re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The point in the article is a good one but nothing about young people and their problems will be any use without a few uncomfortable principles including:
1) As a group and individually they have choices, have no choice but to choose, and take responsibility for the outcome
2) Older people don't require younger people to live on damaging social media or fail to vote
3) It isn't possible or desirable for older people to try to live younger people's lives for them, or to solve the dilemmas of being young
4) The problems of democracy (as many younger people have yet to discover) are not solved by having less of it
I've perhaps not been listening to/watching the BBC as much over the last few days for reasons not mysterious, but can anyone say if there have been any even mildly republican POV expressed? The state broadcaster is forever platforming a motley crew of climate sceptics, EUrophobes, 'genuine concerns about immigration' types and so on in the interests of 'balance', but has this gone out the window?
Truss’s intention to tour the nations was spectacularly ill-judged.
Even my San Francisco-resident Ghanaian friend (ex-London) messaged me to tell me it was a disgrace.
I have a new insight into the minds of tory voters now that we have a semi permanent octogenarian house guest. She voted Remain but loves Johnson but doesn't like Truss because "she has doughy little face".
No wonder the tory party have driven themselves congenitally insane trying to work out what the fuck old people want and then trying to give it to them.
My contact with the septuagenarian world has told me recently: (1) Boris is great (2) Boris should quit (3) Boris shouldn't have quit (3) Liz Truss is great and (4) King Charles is great.
PS Liz Truss is great because she reminds her of Thatcher.
That's a given, doesn't need mentioning really.
I've not long turned sixty and it isn't working yet. Maybe it takes time and one doesn't become a rabid Conservative over night. I'll let you know when it happens.
Is there any news for today? Is Russia still collapsing or has the liberation movement stabilised a bit for now?
Russian MOD conflict maps suggest they are pulling out of the Kharkiv oblast entirely. They’ve left so much kit behind that the Ukranians don’t know what to do with it all.
Ukraine is going to have the pause, consolidate & regroup for now I suspect, otherwise they’ll be completely overextended & vulnerable to a counter-attack. Some of their troops have probably been going for 72 hours straight.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
There are now many more mixed-mode jobs , requiring both intellectual and physical skills. In addition the pay and social class issues against such jobs have greatly changed.
Truss’s intention to tour the nations was spectacularly ill-judged.
Even my San Francisco-resident Ghanaian friend (ex-London) messaged me to tell me it was a disgrace.
I have a new insight into the minds of tory voters now that we have a semi permanent octogenarian house guest. She voted Remain but loves Johnson but doesn't like Truss because "she has doughy little face".
No wonder the tory party have driven themselves congenitally insane trying to work out what the fuck old people want and then trying to give it to them.
My contact with the septuagenarian world has told me recently: (1) Boris is great (2) Boris should quit (3) Boris shouldn't have quit (3) Liz Truss is great and (4) King Charles is great.
The poor contact seems to be struggling to count too
Typo of the day. It seems like Russia would be a lot better off not doing any invasions, and just making $$$ exporting natural resources and importing advanced manufactured gods. https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1568918993188036609
I remember how assured one user here was that Starmer was in fact guilty of the curry incident, oddly we've not heard from him about it recently
I’m pretty sure that the ‘curry’ incident bent the rules a bit, but the police were never going to end Starmer career over it. In hindsight he played a blinder with his ‘I’ll resign’ statement.
It was sold on here by one poster in particular as a million times worse than poor old Boris getting "ambushed by cake" and that Starmer was a hypocrite.
It was at a different time and under different circumstances than Johnson's wrongdoings. Starmer's incident was at a time when we were mainly back at work eating lunch with colleagues. One could argue Starmer was unprofessional drinking alcohol whilst at work, but that wasn't the accusation.
Anyway it matters not a jot as Starmer, for good or ill, is still in post, whilst Johnson is now merely a footnote in history.
David Patrikarakos @dpatrikarakos · 1h There is chatter on #Ukraine 🇺🇦 channels that I stress is unconfirmed: 1. #Russia 🇷🇺 units in Kherson began negotiations to surrender. 2. Fighting has broken out RU & Kadyrov units in the area.
As job of Chechens is largely to terrorise RU into fighting on these could be linked.
