWall and the Brexit Party would have stood candidates in Tory held seats as they did not do with Boris, hence the Tories would have lost more seats to the LDs too
Corbyn wasn't on the ticket for the Conservative leadership. Boris became PM as a result of the leadership election.
The aim of which was to pick a leader to beat Corbyn and deliver Brexit.
Both of which Boris achieved
Super! He can leave now and be applauded as the stunning success he is, or something. I was only answering the question as posed though, and correctly. Still, if you're having second thoughts having backed him in the leadership election, that's good news for all of us I guess.
I voted for Boris in 2019 to beat Corbyn and deliver Brexit, not because I expected him to be a great administrator as PM.
Boris did what I voted for.
As for the next general election I have an open mind, if Labour starts to get a big poll lead and polls show Sunak beating Starmer then I would switch to Sunak no problem. For now I will give Boris the benefit of the doubt with polls about level
That’s not logical. If Boris has done what you wanted from him and you always knew he’s be crap actually trying to do the job, you should now be saying “job done, make way for someone better”.
Douglas Ross confirms to reporters he has never been to Peppa Pig World. But the Scottish Conservatives leader did spend Saturday afternoon watching The MacDougalls - an act he describes as “the new Singing Kettle”. https://twitter.com/Dennynews/status/1462778306621853697
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
Yeah, Cameron and Osborne screwed up! Boris cleaned up!
With the hindsight afforded by Brexit and Scotland, we can now see Cameron as an arrogant and incompetent campaigner who failed to win an outright majority against Brown against the backdrop of the GFC. (And 2015 came courtesy of the SNP.)
It was not at all obvious at the time because Cameron had the soft right on his side, and thereby much of the media.
The soft left, meanwhile, had got high on their own supply and assumed somehow that New Labour were electorally unassailable.
All of this masked Cameron’s essential underperformance.
How on earth, have we ended up with this fool as P.M
Ask yourself who the alternative was and who bears responsibility for that?
Jeremy Hunt, Conservative members. Next.
The alternative was Corbyn who Hunt, unlike Boris, would probably have not won a majority against as he would have had less appeal in the RedWall and the Brexit Party would have stood candidates in Tory held seats as they did not do with Boris, hence the Tories would have lost more seats to the LDs too
Corbyn wasn't on the ticket for the Conservative leadership. Boris became PM as a result of the leadership election.
The aim of which was to pick a leader to beat Corbyn and deliver Brexit.
Both of which Boris achieved
Super! He can leave now and be applauded as the stunning success he is, or something. I was only answering the question as posed though, and correctly. Still, if you're having second thoughts having backed him in the leadership election, that's good news for all of us I guess.
I voted for Boris in 2019 to beat Corbyn and deliver Brexit, not because I expected him to be a great administrator as PM.
Boris did what I voted for.
As for the next general election I have an open mind, if Labour starts to get a big poll lead and polls show Sunak beating Starmer then I would switch to Sunak no problem. For now I will give Boris the benefit of the doubt with polls about level
That is fair enough apart from the to deliver Brexit thing. Why did you want a politician to deliver a policy which you disagree with.
How on earth, have we ended up with this fool as P.M
Ask yourself who the alternative was and who bears responsibility for that?
Jeremy Hunt, Conservative members. Next.
The alternative was Corbyn who Hunt, unlike Boris, would probably have not won a majority against as he would have had less appeal in the RedWall and the Brexit Party would have stood candidates in Tory held seats as they did not do with Boris, hence the Tories would have lost more seats to the LDs too
Corbyn wasn't on the ticket for the Conservative leadership. Boris became PM as a result of the leadership election.
The aim of which was to pick a leader to beat Corbyn and deliver Brexit.
Both of which Boris achieved
Super! He can leave now and be applauded as the stunning success he is, or something. I was only answering the question as posed though, and correctly. Still, if you're having second thoughts having backed him in the leadership election, that's good news for all of us I guess.
I voted for Boris in 2019 to beat Corbyn and deliver Brexit, not because I expected him to be a great administrator as PM.
Boris did what I voted for.
As for the next general election I have an open mind, if Labour starts to get a big poll lead and polls show Sunak beating Starmer then I would switch to Sunak no problem. For now I will give Boris the benefit of the doubt with polls about level
The biggest swing from 2017 to 2019 was actually Labour to LD, not Labour to Conservative, those voters mainly went LD because of Corbyn and most of them have now returned back to Starmer Labour.
However most of the Labour to Conservative swing was for Boris and to deliver Brexit, especially in the RedWall and most of those voters still back Boris and the Tories
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
Yeah, Cameron and Osborne screwed up! Boris cleaned up!
lolz aside, there's a line I've seen somewhere about where the 2015 election was won being these suburban seats in the midlands and inching north, and that people didn't spot the significance at the time.
May, while winning that most pyrrhic of victories, also got a lot of the seats won in 2019 close to the line to then be considered winnable.
There was a swing to Labour in England in 2015
That there was a swing to Labour overall in England may explain why people didn't spot the significance of swings to the Conservatives in key places.
I don't think anyone that was/is going to vote Conservative would change their minds because Boris lost his place in his speech to the CBI?
Of course not. But it’s a visible and watchable exemplar, just as was Kinnock tripping on the beach. And the latter really was of no consequence, whereas expecting our National leader to be able to read a speech from a piece of paper is, you know, a core competence?
It flashed up on CNN that Biden has apparently told allies that he is intending to run in 2024
MRDA surely? Otherwise he'd become a lame duck overnight.
Google is no help in me trying to solve your acronym.
Mandy Rice-Davies applies, from an answer she gave in court during the Profumo Affair – he would say that, wouldn't he.
Fair enough - that's a pretty obscure ref if you ask me.
The point you're making is of course correct.
MRDA is often used on pb, like QTWAIN, AICMFP and, well, pb.
The Profumo Affair should be part of British folklore. A spy scandal with comic elements. A vengeful Establishment driving Ward to suicide. Walk-on parts for a slum landlord later to be notorious in his own right. The Home Secretary acting ultra vires. Two iconic moments: *that* photograph of Christine Keeler, and MRDA, which is where we came in, answering what may have been the most ill-considered question ever put in cross-examination. And the whole thing ruthlessly weaponised by Labour to end 13 years of Tory hegemony.
POBWAS is an adaptation of an acronym used on this site when Gordon used to embarrass himself on a regular basis
I'm not sure that's correct although I know PODWAS did evolve to certain circumstances.
How on earth, have we ended up with this fool as P.M
Ask yourself who the alternative was and who bears responsibility for that?
Jeremy Hunt, Conservative members. Next.
The alternative was Corbyn who Hunt, unlike Boris, would probably have not won a majority against as he would have had less appeal in the RedWall and the Brexit Party would have stood candidates in Tory held seats as they did not do with Boris, hence the Tories would have lost more seats to the LDs too
Corbyn wasn't on the ticket for the Conservative leadership. Boris became PM as a result of the leadership election.
The aim of which was to pick a leader to beat Corbyn and deliver Brexit.
Both of which Boris achieved
Super! He can leave now and be applauded as the stunning success he is, or something. I was only answering the question as posed though, and correctly. Still, if you're having second thoughts having backed him in the leadership election, that's good news for all of us I guess.
I voted for Boris in 2019 to beat Corbyn and deliver Brexit, not because I expected him to be a great administrator as PM.