The point in the article is a good one but nothing about young people and their problems will be any use without a few uncomfortable principles including:
1) As a group and individually they have choices, have no choice but to choose, and take responsibility for the outcome
2) Older people don't require younger people to live on damaging social media or fail to vote
3) It isn't possible or desirable for older people to try to live younger people's lives for them, or to solve the dilemmas of being young
4) The problems of democracy (as many younger people have yet to discover) are not solved by having less of it
5) Power is never gifted, it is always taken
6) Self interest is universal.
Several of those are just random soundbites not principles. Lots of people don't vote in self interest but national interest. Power is often gifted not taken. Democracy is optimised by having checks and balances on it, limiting it, not by making it all powerful. Of course it is desirable for older people to help solve the dilemnas of being young.
Typo of the day. It seems like Russia would be a lot better off not doing any invasions, and just making $$$ exporting natural resources and importing advanced manufactured gods. https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1568918993188036609
The young like to be seen as rebels. Fortunately, common sense often prevails. In October 1962, Che Guevara and Fidel Castro were very popular despite demanding (true rebels always demand things) that Krushcev start World War Three in defence of Cuba,
There were enough more mature voices around to ensure there were more more generations to follow them.
Truss’s intention to tour the nations was spectacularly ill-judged.
Even my San Francisco-resident Ghanaian friend (ex-London) messaged me to tell me it was a disgrace.
I have a new insight into the minds of tory voters now that we have a semi permanent octogenarian house guest. She voted Remain but loves Johnson but doesn't like Truss because "she has doughy little face".
No wonder the tory party have driven themselves congenitally insane trying to work out what the fuck old people want and then trying to give it to them.
My contact with the septuagenarian world has told me recently: (1) Boris is great (2) Boris should quit (3) Boris shouldn't have quit (3) Liz Truss is great and (4) King Charles is great.
PS Liz Truss is great because she reminds her of Thatcher.
That's a given, doesn't need mentioning really.
I've not long turned sixty and it isn't working yet. Maybe it takes time and one doesn't become a rabid Conservative over night. I'll let you know when it happens.
Maybe when you get to the state pension age?
I'll be working and thus flying the red flag 'til I drop. One can't live a champagne socialist lifestyle on pensions alone.
Panicked Russian soldiers are abandoning their tanks, weapons and even clothes as they "literally run from their positions" in the face of a shock Ukrainian offensive, soldiers have told The Telegraph.
A Ukrainian intelligence unit on the front line said the Russian chain of command was broken and soldiers were fleeing without putting up a fight, many of them changing into civilian clothes to avoid detection.
David Patrikarakos @dpatrikarakos · 1h There is chatter on #Ukraine 🇺🇦 channels that I stress is unconfirmed: 1. #Russia 🇷🇺 units in Kherson began negotiations to surrender. 2. Fighting has broken out RU & Kadyrov units in the area.
As job of Chechens is largely to terrorise RU into fighting on these could be linked.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
There is a partial truth in this, though it is not true in WWC culture that there is any aversion at all to leaving school at 16 and developing classic WWC skills.
Then deeper point is this: suppose young people have been 'sold a lie'. If so this is by universities (some in name only) who have a vested interest in doing so - they automatically want to keep the Dept of Verbiage Studies going as a job creation scheme for tenth rate academics. Of course.
By 18 and adulthood there is this thing that everyone has to have learned: Not everything people say is true. Your elders are ignorant, venal and self interested. Do Your Own Research.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
There are now many more mixed-mode jobs , requiring both intellectual and physical skills. In addition the pay and social class issues against such jobs have greatly changed.
Yes, also that a lot of university degrees are pointless. I don't want to say they're Mickey Mouse degrees. Clearly the likes of English Literature or Ancient Greek are (presumably) intellectually demanding. But I'm not sure we as a nation are benefitting from having people spend three years studying subjects which don't lead anywhere. And many subjects which do lead somewhere should be able to do so in rather less than three years. This isn't a new point. ISTR Bill Bryson making a similar ppint back in the 80s. But we seem to be gratuitous in our inefficiency in higher education.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
I often hear this claim that young people were "sold a lie" of university making you rich. Is there any evidence of it? I can't find anything beyond "there is a pay premium to a degree", which was and continues to be true. I don't believe anyone was told the type of degree didn't matter or that you didn't also have to work hard once you had a degree.
I would also disagree that there is a "natural" number of high paying jobs. Whatever pay level you set, there are more jobs above that level and fewer below that level than in 1997, even accounting for inflation. If you compare two countries, the one with higher education levels will almost always have more high paying jobs. Lots of Western countries have chosen Poland as a place for higher skilled back office functions off the back of the number of good graduates vs other Eastern European countries.
David Patrikarakos @dpatrikarakos · 1h There is chatter on #Ukraine 🇺🇦 channels that I stress is unconfirmed: 1. #Russia 🇷🇺 units in Kherson began negotiations to surrender. 2. Fighting has broken out RU & Kadyrov units in the area.
As job of Chechens is largely to terrorise RU into fighting on these could be linked.
If you are a Russian commander in Kherson, you have seen your forces get very, very isolated in just 48 hours. You aren't going to be taking more territory, you have already diminished and fast dwindling resources to try and hold what you have. You aren't going to fight your way out through to Crimea - the bridges are down and the temporary pontoons sunk. Even if you get there, what next? The Kerch Bridge gets whacked by HIMARS - and all you have done is move the siege a hundred kilometres further from Kyiv.
Surrender looks to be about your only option. Just as the Ukrainian military planners have crafted. But at least history will remember you are someone who saved tens of thousands of lives rather than fighting a lost cause.
Is there any news for today? Is Russia still collapsing or has the liberation movement stabilised a bit for now?
Russian MOD conflict maps suggest they are pulling out of the Kharkiv oblast entirely. They’ve left so much kit behind that the Ukranians don’t know what to do with it all.
Ukraine is going to have the pause, consolidate & regroup for now I suspect, otherwise they’ll be completely overextended & vulnerable to a counter-attack. Some of their troops have probably been going for 72 hours straight.
Typo of the day. It seems like Russia would be a lot better off not doing any invasions, and just making $$$ exporting natural resources and importing advanced manufactured gods. https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1568918993188036609
I watched the NZ Accession ceremony earlier and was suddenly struck by the fact that it is essentially unprecedented.
The last accession in 1952 took place when NZ was barely independent and fully identified as part of a family of *British* nations, with the UK (and the Queen) at its head of the family.
NZ just isn’t that country anymore and the risk for monarchists is that they look irrelevant and at worst imperialist if they pretend otherwise.
If the monarchy wants NZ to avoid becoming a republic, it needs to find a way to renew its relevance. It can’t be a just a bunch of eccentric British aristocrats.
It would need to become - as some have hinted above - a conscious guarantor of NZ’s democracy and constitution - embodied in the Treaty of Waitangi, the founding “partnership” between Crown and Māori.
Charles needs to start practicing his Māori.
I presume similar dynamics are at play in Canada and even Australia.
Most New Zealanders want to keep the monarchy and the Governor General is Maori. In Canada the Governor General is now Inuk and both PM Trudeau and Leader of the Opposition Poilievre wish to keep the monarchy
Typo of the day. It seems like Russia would be a lot better off not doing any invasions, and just making $$$ exporting natural resources and importing advanced manufactured gods. https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1568918993188036609
Seems like a plan.
Services are increasingly replacing gods.
You need skills for services and Putin has chased most skilled young people out of the country.
I've perhaps not been listening to/watching the BBC as much over the last few days for reasons not mysterious, but can anyone say if there have been any even mildly republican POV expressed? The state broadcaster is forever platforming a motley crew of climate sceptics, EUrophobes, 'genuine concerns about immigration' types and so on in the interests of 'balance', but has this gone out the window?
I've not seen any republicans being called on - whether the BBC higher ups have decided this might be in poor taste before the late Queen has even been buried, I don't know - but there has been some discussion of republican sentiment in the realms. The decision of the Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda to offer a referendum on becoming a republic has been mentioned.
David Patrikarakos @dpatrikarakos · 1h There is chatter on #Ukraine 🇺🇦 channels that I stress is unconfirmed: 1. #Russia 🇷🇺 units in Kherson began negotiations to surrender. 2. Fighting has broken out RU & Kadyrov units in the area.
As job of Chechens is largely to terrorise RU into fighting on these could be linked.