Boris did what I voted for.
As for the next general election I have an open mind, if Labour starts to get a big poll lead and polls show Sunak beating Starmer then I would switch to Sunak no problem. For now I will give Boris the benefit of the doubt with polls about level
That is fair enough apart from the to deliver Brexit thing. Why did you want a politician to deliver a policy which you disagree with.
As I respected the 2016 referendum result
So what. You disagreed with the 2016 referendum result. Or are you saying that whoever wins an election will get your support.
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
But full employment means that half the young people no longer have to move out, as they have done for 2 generations. In Leigh, for example, there are young families moving in. Attracted by cheap housing and reasonable proximity to Manchester. Finding a lack of GP services and school places, mind.
The same sort of cheaper housing described in the article, right?
Leigh was the site of that artisan pizza place that the left excoriated for not being pro-Labour, iirc.
Here's the thing, if it's not REALLY obvious. The fact Leigh has such privately owned businesses is the sort of indicator of these underlying trends.
But, you know what, attack the small business owner on twitter. That's almost as good a campaigning tool as, oh, I dunno, posing for photos in john lewis and BURNERGATE.
I just watched the Peppa Pig speech expecting to see a total train wreck of a man on the brink, from all the excitable commentary. Seemed like classic Boris to me. If he’s on that sort of form, then the value surely has to be on his exit being +2024 even though it’s only an evens return.
Though I am not one to bet, the return structure is too much like financial options which is above my risk tolerance (except on the exceedingly rare occasion when you can have high certainty the house has priced it wildly wrong).
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
The biggest swing from 2017 to 2019 was actually Labour to LD, not Labour to Conservative, those voters mainly went LD because of Corbyn and most of them have now returned back to Starmer Labour.
However most of the Labour to Conservative swing was for Boris and to deliver Brexit, especially in the RedWall and most of those voters still back Boris and the Tories
I do agree with you on the point that Johnson reaches voters other Conservative Politicians can only dream of reaching. However are we at the tipping point where this is offset by traditional voters who are tiring of the joke?
Health minister tells Germans they will either have 'been vaccinated, recovered or died' from Covid by end of winter
I think an Oxford comma would have been useful in that headline.
Indeed.
Talking about Oxford, next summer I have to spend 3 nights in that city.
Can PBers recommend any good places and restaurants to visit in the area.
The prison has been converted into an hotel - it is at least very close to the railway station FWIW. I have never stayed there, in current or previous incarnation. So cannot rate either.
Last time I went to see my old friends we had lunch here - pre covid though so no comment on current state (and other places have higherr star markings, though it was a particularly good Sunday lunch that I recall).
As others have said, the Ashmolean, University Museum of Natural History and its adjacent Pitt-Rivers are great, the UMNH for its architecture; but don't omit the Bodleian and Radcliffe Camera if you have not been. Ashmolean Museum of [edit] Hiustory of Science is small but might appeal.
The pubs have changed a lot from my younger days seeing my friends (I liked the one which hard draught scrumpy and draught milk for the rowing teams in training). But it's worth taking a walk along the rivers - go down Cherwell at Magdalen/Botanic Gardens to Thames/Isis at the college boathouses them upstream in the canal/railway corridor to Port Meadow (pub on opposite side at Binsey: Perch it is called IIRC). Further north will take you to the Trout as HYUFD says.
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
But full employment means that half the young people no longer have to move out, as they have done for 2 generations. In Leigh, for example, there are young families moving in. Attracted by cheap housing and reasonable proximity to Manchester. Finding a lack of GP services and school places, mind.
The same sort of cheaper housing described in the article, right?
Leigh was the site of that artisan pizza place that the left excoriated for not being pro-Labour, iirc.
Here's the thing, if it's not REALLY obvious. The fact Leigh has such privately owned businesses is the sort of indicator of these underlying trends.
But, you know what, attack the small business owner on twitter. That's almost as good a campaigning tool as, oh, I dunno, posing for photos in john lewis and BURNERGATE.
You seem surprised Leigh has privately owned businesses. It always has had. No indication of owt much.
The biggest swing from 2017 to 2019 was actually Labour to LD, not Labour to Conservative, those voters mainly went LD because of Corbyn and most of them have now returned back to Starmer Labour.
However most of the Labour to Conservative swing was for Boris and to deliver Brexit, especially in the RedWall and most of those voters still back Boris and the Tories
I do agree with you on the point that Johnson reaches voters other Conservative Politicians can only dream of reaching. However are we at the tipping point where this is offset by traditional voters who are tiring of the joke?
Not at present, if Labour gets a 5%+ lead in most polls maybe.
Should be noted however more 2019 Conservative voters have gone ReformUK than to Starmer Labour or the LDs, certainly if you believe Yougov
Health minister tells Germans they will either have 'been vaccinated, recovered or died' from Covid by end of winter
I think an Oxford comma would have been useful in that headline.
Indeed.
Talking about Oxford, next summer I have to spend 3 nights in that city.
Can PBers recommend any good places and restaurants to visit in the area.
The prison has been converted into an hotel - it is at least very close to the railway station FWIW. I have never stayed there, in current or previous incarnation. So cannot rate either.
Last time I went to see my old friends we had lunch here - pre covid though so no comment on current state (and other places have higherr star markings, though it was a particularly good Sunday lunch that I recall).
As others have said, the Ashmolean, University Museum of Natural History and its adjacent Pitt-Rivers are great, the UMNH for its architecture; but don't omit the Bodleian and Radcliffe Camera if you have not been. Ashmolean Museum of [edit] Hiustory of Science is small but might appeal.
The pubs have changed a lot from my younger days seeing my friends (I liked the one which hard draught scrumpy and draught milk for the rowing teams in training). But it's worth taking a walk along the rivers - go down Cherwell at Magdalen/Botanic Gardens to Thames/Isis at the college boathouses them upstream in the canal/railway corridor to Port Meadow (pub on opposite side at Binsey: Perch it is called IIRC). Further north will take you to the Trout as HYUFD says.
An Inspector Morse-themed tour of Oxford is more TSE's mark, and staying at Raymond Blanc's gaff to justify his expense account.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Health minister tells Germans they will either have 'been vaccinated, recovered or died' from Covid by end of winter
I think an Oxford comma would have been useful in that headline.
Indeed.
Talking about Oxford, next summer I have to spend 3 nights in that city.
Can PBers recommend any good places and restaurants to visit in the area.
The prison has been converted into an hotel - it is at least very close to the railway station FWIW. I have never stayed there, in current or previous incarnation. So cannot rate either.
Last time I went to see my old friends we had lunch here - pre covid though so no comment on current state (and other places have higherr star markings, though it was a particularly good Sunday lunch that I recall).
As others have said, the Ashmolean, University Museum of Natural History and its adjacent Pitt-Rivers are great, the UMNH for its architecture; but don't omit the Bodleian and Radcliffe Camera if you have not been. Ashmolean Museum of [edit] Hiustory of Science is small but might appeal.
The pubs have changed a lot from my younger days seeing my friends (I liked the one which hard draught scrumpy and draught milk for the rowing teams in training). But it's worth taking a walk along the rivers - go down Cherwell at Magdalen/Botanic Gardens to Thames/Isis at the college boathouses them upstream in the canal/railway corridor to Port Meadow (pub on opposite side at Binsey: Perch it is called IIRC). Further north will take you to the Trout as HYUFD says.