I'm sure someone speculated earlier in the war the Chechens were mostly to hang back as threat to anyone thinking of deserting, but that may have simply been wishful thinking.
I've perhaps not been listening to/watching the BBC as much over the last few days for reasons not mysterious, but can anyone say if there have been any even mildly republican POV expressed? The state broadcaster is forever platforming a motley crew of climate sceptics, EUrophobes, 'genuine concerns about immigration' types and so on in the interests of 'balance', but has this gone out the window?
There's a shock and awe element designed into the system: New King is, and is proclaimed as, King immediately, funeral is not for 2 weeks. That's 2 weeks after the power grab during which it would be in really bad taste to question it. I gather for non royal titles (and I got this from a Simon Raven novel, not from inner reserves of poshness) it works differently, it is bad taste to address a new Duke as Duke until after the old Duke is buried.
Impressively audible booing on the Beeb coverage of the proclamation in Edinburgh.
Typo of the day. It seems like Russia would be a lot better off not doing any invasions, and just making $$$ exporting natural resources and importing advanced manufactured gods. https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1568918993188036609
David Patrikarakos @dpatrikarakos · 1h There is chatter on #Ukraine 🇺🇦 channels that I stress is unconfirmed: 1. #Russia 🇷🇺 units in Kherson began negotiations to surrender. 2. Fighting has broken out RU & Kadyrov units in the area.
As job of Chechens is largely to terrorise RU into fighting on these could be linked.
A constant theme of Russian warfare seems to be Russian PBIs being terrorised into engaging the enemy, often on pretty hopeless terms, by brutality from their own side. It is rather refreshing to hear of this backfiring for once. Hopefully the Chechens will get a good kicking.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
I often hear this claim that young people were "sold a lie" of university making you rich. Is there any evidence of it? I can't find anything beyond "there is a pay premium to a degree", which was and continues to be true. I don't believe anyone was told the type of degree didn't matter or that you didn't also have to work hard once you had a degree.
I would also disagree that there is a "natural" number of high paying jobs. Whatever pay level you set, there are more jobs above that level and fewer below that level than in 1997, even accounting for inflation. If you compare two countries, the one with higher education levels will almost always have more high paying jobs. Lots of Western countries have chosen Poland as a place for higher skilled back office functions off the back of the number of good graduates vs other Eastern European countries.
Not really.
The problem isn’t the degrees - tons of them are including modules on Business etc to make them (partially) worldly.
When I used to help at a volunteer communal workshop - it was full of frustrated young people in dead end, low paid desk jobs, who frantically wanted to Make Stuff.
Being a sparky would have double the wages for many of them.
The point in the article is a good one but nothing about young people and their problems will be any use without a few uncomfortable principles including:
1) As a group and individually they have choices, have no choice but to choose, and take responsibility for the outcome
2) Older people don't require younger people to live on damaging social media or fail to vote
3) It isn't possible or desirable for older people to try to live younger people's lives for them, or to solve the dilemmas of being young
4) The problems of democracy (as many younger people have yet to discover) are not solved by having less of it
5) Power is never gifted, it is always taken
6) Self interest is universal.
Several of those are just random soundbites not principles. Lots of people don't vote in self interest but national interest. Power is often gifted not taken. Democracy is optimised by having checks and balances on it, limiting it, not by making it all powerful. Of course it is desirable for older people to help solve the dilemnas of being young.
All very good points. Thanks. Yes, I should soften one or two of the absolutes. But I think we are on similar lines.
As to random soundbites, where would PB be without them?
I remember how assured one user here was that Starmer was in fact guilty of the curry incident, oddly we've not heard from him about it recently
I’m pretty sure that the ‘curry’ incident bent the rules a bit, but the police were never going to end Starmer career over it. In hindsight he played a blinder with his ‘I’ll resign’ statement.
It was sold on here by one poster in particular as a million times worse than poor old Boris getting "ambushed by cake" and that Starmer was a hypocrite.
It was at a different time and under different circumstances than Johnson's wrongdoings. Starmer's incident was at a time when we were mainly back at work eating lunch with colleagues. One could argue Starmer was unprofessional drinking alcohol whilst at work, but that wasn't the accusation.