An Inspector Morse-themed tour of Oxford is more TSE's mark, and staying at Raymond Blanc's gaff to justify his expense account.
That'd be difficult - the Morse films are full of wormholes (as they pass from one quad to another, they flip between colleges).
I went to a mixed sex boarding school in my late teens. Very much the sweet spot I reckon.
Yes, a lot of kids would probably LIKE boarding school by that age. Entirely different to 7
I reckon both mine would not be averse. They yearn to see new stuff
I wish I’d been sent to boarding school!
The golden age of boarding schools is past. Cold showers and fagging. Being thrashed till the blood ran down your legs and having your best friend die of pneumonia after a cross-country run. These days it's 24x7 woke – see the last thread or that Eton teacher sacked for saying chaps had balls or some such.
Also, there's the obvious point that seems to be missed about the Red Wall - in that, in terms of demographics, incomes etc, it should have turned Blue in 2010 or 2015 but these seats had held on longer than expected.
But full employment means that half the young people no longer have to move out, as they have done for 2 generations. In Leigh, for example, there are young families moving in. Attracted by cheap housing and reasonable proximity to Manchester. Finding a lack of GP services and school places, mind.
The same sort of cheaper housing described in the article, right?
Leigh was the site of that artisan pizza place that the left excoriated for not being pro-Labour, iirc.
Here's the thing, if it's not REALLY obvious. The fact Leigh has such privately owned businesses is the sort of indicator of these underlying trends.
But, you know what, attack the small business owner on twitter. That's almost as good a campaigning tool as, oh, I dunno, posing for photos in john lewis and BURNERGATE.
You seem surprised Leigh has privately owned businesses. It always has had. No indication of owt much.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
Why oh dear oh dear. It's the same with the N-word. If you ain't you can't; if you are you can. Logical? Perhaps not but this is where we are. Or to put it on a sounder theoretical basis, reclaim the term to detoxify it (cf Tottenham Hotspur).
The biggest swing from 2017 to 2019 was actually Labour to LD, not Labour to Conservative, those voters mainly went LD because of Corbyn and most of them have now returned back to Starmer Labour.
However most of the Labour to Conservative swing was for Boris and to deliver Brexit, especially in the RedWall and most of those voters still back Boris and the Tories
I do agree with you on the point that Johnson reaches voters other Conservative Politicians can only dream of reaching. However are we at the tipping point where this is offset by traditional voters who are tiring of the joke?
Not at present, if Labour gets a 5%+ lead in most polls maybe.
Should be noted however more 2019 Conservative voters have gone ReformUK than to Starmer Labour or the LDs, certainly if you believe Yougov
In a Tory/Labour seat a vote switching from Tory to Labour is +2 votes to Labour. A Tory voter voting Reform / not voting is still -1 vote for the Tories
Hartlepool is a prime example of the Tory party problem - If ReformUK take enough votes from the Tories, Labour wins the seat.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Health minister tells Germans they will either have 'been vaccinated, recovered or died' from Covid by end of winter
I think an Oxford comma would have been useful in that headline.
Indeed.
Talking about Oxford, next summer I have to spend 3 nights in that city.
Can PBers recommend any good places and restaurants to visit in the area.
I have a thing called an Oxford Alumni card (sexist and grammatical fail) which doesn't have a photo on it and I think gets you admission to some colleges or something. Blag one off an Oxford friend if you are interested in seeing the workings of a proper university.
Health minister tells Germans they will either have 'been vaccinated, recovered or died' from Covid by end of winter
I think an Oxford comma would have been useful in that headline.
Indeed.
Talking about Oxford, next summer I have to spend 3 nights in that city.
Can PBers recommend any good places and restaurants to visit in the area.
The prison has been converted into an hotel - it is at least very close to the railway station FWIW. I have never stayed there, in current or previous incarnation. So cannot rate either.
Last time I went to see my old friends we had lunch here - pre covid though so no comment on current state (and other places have higherr star markings, though it was a particularly good Sunday lunch that I recall).
As others have said, the Ashmolean, University Museum of Natural History and its adjacent Pitt-Rivers are great, the UMNH for its architecture; but don't omit the Bodleian and Radcliffe Camera if you have not been. Ashmolean Museum of [edit] Hiustory of Science is small but might appeal.
The pubs have changed a lot from my younger days seeing my friends (I liked the one which hard draught scrumpy and draught milk for the rowing teams in training). But it's worth taking a walk along the rivers - go down Cherwell at Magdalen/Botanic Gardens to Thames/Isis at the college boathouses them upstream in the canal/railway corridor to Port Meadow (pub on opposite side at Binsey: Perch it is called IIRC). Further north will take you to the Trout as HYUFD says.
I've stayed at the Oxford Malmaison before, very surreal to stay in a hotel that was a former prison.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
How much of the 2019 result was anti-Corby rather than pro-Johnson and how much is this being proven with the now level pegging in the polls?
It was pro-Brexit more than anything. Two years of joyously trying to get in the way of people's votes had their inevitable conclusion.
We're mid-term.
This is not what the polling that has been posted, shows
Corbyn had two GE's; one where he accepted Brexit and got 40% and a hung parliament, and another where he let Sir Keir talk him into a second referendum, and got 32% and gave the Tories a landslide
Ed and Gordon Brown both got less than Corbo's worst % at a GE
Health minister tells Germans they will either have 'been vaccinated, recovered or died' from Covid by end of winter
I think an Oxford comma would have been useful in that headline.
Indeed.
Talking about Oxford, next summer I have to spend 3 nights in that city.
Can PBers recommend any good places and restaurants to visit in the area.
I have a thing called an Oxford Alumni card (sexist and grammatical fail) which doesn't have a photo on it and I think gets you admission to some colleges or something. Blag one off an Oxford friend if you are interested in seeing the workings of a proper university.
I spent three years at a proper university.
The thing that worries me is if I step inside an Oxford college I'll be like a vampire exposed to sunlight.
Its the kids. Boris strikes me as the kind of selfish but charismatic chancer who has always managed to dodge most paternal duties - I don’t mean simply ignoring bastard offspring but always having something more important to do just as the wife needs help with nappies
But this time he can’t dodge. Carrie looks pretty assertive. He’s in the public spotlight. He’s stuck at Number 10. All = a lack of sleep which is ageing him by a decade in a year
I think that's right. Having kids in your 50s isn't that smart because they so disrupt your life.
I am sure they can afford nannies.
One of my late grandfathers had a child in his 50s with a younger wife but again they could afford a nanny at that time. For most people though yes without major child support it can be a burden and even with a nanny you still have to support them through school and maybe university
It’s not the financial issues - tho they are a factor - it’s the physical and emotional demands of parenting. And these are now much greater on fathers than they were.
In Victorian times a rich father could get away with seeing the bairns for 10 minutes a day and maybe an hour at the weekend. Then you packed them off to boarding school at 7. Incredible, really. And cruel
Carrie won’t stand for that. She’s a modern mum. She will expect Boris to pitch in, or else. And it is showing.
Two of our last three Prime Ministers were packed off to boarding school at seven or eight, and probably nearly all the rest before Wilson. Pitt the Younger was home-schooled iirc from the ITV series.
I don't understand parents, esp a mother, who will happily post their children to faraway places when the kids are about 7. And not see them for months, or years
7? It's an adorable age. That's when kids are most fun - from about 6 to 10. Inquiring, amusing, eager, cute, unpredictable, yet still with that precious innocence.