Anyway it matters not a jot as Starmer, for good or ill, is still in post, whilst Johnson is now merely a footnote in history.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
There are now many more mixed-mode jobs , requiring both intellectual and physical skills. In addition the pay and social class issues against such jobs have greatly changed.
As someone actually in that generation, university isn't seen by young people as some kind of pathway to easy money, it's pretty much a basic requirement for most jobs beyond stacking shelves or delivering takeaways. If you want to be a police officer, teacher, civil servant, accountant, whatever, you need a degree. If you don't have a degree, you'll be at a disadvantage when applying for work compared to the 50% of your cohort who do.
Typo of the day. It seems like Russia would be a lot better off not doing any invasions, and just making $$$ exporting natural resources and importing advanced manufactured gods. https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1568918993188036609
Seems like a plan.
Manufacturing gods - whose in that trade these days? The Red Sea Pedestrians last had a go 2k years back….
I think the debate about Jamaica, NZ, Canada, and others becoming republics or not is a dead duck wrt the Commonwealth. There may be debates within each county, however we already know what the answer is: countries are able to do whatever they like.
Prince Charles in his speech to the last Commonwealth Heads of Govts meeting in Rwanda last year:
The Commonwealth contains within it countries that have had constitutional relationships with my Family, some that continue to do so, and increasingly those that have had none. I want to say clearly, as I have said before, that each member’s Constitutional arrangement, as Republic or Monarchy, is purely a matter for each member country to decide. The benefit of long life brings me the experience that arrangements such as these can change, calmly and without rancour.
The social contract - that you can get ahead via hard work - has broken down.
Also, the world is burning, and the Young expect to inherit the ashes.
It really is no surprise they are authoritian-curious.
The party breakdown is interesting in the cross tabs for support of an authoritarian leader:
I simply find that breakdown ridiculously implausible.
Brexit and Green votes look plausible, but what's going on with the Lib Dem column there? Though there's always been a chunk of None Of The Above about Lib Dem votes...
David Patrikarakos @dpatrikarakos · 1h There is chatter on #Ukraine 🇺🇦 channels that I stress is unconfirmed: 1. #Russia 🇷🇺 units in Kherson began negotiations to surrender. 2. Fighting has broken out RU & Kadyrov units in the area.
As job of Chechens is largely to terrorise RU into fighting on these could be linked.
I'm sure someone speculated earlier in the war the Chechens were mostly to hang back as threat to anyone thinking of deserting, but that may have simply been wishful thinking.
Quite likely. Soviets pretty much have the patent on barrier troops and if there was ever an army that sounded like it needed them...
Sean_F said: "I'm unconvinced that life is worse for young people than in the sixties, seventies, or eighties.
If you don't vote, there's not much point complaining that things are not to your liking."
In the US, life is worse for young people now than it was in the fifties, sixties, seventies, and eighties -- in some ways. And better in other ways.
The most important way it is worse here is the breakdown of families. A young person is far less to have had two parents in their lives while growing up, than a young person would have in the fifties, and even most of the sixties. And if there is a simple way to cure that breakdown by voting, I don't know what it is. (Choosing leaders who set good examples probably helps, a little.)
There are many ways it is better, most of them due to technological advances. For example, young people's teeth are much better now, thanks to widespread fluoridation. (Interestingly, Portland, Oregon does not fluoridate its water, so that is one place where, in principle, voting could easily make a difference.)
I love the idea that you since university education is some sort of lie of guaranteed advancement, we should simply cut university education.
Fucking bonkers.
Even if it were true (whispers: It isn't. Not really.), it would inevitably come across as "Examples of older people pulling up the ladder behind them and chopping it up for firewood, part 94".
Anyway there is a very basic reason why young people are disillusioned, it's because Thatcher's model of a capitalist property-owning democracy doesn't apply to them.
Young people can't accumulate capital because they're paying 30-40% of their income in rent. Young people can't buy property because housebuilding hasn't kept up with demand. Young people have voted the "wrong" way in every election or referendum since 2010 and were overruled by the elderly who won't have to live with the long term consequences of those decisions.
Incorporate young people into the capitalist property-owning democratic model by resolving these problems.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
I often hear this claim that young people were "sold a lie" of university making you rich. Is there any evidence of it? I can't find anything beyond "there is a pay premium to a degree", which was and continues to be true. I don't believe anyone was told the type of degree didn't matter or that you didn't also have to work hard once you had a degree.