15 or 17 is different, of course.
I am sure plenty of kids benefit from the bracing cruelty of boarding school at age 7. Makes you independent, blah blah
But I have friends who absolutely hated it, and who have blamed and despised their parents ever since
What is the point of having kids and packing them off to boarding school? If you want to have a relaxing time then don't have kids. You are right about the 6-10 age range. My eldest is coming up for 13 and the experience with her is totally different now!
My wife went to several boarding schools primarily because her father was often working in different jobs in Europe and it provided her some stability. There are some circumstances like that where they fulfil a need. In most cases though I feel it is for parents with lots of money so they can carry on living a life as if they didn't have kids for 2/3rds of the year.
I can understand how Boris is knackered. My kids are 12, 8 and 4 and I regularly get woken at 4.30am in the morning by the youngest, work during the day and at the end of the day act as a taxi service for kids activities. Often I don't get in from them until 9pm. I'm often in bed before the oldest one. At least I don't have to worry about being Prime Minister too!
Agreed. I can understand the colonial need for boarding schools, or people in the military etc. But the Empire has gone, and the army is down to 3 people with a rusty grenade
I am friends with one family of four brothers. All went off to boarding school at 7 or 8. Only one of them had a good relationship with his parents (who had no military or colonial excuse for sending the boys away, the Mum just loved horse-riding - I believe that was her actual excuse: "I need to time to ride my horses"). The two others were indifferent to their parents to the point of coldness (both went to live abroad). The fourth is sadly mad and violently loathed his folks (the parents are both dead now)
An extreme case, of course. But illustrative of how it can go wrong
I am a fairly good approximation of brother 4 in that scenario. Except there wasn't enough money left for horses, so we had an expensive shit time at school while our parents had a penurious shit time at home. The voice which told them this was a sensible way of arranging things puts me in mind of the Milgram experiment.
I just watched the Peppa Pig speech expecting to see a total train wreck of a man on the brink, from all the excitable commentary. Seemed like classic Boris to me. If he’s on that sort of form, then the value surely has to be on his exit being +2024 even though it’s only an evens return.
Though I am not one to bet, the return structure is too much like financial options which is above my risk tolerance (except on the exceedingly rare occasion when you can have high certainty the house has priced it wildly wrong).
The messy bit was him losing his place. The rest of it was just Boris.
But - and its a big but - "just Boris" would have prompted "ah he's a lad" comments in the past from his excusers. Now its a pretty savage takedown. "He went to the CBI and talked about Peppa Pig snarl gnash".
The same Boris. Just that people have grown tired of the joke.
I boarded from aged 10 to 18, but it was a mixed school with mainly day pupils and a few boarders. I did it for a reason, to sing in the cathedral choir and it was a conscious choice made by me with my eyes reasonably open to what it meant. I enjoyed it. That said, I wouldn't send my own children without a very strong reason. It's an odd thing to do if there is no pressing reason to.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
The biggest swing from 2017 to 2019 was actually Labour to LD, not Labour to Conservative, those voters mainly went LD because of Corbyn and most of them have now returned back to Starmer Labour.
However most of the Labour to Conservative swing was for Boris and to deliver Brexit, especially in the RedWall and most of those voters still back Boris and the Tories
I do agree with you on the point that Johnson reaches voters other Conservative Politicians can only dream of reaching. However are we at the tipping point where this is offset by traditional voters who are tiring of the joke?
Not at present, if Labour gets a 5%+ lead in most polls maybe.
Should be noted however more 2019 Conservative voters have gone ReformUK than to Starmer Labour or the LDs, certainly if you believe Yougov
In a Tory/Labour seat a vote switching from Tory to Labour is +2 votes to Labour. A Tory voter voting Reform / not voting is still -1 vote for the Tories
Hartlepool is a prime example of the Tory party problem - If ReformUK take enough votes from the Tories, Labour wins the seat.
No matter how many times you demonstrate "I have three more beans" maths to HYUFD he just doesn't get it. To be fair a lot of Corbynites had the same problem - couldn't understand that an election is how you perform and how your opponent performs.
Jon Stone @joncstone · 40m Starmer on Boris Johnson saying ‘fuck business': "I can promise you that the only 'F words' I'll be using are ‘foreign investment’, 'fair trade', 'fiscal policy', and 'fiduciary duty'" Show this thread
Health minister tells Germans they will either have 'been vaccinated, recovered or died' from Covid by end of winter
I think an Oxford comma would have been useful in that headline.
Indeed.
Talking about Oxford, next summer I have to spend 3 nights in that city.
Can PBers recommend any good places and restaurants to visit in the area.
I have a thing called an Oxford Alumni card (sexist and grammatical fail) which doesn't have a photo on it and I think gets you admission to some colleges or something. Blag one off an Oxford friend if you are interested in seeing the workings of a proper university.
I spent three years at a proper university.
The thing that worries me is if I step inside an Oxford college I'll be like a vampire exposed to sunlight.
Ignorance and the light of education? Surely you mean Superman and kryptonite?
How on earth, have we ended up with this fool as P.M
Ask yourself who the alternative was and who bears responsibility for that?
Jeremy Hunt, Conservative members. Next.
The alternative was Corbyn who Hunt, unlike Boris, would probably have not won a majority against as he would have had less appeal in the RedWall and the Brexit Party would have stood candidates in Tory held seats as they did not do with Boris, hence the Tories would have lost more seats to the LDs too
Without a parallel universe you have no way of knowing. Hunt is a highly able man. You have no idea what sort of campaign he would have led. The outcome would no doubt have been different in detail, but the country was already terrified of Mr. Thicky and Hunt would have beaten him almost certainly. It was not a pro-Bozo election, more an anti-Corbyn one.
Exactly, Both Corbyn and Johnson, were/are a disaster for the U.K., surely time for this Clown to depart the stage
I blame the Queen.
It's her government and her loyal opposition.
After nearly seventy years on the job you might think she would be a bit better at it.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
In your experience. Which was my point. Nothing to do with any general truth or "common sense". Just your experience. And as you have accepted, you are hardly the picture of rational judgement to opine on anything.
I just watched the Peppa Pig speech expecting to see a total train wreck of a man on the brink, from all the excitable commentary. Seemed like classic Boris to me. If he’s on that sort of form, then the value surely has to be on his exit being +2024 even though it’s only an evens return.
Though I am not one to bet, the return structure is too much like financial options which is above my risk tolerance (except on the exceedingly rare occasion when you can have high certainty the house has priced it wildly wrong).
The messy bit was him losing his place. The rest of it was just Boris.
But - and its a big but - "just Boris" would have prompted "ah he's a lad" comments in the past from his excusers. Now its a pretty savage takedown. "He went to the CBI and talked about Peppa Pig snarl gnash".
The same Boris. Just that people have grown tired of the joke.
I wonder how the umbrella malfunction would play today.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Topping is perhaps one of those who thrived ? I loathed the experience.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Topping is perhaps one of those who thrived ? I loathed the experience.
As I said from the outset I make no judgement, just that there are alternative views. And experiences.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Topping is perhaps one of those who thrived ? I loathed the experience.
Another boarder!
It would be interesting to see results of a demographic survey of PB readers and posters.