I would also disagree that there is a "natural" number of high paying jobs. Whatever pay level you set, there are more jobs above that level and fewer below that level than in 1997, even accounting for inflation. If you compare two countries, the one with higher education levels will almost always have more high paying jobs. Lots of Western countries have chosen Poland as a place for higher skilled back office functions off the back of the number of good graduates vs other Eastern European countries.
In a techy, services led economy there will be more white collar jobs.
Rates of tertiary education here are comparable with our competitors, South Korea being substantially higher still. I don't think Britons are more stupid or less capable than our competitors.
There is a problem of poor quality courses, but that iss not the fault of the students, or the need for a highly skilled workforce, but of the universities themselves.
I remember how assured one user here was that Starmer was in fact guilty of the curry incident, oddly we've not heard from him about it recently
I’m pretty sure that the ‘curry’ incident bent the rules a bit, but the police were never going to end Starmer career over it. In hindsight he played a blinder with his ‘I’ll resign’ statement.
It was sold on here by one poster in particular as a million times worse than poor old Boris getting "ambushed by cake" and that Starmer was a hypocrite.
It was at a different time and under different circumstances than Johnson's wrongdoings. Starmer's incident was at a time when we were mainly back at work eating lunch with colleagues. One could argue Starmer was unprofessional drinking alcohol whilst at work, but that wasn't the accusation.
Anyway it matters not a jot as Starmer, for good or ill, is still in post, whilst Johnson is now merely a footnote in history.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
There are now many more mixed-mode jobs , requiring both intellectual and physical skills. In addition the pay and social class issues against such jobs have greatly changed.
Yes, also that a lot of university degrees are pointless. I don't want to say they're Mickey Mouse degrees. Clearly the likes of English Literature or Ancient Greek are (presumably) intellectually demanding. But I'm not sure we as a nation are benefitting from having people spend three years studying subjects which don't lead anywhere. And many subjects which do lead somewhere should be able to do so in rather less than three years. This isn't a new point. ISTR Bill Bryson making a similar ppint back in the 80s. But we seem to be gratuitous in our inefficiency in higher education.
We've got into the frame of mind that says anyone pointing out that young people are being conned into an expensive course of higher education that is going to be useless to them, in return for a lifetime of debt, is somehow attacking the victims of the con.
I love the idea that you since university education is some sort of lie of guaranteed advancement, we should simply cut university education.
Fucking bonkers.
Not cut it. Do it better. Focus funding to courses giving more value. Shorter, more focused courses. Enable students to add more value to themselves while aquiring less debt.
Quite surprised by that poll finding - I thought it was older & more conservative people who were keener on authoritarianism.
Older people were taught that there are different points of view and it's important to have a civilised debate between them. Young people are taught that there's only one correct opinion on every subject.
Therefore — authoritarianism.
The best thing we can do for our young people is to teach them critical thinking.
To analyse the evidence, critique it, think for themselves, and keep an open mind to other perspectives if it changes.
I remember how assured one user here was that Starmer was in fact guilty of the curry incident, oddly we've not heard from him about it recently
I’m pretty sure that the ‘curry’ incident bent the rules a bit, but the police were never going to end Starmer career over it. In hindsight he played a blinder with his ‘I’ll resign’ statement.
It was sold on here by one poster in particular as a million times worse than poor old Boris getting "ambushed by cake" and that Starmer was a hypocrite.
It was at a different time and under different circumstances than Johnson's wrongdoings. Starmer's incident was at a time when we were mainly back at work eating lunch with colleagues. One could argue Starmer was unprofessional drinking alcohol whilst at work, but that wasn't the accusation.
Anyway it matters not a jot as Starmer, for good or ill, is still in post, whilst Johnson is now merely a footnote in history.
I’d have some sympathy for Johnson if it had only been the cake ambush, but it clearly wasn’t. The garden party photos were enough. The culture among the staff was terrible, and he had to take the can for that. And then the lies. It was never going to wash in the end about thinking it was within the rules as the rules came from No 10, ultimately.