Health minister tells Germans they will either have 'been vaccinated, recovered or died' from Covid by end of winter
I think an Oxford comma would have been useful in that headline.
Indeed.
Talking about Oxford, next summer I have to spend 3 nights in that city.
Can PBers recommend any good places and restaurants to visit in the area.
The prison has been converted into an hotel - it is at least very close to the railway station FWIW. I have never stayed there, in current or previous incarnation. So cannot rate either.
Last time I went to see my old friends we had lunch here - pre covid though so no comment on current state (and other places have higherr star markings, though it was a particularly good Sunday lunch that I recall).
As others have said, the Ashmolean, University Museum of Natural History and its adjacent Pitt-Rivers are great, the UMNH for its architecture; but don't omit the Bodleian and Radcliffe Camera if you have not been. Ashmolean Museum of [edit] Hiustory of Science is small but might appeal.
The pubs have changed a lot from my younger days seeing my friends (I liked the one which hard draught scrumpy and draught milk for the rowing teams in training). But it's worth taking a walk along the rivers - go down Cherwell at Magdalen/Botanic Gardens to Thames/Isis at the college boathouses them upstream in the canal/railway corridor to Port Meadow (pub on opposite side at Binsey: Perch it is called IIRC). Further north will take you to the Trout as HYUFD says.
I've stayed at the Oxford Malmaison before, very surreal to stay in a hotel that was a former prison.
But better than being in a prison that was a former hotel.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Topping is perhaps one of those who thrived ? I loathed the experience.
As I said from the outset I make no judgement, just that there are alternative views. And experiences.
I am not judging you. You clearly thrived, as Nigel says. Good for you
However as this is a betting website, I would wager that 80%+ of humanity agrees with me, not you: don't send your kids away at the age of 7, to live with other people, unless there is some overwhelming need
Health minister tells Germans they will either have 'been vaccinated, recovered or died' from Covid by end of winter
I think an Oxford comma would have been useful in that headline.
Indeed.
Talking about Oxford, next summer I have to spend 3 nights in that city.
Can PBers recommend any good places and restaurants to visit in the area.
Two One Five, and Pompette, both in Summertown, have good word of mouth. But I haven't been to Oxford in a while so I can't vouch personally. If you could go to both and report back
The Cherwell Boathouse (mostly) deserves it’s good reputation. Plus you get a decent view of the river.
Gees is OK. Used to do a decent pudding night, don’t know if they still do.
Plenty of decent pubs: The Trout trades on its Morse related reputation too much IMO, although it’s a nice walk up Port Meadow to get there - the Perch used to have the better food of the two pubs on Port Meadow frankly.
Places wise, Oxford has some excellent museums, but the Pitt Rivers is the stand-out experience you won’t find anywhere else - it’s an anthropological museum organised by theme rather than origin. The best of high-minded British colonialism. (Insert obvious political commentary here.)
Jon Stone @joncstone · 40m Starmer on Boris Johnson saying ‘fuck business': "I can promise you that the only 'F words' I'll be using are ‘foreign investment’, 'fair trade', 'fiscal policy', and 'fiduciary duty'" Show this thread
He didn't say that did he? Four words that don't begin with F!
Its the kids. Boris strikes me as the kind of selfish but charismatic chancer who has always managed to dodge most paternal duties - I don’t mean simply ignoring bastard offspring but always having something more important to do just as the wife needs help with nappies
But this time he can’t dodge. Carrie looks pretty assertive. He’s in the public spotlight. He’s stuck at Number 10. All = a lack of sleep which is ageing him by a decade in a year
I think that's right. Having kids in your 50s isn't that smart because they so disrupt your life.
I am sure they can afford nannies.
One of my late grandfathers had a child in his 50s with a younger wife but again they could afford a nanny at that time. For most people though yes without major child support it can be a burden and even with a nanny you still have to support them through school and maybe university
It’s not the financial issues - tho they are a factor - it’s the physical and emotional demands of parenting. And these are now much greater on fathers than they were.
In Victorian times a rich father could get away with seeing the bairns for 10 minutes a day and maybe an hour at the weekend. Then you packed them off to boarding school at 7. Incredible, really. And cruel
Carrie won’t stand for that. She’s a modern mum. She will expect Boris to pitch in, or else. And it is showing.
Two of our last three Prime Ministers were packed off to boarding school at seven or eight, and probably nearly all the rest before Wilson. Pitt the Younger was home-schooled iirc from the ITV series.
I don't understand parents, esp a mother, who will happily post their children to faraway places when the kids are about 7. And not see them for months, or years
7? It's an adorable age. That's when kids are most fun - from about 6 to 10. Inquiring, amusing, eager, cute, unpredictable, yet still with that precious innocence.
15 or 17 is different, of course.
I am sure plenty of kids benefit from the bracing cruelty of boarding school at age 7. Makes you independent, blah blah
But I have friends who absolutely hated it, and who have blamed and despised their parents ever since
Divorce is never easy, but I was lucky in some respects with mine, as the child stayed with me from five until ten-and-a-half, and I do think they are by far the most rewarding years.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Topping is perhaps one of those who thrived ? I loathed the experience.
As I said from the outset I make no judgement, just that there are alternative views. And experiences.
I am not judging you. You clearly thrived, as Nigel says. Good for you
However as this is a betting website, I would wager that 80%+ of humanity agrees with me, not you: don't send your kids away at the age of 7, to live with other people, unless there is some overwhelming need
Everyone’s experiences are different.
My school had a small boarding contingent and, personally, at the end of every school day I envied that they got to stay in school while I had to go home.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Topping is perhaps one of those who thrived ? I loathed the experience.
As I said from the outset I make no judgement, just that there are alternative views. And experiences.
I am not judging you. You clearly thrived, as Nigel says. Good for you
However as this is a betting website, I would wager that 80%+ of humanity agrees with me, not you: don't send your kids away at the age of 7, to live with other people, unless there is some overwhelming need
80% of humanity. That's a high bar. Let me know the terms of the bet and the evidence required.
Its the kids. Boris strikes me as the kind of selfish but charismatic chancer who has always managed to dodge most paternal duties - I don’t mean simply ignoring bastard offspring but always having something more important to do just as the wife needs help with nappies
But this time he can’t dodge. Carrie looks pretty assertive. He’s in the public spotlight. He’s stuck at Number 10. All = a lack of sleep which is ageing him by a decade in a year
I think that's right. Having kids in your 50s isn't that smart because they so disrupt your life.
I am sure they can afford nannies.
One of my late grandfathers had a child in his 50s with a younger wife but again they could afford a nanny at that time. For most people though yes without major child support it can be a burden and even with a nanny you still have to support them through school and maybe university
It’s not the financial issues - tho they are a factor - it’s the physical and emotional demands of parenting. And these are now much greater on fathers than they were.
In Victorian times a rich father could get away with seeing the bairns for 10 minutes a day and maybe an hour at the weekend. Then you packed them off to boarding school at 7. Incredible, really. And cruel
Carrie won’t stand for that. She’s a modern mum. She will expect Boris to pitch in, or else. And it is showing.
Two of our last three Prime Ministers were packed off to boarding school at seven or eight, and probably nearly all the rest before Wilson. Pitt the Younger was home-schooled iirc from the ITV series.
I don't understand parents, esp a mother, who will happily post their children to faraway places when the kids are about 7. And not see them for months, or years
7? It's an adorable age. That's when kids are most fun - from about 6 to 10. Inquiring, amusing, eager, cute, unpredictable, yet still with that precious innocence.
15 or 17 is different, of course.
I am sure plenty of kids benefit from the bracing cruelty of boarding school at age 7. Makes you independent, blah blah
But I have friends who absolutely hated it, and who have blamed and despised their parents ever since
What is the point of having kids and packing them off to boarding school? If you want to have a relaxing time then don't have kids. You are right about the 6-10 age range. My eldest is coming up for 13 and the experience with her is totally different now!
My wife went to several boarding schools primarily because her father was often working in different jobs in Europe and it provided her some stability. There are some circumstances like that where they fulfil a need. In most cases though I feel it is for parents with lots of money so they can carry on living a life as if they didn't have kids for 2/3rds of the year.
I can understand how Boris is knackered. My kids are 12, 8 and 4 and I regularly get woken at 4.30am in the morning by the youngest, work during the day and at the end of the day act as a taxi service for kids activities. Often I don't get in from them until 9pm. I'm often in bed before the oldest one. At least I don't have to worry about being Prime Minister too!
Agreed. Our children bring us so much happiness, even if they're hard work at times. The idea of sending them away is just mind-boggling to me. Boarding school for primary school aged children seems pretty close to child abuse or neglect. For older children it may be okay but it's sad for the parents to miss out on such an interesting time in their children's lives. And I think taking the children out of the family relationship perhaps harms their ability to form healthy stable relationships themselves later in life (see eg the PM).
Health minister tells Germans they will either have 'been vaccinated, recovered or died' from Covid by end of winter
I think an Oxford comma would have been useful in that headline.
Indeed.
Talking about Oxford, next summer I have to spend 3 nights in that city.
Can PBers recommend any good places and restaurants to visit in the area.
Two One Five, and Pompette, both in Summertown, have good word of mouth. But I haven't been to Oxford in a while so I can't vouch personally. If you could go to both and report back
The Cherwell Boathouse (mostly) deserves it’s good reputation. Plus you get a decent view of the river.
Gees is OK. Used to do a decent pudding night, don’t know if they still do.
Plenty of decent pubs: The Trout trades on its Morse related reputation too much IMO, although it’s a nice walk up Port Meadow to get there - the Perch used to have the better food of the two pubs on Port Meadow frankly.
Places wise, Oxford has some excellent museums, but the Pitt Rivers is the stand-out experience you won’t find anywhere else - it’s an anthropological museum organised by theme rather than origin. The best of high-minded British colonialism. (Insert obvious political commentary here.)
If visiting the latter, make sure you go into the annexe at the back, which is where the most interesting stuff resides.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Topping is perhaps one of those who thrived ? I loathed the experience.
As I said from the outset I make no judgement, just that there are alternative views. And experiences.
I am not judging you. You clearly thrived, as Nigel says. Good for you
However as this is a betting website, I would wager that 80%+ of humanity agrees with me, not you: don't send your kids away at the age of 7, to live with other people, unless there is some overwhelming need
80% of humanity. That's a high bar. Let me know the terms of the bet and the evidence required.
I think I'm touching on some personal issues here, and I genuinely have no desire to do that. It's too early in the day!
I just watched the Peppa Pig speech expecting to see a total train wreck of a man on the brink, from all the excitable commentary. Seemed like classic Boris to me. If he’s on that sort of form, then the value surely has to be on his exit being +2024 even though it’s only an evens return.
Though I am not one to bet, the return structure is too much like financial options which is above my risk tolerance (except on the exceedingly rare occasion when you can have high certainty the house has priced it wildly wrong).
The messy bit was him losing his place. The rest of it was just Boris.
But - and its a big but - "just Boris" would have prompted "ah he's a lad" comments in the past from his excusers. Now its a pretty savage takedown. "He went to the CBI and talked about Peppa Pig snarl gnash".
The same Boris. Just that people have grown tired of the joke.
Yes, that really is the problem. Nothing matters until it matters, and then it really matters. JRM, who The Economist described as a "gargoyle" last week, is another one. It doesn´t matter that his off shore clients paid him £8 million, it doesn´t matter that he annoys most of his fellow MPs and put on a gnarly display which totally dropped Patterson in the clarts. Then suddenly all of it does matter and its all over. The fact that Johnson stays loyal to his clique is a cost to him and to the Tories and it doesn´t matter, then suddenly it does matter and all the City rumours about JRM are repeated and we say that it was obvious that he was vulnerable from the start. The weaknesses of this government are obvious to all who look. The question is when those weaknesses are seen as just too egregious for the party to continue in office. I think we have not reached the tipping point quite yet, but a couple of awful by elections will not help. As HYFUD will tell you, the Tories are on course for comfrortable holds... but they are two of the safest seats in the country. From what I am hearing, they are both a lot less safe now.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Yes, FWIW I didn't go to school (even a day school) till 7 though we had a similar-aged lad and a tutor for a couple of years. My father went to boarding schools and loathed them, my mother was Russian and hence into the Family Together thing, so it was obvious for them. I gained academically but I did lack socialising skills at first.
I don't think one can generalise - if the home is happy but not possessive and the kid has outside experiences too, then all kinds of models work OK. Boarding schools do seem strange to me, though.
I couldn't find any mention of the Boris gaffe on the Beeb website, at least not yet. Perhaps Nadine has "had a word".
They do sometimes take their time to report new news though.
I think they did report the speech on an earlier bulletin on the radio but it was just an excerpt of whatever green guff BJ had decided to insert today, no gaffes mentioned.
The biggest swing from 2017 to 2019 was actually Labour to LD, not Labour to Conservative, those voters mainly went LD because of Corbyn and most of them have now returned back to Starmer Labour.
However most of the Labour to Conservative swing was for Boris and to deliver Brexit, especially in the RedWall and most of those voters still back Boris and the Tories
I do agree with you on the point that Johnson reaches voters other Conservative Politicians can only dream of reaching. However are we at the tipping point where this is offset by traditional voters who are tiring of the joke?
Not at present, if Labour gets a 5%+ lead in most polls maybe.
Should be noted however more 2019 Conservative voters have gone ReformUK than to Starmer Labour or the LDs, certainly if you believe Yougov
In a Tory/Labour seat a vote switching from Tory to Labour is +2 votes to Labour. A Tory voter voting Reform / not voting is still -1 vote for the Tories
Hartlepool is a prime example of the Tory party problem - If ReformUK take enough votes from the Tories, Labour wins the seat.
No matter how many times you demonstrate "I have three more beans" maths to HYUFD he just doesn't get it. To be fair a lot of Corbynites had the same problem - couldn't understand that an election is how you perform and how your opponent performs.
Boris is more likely to win back those 2019 Tory voters lost to RefUK than any other Tory alternative leader was the point
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Especially when you consider that you're likely sending your children away to be raped at some point, if you send them to boarding school.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Topping is perhaps one of those who thrived ? I loathed the experience.
As I said from the outset I make no judgement, just that there are alternative views. And experiences.
I am not judging you. You clearly thrived, as Nigel says. Good for you
However as this is a betting website, I would wager that 80%+ of humanity agrees with me, not you: don't send your kids away at the age of 7, to live with other people, unless there is some overwhelming need
Everyone’s experiences are different.
My school had a small boarding contingent and, personally, at the end of every school day I envied that they got to stay in school while I had to go home.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Topping is perhaps one of those who thrived ? I loathed the experience.