On topic, may I respectfully suggest that rather too much weight is being given to the poll in the header? It's one poll, that's all, and although it's a large sample, the number of young people in that sample is likely to be less than 2,000 if the ages are weighted properly. And I'm not convinced the question is that clear - the phrase "doesn't have to bother with parliament/elections" could be interpreted as "for now".
I'm not persuaded that young people have changed significantly in recent years, or indeed in my lifetime, having a mix of views, hopefully on average more radical than their elders. It's only 5 years since a lot of young people turned out, for good or ill, to vote for Corbyn. Whatever one's views on him, I don't think 'authoritarian' would feature strongly.
TL:DR - lots of bollocks being talked about fascist/authoritarian youth.
The social contract - that you can get ahead via hard work - has broken down.
Also, the world is burning, and the Young expect to inherit the ashes.
It really is no surprise they are authoritian-curious.
The party breakdown is interesting in the cross tabs for support of an authoritarian leader:
I simply find that breakdown ridiculously implausible.
What that tells me is that people who think their party might get a shot at government (Lab, Con, SNP) are happier with the current system than those who don’t. That aside there’s not infrequently a pretty authoritarian streak in Green politics “because they’re right”.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
The problem is the huge waste of resources pouring into quasi-compulsory but largely useless higher education.
On topic, may I respectfully suggest that rather too much weight is being given to the poll in the header? It's one poll, that's all, and although it's a large sample, the number of young people in that sample is likely to be less than 2,000 if the ages are weighted properly. And I'm not convinced the question is that clear - the phrase "doesn't have to bother with parliament/elections" could be interpreted as "for now".
I'm not persuaded that young people have changed significantly in recent years, or indeed in my lifetime, having a mix of views, hopefully on average more radical than their elders. It's only 5 years since a lot of young people turned out, for good or ill, to vote for Corbyn. Whatever one's views on him, I don't think 'authoritarian' would feature strongly.
TL:DR - lots of bollocks being talked about fascist/authoritarian youth.
Not as bollocks as your point. given a competent pollster and what you concede is an adequately large sample, "It's only 2,000 people it isn't everybody" is gibberish
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
The problem is the huge waste of resources pouring into quasi-compulsory but largely useless higher education.
"Over their working lives, men will be £130,000 better off on average by going to university after taxes, student loan repayments and foregone earnings are taken into account. For women, this figure is £100,000."
What is your evidence to suggest it is "largely useless"?
The social contract - that you can get ahead via hard work - has broken down.
Also, the world is burning, and the Young expect to inherit the ashes.
It really is no surprise they are authoritian-curious.
The party breakdown is interesting in the cross tabs for support of an authoritarian leader:
I simply find that breakdown ridiculously implausible.
What that tells me is that people who think their party might get a shot at government (Lab, Con, SNP) are happier with the current system than those who don’t. That aside there’s not infrequently a pretty authoritarian streak in Green politics “because they’re right”.
The prospect of Uber Fuhrer Caroline Lucas might be interesting!
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
The problem is the huge waste of resources pouring into quasi-compulsory but largely useless higher education.
"Over their working lives, men will be £130,000 better off on average by going to university after taxes, student loan repayments and foregone earnings are taken into account. For women, this figure is £100,000."
What is your evidence to suggest it is "largely useless"?
Nobody has completed a working life since the Blair explosion of higher education so your data are valueless.
Sean_F said: "I'm unconvinced that life is worse for young people than in the sixties, seventies, or eighties.
If you don't vote, there's not much point complaining that things are not to your liking."
In the US, life is worse for young people now than it was in the fifties, sixties, seventies, and eighties -- in some ways. And better in other ways.
The most important way it is worse here is the breakdown of families. A young person is far less to have had two parents in their lives while growing up, than a young person would have in the fifties, and even most of the sixties. And if there is a simple way to cure that breakdown by voting, I don't know what it is. (Choosing leaders who set good examples probably helps, a little.)
There are many ways it is better, most of them due to technological advances. For example, young people's teeth are much better now, thanks to widespread fluoridation. (Interestingly, Portland, Oregon does not fluoridate its water, so that is one place where, in principle, voting could easily make a difference.)
The one unspoken truth, which is absolutely politically incorrect - in its truest sense - to mention, is just how much better children do when raised by both their biological parents within a stable marriage.