As I said from the outset I make no judgement, just that there are alternative views. And experiences.
I am not judging you. You clearly thrived, as Nigel says. Good for you
However as this is a betting website, I would wager that 80%+ of humanity agrees with me, not you: don't send your kids away at the age of 7, to live with other people, unless there is some overwhelming need
At least three of the staff subsequently did 5-10 stretches for sex crimes, which probably isn't quite so much of a thing today.
Its the kids. Boris strikes me as the kind of selfish but charismatic chancer who has always managed to dodge most paternal duties - I don’t mean simply ignoring bastard offspring but always having something more important to do just as the wife needs help with nappies
But this time he can’t dodge. Carrie looks pretty assertive. He’s in the public spotlight. He’s stuck at Number 10. All = a lack of sleep which is ageing him by a decade in a year
I think that's right. Having kids in your 50s isn't that smart because they so disrupt your life.
I am sure they can afford nannies.
One of my late grandfathers had a child in his 50s with a younger wife but again they could afford a nanny at that time. For most people though yes without major child support it can be a burden and even with a nanny you still have to support them through school and maybe university
It’s not the financial issues - tho they are a factor - it’s the physical and emotional demands of parenting. And these are now much greater on fathers than they were.
In Victorian times a rich father could get away with seeing the bairns for 10 minutes a day and maybe an hour at the weekend. Then you packed them off to boarding school at 7. Incredible, really. And cruel
Carrie won’t stand for that. She’s a modern mum. She will expect Boris to pitch in, or else. And it is showing.
Two of our last three Prime Ministers were packed off to boarding school at seven or eight, and probably nearly all the rest before Wilson. Pitt the Younger was home-schooled iirc from the ITV series.
I don't understand parents, esp a mother, who will happily post their children to faraway places when the kids are about 7. And not see them for months, or years
7? It's an adorable age. That's when kids are most fun - from about 6 to 10. Inquiring, amusing, eager, cute, unpredictable, yet still with that precious innocence.
15 or 17 is different, of course.
I am sure plenty of kids benefit from the bracing cruelty of boarding school at age 7. Makes you independent, blah blah
But I have friends who absolutely hated it, and who have blamed and despised their parents ever since
What is the point of having kids and packing them off to boarding school? If you want to have a relaxing time then don't have kids. You are right about the 6-10 age range. My eldest is coming up for 13 and the experience with her is totally different now!
My wife went to several boarding schools primarily because her father was often working in different jobs in Europe and it provided her some stability. There are some circumstances like that where they fulfil a need. In most cases though I feel it is for parents with lots of money so they can carry on living a life as if they didn't have kids for 2/3rds of the year.
I can understand how Boris is knackered. My kids are 12, 8 and 4 and I regularly get woken at 4.30am in the morning by the youngest, work during the day and at the end of the day act as a taxi service for kids activities. Often I don't get in from them until 9pm. I'm often in bed before the oldest one. At least I don't have to worry about being Prime Minister too!
Agreed. Our children bring us so much happiness, even if they're hard work at times. The idea of sending them away is just mind-boggling to me. Boarding school for primary school aged children seems pretty close to child abuse or neglect. For older children it may be okay but it's sad for the parents to miss out on such an interesting time in their children's lives. And I think taking the children out of the family relationship perhaps harms their ability to form healthy stable relationships themselves later in life (see eg the PM).
As I said you are looking at this mainly from the parents' perspective, not the child's.
"...bring us so much happiness..." "...sad for the parents..."
You aren't sending them away for ever there are plenty of exeats and so forth and holidays for family relationships. And in the meantime they are learning self-sufficiency and making lifelong friendships and are with their friends all the time.
Health minister tells Germans they will either have 'been vaccinated, recovered or died' from Covid by end of winter
I think an Oxford comma would have been useful in that headline.
Indeed.
Talking about Oxford, next summer I have to spend 3 nights in that city.
Can PBers recommend any good places and restaurants to visit in the area.
The prison has been converted into an hotel - it is at least very close to the railway station FWIW. I have never stayed there, in current or previous incarnation. So cannot rate either.
Last time I went to see my old friends we had lunch here - pre covid though so no comment on current state (and other places have higherr star markings, though it was a particularly good Sunday lunch that I recall).
As others have said, the Ashmolean, University Museum of Natural History and its adjacent Pitt-Rivers are great, the UMNH for its architecture; but don't omit the Bodleian and Radcliffe Camera if you have not been. Ashmolean Museum of [edit] Hiustory of Science is small but might appeal.
The pubs have changed a lot from my younger days seeing my friends (I liked the one which hard draught scrumpy and draught milk for the rowing teams in training). But it's worth taking a walk along the rivers - go down Cherwell at Magdalen/Botanic Gardens to Thames/Isis at the college boathouses them upstream in the canal/railway corridor to Port Meadow (pub on opposite side at Binsey: Perch it is called IIRC). Further north will take you to the Trout as HYUFD says.
I've stayed at the Oxford Malmaison before, very surreal to stay in a hotel that was a former prison.
Trust me it's not as strange as the Four Seasons in Istanbul which was the Sultanahmet Jail..
Why oh dear oh dear. It's the same with the N-word. If you ain't you can't; if you are you can. Logical? Perhaps not but this is where we are. Or to put it on a sounder theoretical basis, reclaim the term to detoxify it (cf Tottenham Hotspur).
Spurs' reclaiming of the term in question has done nothing to detoxify it; if anything the reverse. I thought you were currently a fan of David Baddiel's works? He has been very vocal about the confusion that arises on this exact point, that if a word is considered taboo then no-one should use it, even in a pseudo-positive sense, and if they do it becomes much harder to explain to the general population why they shouldn't.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Topping is perhaps one of those who thrived ? I loathed the experience.
As I said from the outset I make no judgement, just that there are alternative views. And experiences.
I am not judging you. You clearly thrived, as Nigel says. Good for you
However as this is a betting website, I would wager that 80%+ of humanity agrees with me, not you: don't send your kids away at the age of 7, to live with other people, unless there is some overwhelming need
At least three of the staff subsequently did 5-10 stretches for sex crimes, which probably isn't quite so much of a thing today.
Ampleforth?
I’m glad I was a good Muslim boy in my youth, thus ruling out that place.
Boarding school can be the making of some people, can be horrible for some people, and all shades in between. Just like any school experience.
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
That's like saying cold showers can be good for small children, or Spartan babycare (expose them on mountains!), or constant flogging makes boys disciplined
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
Damaged. Taking hallucinogenic drugs, getting sent to jail, going on benders and blacking out from time to time in the course of a rich and varied career flint knapping damaged you mean.
When did I ever say I was UNdamaged? lol
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
Why is it not selfish to force your children to be with you the whole time instead of allowing them to become independent away from you for part of the year.
At the age of..... seven??
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Topping is perhaps one of those who thrived ? I loathed the experience.
As I said from the outset I make no judgement, just that there are alternative views. And experiences.
I am not judging you. You clearly thrived, as Nigel says. Good for you
However as this is a betting website, I would wager that 80%+ of humanity agrees with me, not you: don't send your kids away at the age of 7, to live with other people, unless there is some overwhelming need
80% of humanity. That's a high bar. Let me know the terms of the bet and the evidence required.
I think I'm touching on some personal issues here, and I genuinely have no desire to do that. It's too early in the day!
I must attend to my flints. Later
LOL so no wager then. That's a shame what with PB being a betting site an' all.
Comments
Those underlying trends aren't going to go away.
(see https://www.economist.com/britain/2021/03/31/the-truth-behind-the-tories-northern-strongholds)
Nowadays, AICMFP is used satirically on pb.
May, while winning that most pyrrhic of victories, also got a lot of the seats won in 2019 close to the line to then be considered winnable.
As Starmer keeps saying, the joke isn't funny any more. I do think this is a good attack line to dismantle the "Boris is a lad isn't he" warm fuzzy bullshit
I am friends with one family of four brothers. All went off to boarding school at 7 or 8. Only one of them had a good relationship with his parents (who had no military or colonial excuse for sending the boys away, the Mum just loved horse-riding - I believe that was her actual excuse: "I need to time to ride my horses"). The two others were indifferent to their parents to the point of coldness (both went to live abroad). The fourth is sadly mad and violently loathed his folks (the parents are both dead now)
An extreme case, of course. But illustrative of how it can go wrong
In Leigh, for example, there are young families moving in. Attracted by cheap housing and reasonable proximity to Manchester.
Finding a lack of GP services and school places, mind.
https://twitter.com/Dennynews/status/1462778306621853697
If you know, you know...
The soft left, meanwhile, had got high on their own supply and assumed somehow that New Labour were electorally unassailable.
All of this masked Cameron’s essential underperformance.
As I respected the 2016 referendum result
Very much the sweet spot I reckon.
However most of the Labour to Conservative swing was for Boris and to deliver Brexit, especially in the RedWall and most of those voters still back Boris and the Tories
I mean, that is really obvious, right?
I reckon both mine would not be averse. They yearn to see new stuff
Certainly saw some new stuff for sure.
Leigh was the site of that artisan pizza place that the left excoriated for not being pro-Labour, iirc.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/pizzeria-owner-who-voted-tory-sliced-up-by-the-left-in-social-media-pile-on-trv0xmrxd
There.
Here's the thing, if it's not REALLY obvious. The fact Leigh has such privately owned businesses is the sort of indicator of these underlying trends.
But, you know what, attack the small business owner on twitter. That's almost as good a campaigning tool as, oh, I dunno, posing for photos in john lewis and BURNERGATE.
Though I am not one to bet, the return structure is too much like financial options which is above my risk tolerance (except on the exceedingly rare occasion when you can have high certainty the house has priced it wildly wrong).
The corollary of saying how selfish it is for parents to send their children away to boarding school is to say how selfish it is for parents to stunt their children's growth by having them around as playthings rather than letting them develop on their own.
I make no comment on the benefit or disadvantages of boarding schools just that it is not all oh how Victorian.
Last time I went to see my old friends we had lunch here - pre covid though so no comment on current state (and other places have higherr star markings, though it was a particularly good Sunday lunch that I recall).
https://www.geesrestaurant.co.uk/food-and-drink/
As others have said, the Ashmolean, University Museum of Natural History and its adjacent Pitt-Rivers are great, the UMNH for its architecture; but don't omit the Bodleian and Radcliffe Camera if you have not been. Ashmolean Museum of [edit] Hiustory of Science is small but might appeal.
The pubs have changed a lot from my younger days seeing my friends (I liked the one which hard draught scrumpy and draught milk for the rowing teams in training). But it's worth taking a walk along the rivers - go down Cherwell at Magdalen/Botanic Gardens to Thames/Isis at the college boathouses them upstream in the canal/railway corridor to Port Meadow (pub on opposite side at Binsey: Perch it is called IIRC). Further north will take you to the Trout as HYUFD says.
Should be noted however more 2019 Conservative voters have gone ReformUK than to Starmer Labour or the LDs, certainly if you believe Yougov
Well, yes. But common sense says kids at the age of 7 should not be separated from their parents for months on end, especially the mothers. Some will thrive, most will survive, a large minority will be damaged
As they reach their teens it is different, as we have all agreed
A Tory voter voting Reform / not voting is still -1 vote for the Tories
Hartlepool is a prime example of the Tory party problem - If ReformUK take enough votes from the Tories, Labour wins the seat.
I'm a fricking basket case (who has has an enormous amount of fun). That doesn't mean I can't see bad, selfish parenting. Boarding school at 7 is it, with some exceptions
My dad got sent to boarding school in Cape Town when he was 6! From his stories of the conditions he might as well have been on Robben Island.
Ed and Gordon Brown both got less than Corbo's worst % at a GE
The thing that worries me is if I step inside an Oxford college I'll be like a vampire exposed to sunlight.
But - and its a big but - "just Boris" would have prompted "ah he's a lad" comments in the past from his excusers. Now its a pretty savage takedown. "He went to the CBI and talked about Peppa Pig snarl gnash".
The same Boris. Just that people have grown tired of the joke.
Children of 7 like being with Mum and Dad. In my experience. That's not "forcing" kids to stay home the whole time - they still go to school. This is just letting kids be their normal selves. Most kids want Mum and warmth and safety at the end of the day. They're 7, FFS
I guess we are simply of totally different mindsets and I find yours utterly incomprehensible, so there isn't much room for debate, and we may as well desist
Jon Stone
@joncstone
· 40m
Starmer on Boris Johnson saying ‘fuck business': "I can promise you that the only 'F words' I'll be using are ‘foreign investment’, 'fair trade', 'fiscal policy', and 'fiduciary duty'"
Show this thread
It's her government and her loyal opposition.
After nearly seventy years on the job you might think she would be a bit better at it.
They do sometimes take their time to report new news though.
I loathed the experience.
It would be interesting to see results of a demographic survey of PB readers and posters.
https://twitter.com/ITVNewsPolitics/status/1462765158925746178
It began this process by leaving the free-trade single market that Thatcher championed - the largest of its kind. ~AA
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/anne-marie-trevelyan-delivers-speech-on-free-trade-at-centre-for-policy-studies
I am not judging you. You clearly thrived, as Nigel says. Good for you
However as this is a betting website, I would wager that 80%+ of humanity agrees with me, not you: don't send your kids away at the age of 7, to live with other people, unless there is some overwhelming need
Gees is OK. Used to do a decent pudding night, don’t know if they still do.
Plenty of decent pubs: The Trout trades on its Morse related reputation too much IMO, although it’s a nice walk up Port Meadow to get there - the Perch used to have the better food of the two pubs on Port Meadow frankly.
Places wise, Oxford has some excellent museums, but the Pitt Rivers is the stand-out experience you won’t find anywhere else - it’s an anthropological museum organised by theme rather than origin. The best of high-minded British colonialism. (Insert obvious political commentary here.)
There is no cellphone coverage on any of the wards
My school had a small boarding contingent and, personally, at the end of every school day I envied that they got to stay in school while I had to go home.
I must attend to my flints. Later
I don't think one can generalise - if the home is happy but not possessive and the kid has outside experiences too, then all kinds of models work OK. Boarding schools do seem strange to me, though.
"...bring us so much happiness..." "...sad for the parents..."
You aren't sending them away for ever there are plenty of exeats and so forth and holidays for family relationships. And in the meantime they are learning self-sufficiency and making lifelong friendships and are with their friends all the time.
I’m glad I was a good Muslim boy in my youth, thus ruling out that place.
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1462780410556043278?s=20