We don't mention it because we don't want to seem stuffy or judge, and many such marriages - sadly - infrequently don't work out, but the evidence is irrefutable.
David Patrikarakos @dpatrikarakos · 1h There is chatter on #Ukraine 🇺🇦 channels that I stress is unconfirmed: 1. #Russia 🇷🇺 units in Kherson began negotiations to surrender. 2. Fighting has broken out RU & Kadyrov units in the area.
As job of Chechens is largely to terrorise RU into fighting on these could be linked.
I'm sure someone speculated earlier in the war the Chechens were mostly to hang back as threat to anyone thinking of deserting, but that may have simply been wishful thinking.
Quite likely. Soviets pretty much have the patent on barrier troops and if there was ever an army that sounded like it needed them...
It does seem mostly a myth. "Barrier Troops" seem to have substantially the same role as the Military Police in other armies.
Anyway there is a very basic reason why young people are disillusioned, it's because Thatcher's model of a capitalist property-owning democracy doesn't apply to them.
Young people can't accumulate capital because they're paying 30-40% of their income in rent. Young people can't buy property because housebuilding hasn't kept up with demand. Young people have voted the "wrong" way in every election or referendum since 2010 and were overruled by the elderly who won't have to live with the long term consequences of those decisions.
Incorporate young people into the capitalist property-owning democratic model by resolving these problems.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
The problem is the huge waste of resources pouring into quasi-compulsory but largely useless higher education.
"Over their working lives, men will be £130,000 better off on average by going to university after taxes, student loan repayments and foregone earnings are taken into account. For women, this figure is £100,000."
What is your evidence to suggest it is "largely useless"?
It doesn't even teach people to cite their sources, apparently. Still less to express any proper scepticism or reservation about sweeping and implausible claims.
Quite surprised by that poll finding - I thought it was older & more conservative people who were keener on authoritarianism.
Older people were taught that there are different points of view and it's important to have a civilised debate between them. Young people are taught that there's only one correct opinion on every subject.
Therefore — authoritarianism.
The best thing we can do for our young people is to teach them critical thinking.
To analyse the evidence, critique it, think for themselves, and keep an open mind to other perspectives if it changes.
I quite agree. You'll be relieved to know that's what our educators, at all levels, are doing. To a greater degree than was the case 50 years ago, when many were just taught 'facts'.
"That aside there’s not infrequently a pretty authoritarian streak in Green politics “because they’re right”."
That's my experience too. Extinction Rebellion like to inconvenience people because they deserve it. It's the only like to make the morons sit up and take notice. No wonder they'll never win an election.
I love the idea that you since university education is some sort of lie of guaranteed advancement, we should simply cut university education.
Fucking bonkers.
Indeed, universities are primarily places for further education and research. Unless you study economics or an MBA or engineering or Medicine or law at a top university a degree is unlikely to make a vast difference to your income
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
There are now many more mixed-mode jobs , requiring both intellectual and physical skills. In addition the pay and social class issues against such jobs have greatly changed.
As someone actually in that generation, university isn't seen by young people as some kind of pathway to easy money, it's pretty much a basic requirement for most jobs beyond stacking shelves or delivering takeaways. If you want to be a police officer, teacher, civil servant, accountant, whatever, you need a degree. If you don't have a degree, you'll be at a disadvantage when applying for work compared to the 50% of your cohort who do.
Completely understandable and you have my sympathy. It shouldn't be the case. Let's take accountancy: how it should work is that a graduate with a relevant degree should be better placed than an 18 year old school leaver - but not better off than someone who left school at 18 and got three years of relevant experience. But sadly HR departments are often not sophisticated enough for thus to be the case. This isn't the fault of Bournville and his generarion, it's the fault of the generation offering them jobs (or not). Hopefully the current labour shortage will force recruiters to be a bit more open minded.
Quite surprised by that poll finding - I thought it was older & more conservative people who were keener on authoritarianism.
Older people were taught that there are different points of view and it's important to have a civilised debate between them. Young people are taught that there's only one correct opinion on every subject.
Therefore — authoritarianism.
The best thing we can do for our young people is to teach them critical thinking.
To analyse the evidence, critique it, think for themselves, and keep an open mind to other perspectives if it changes.
Are you suggesting that young people do not think critically because they think differently to you on certain issues?
On topic, may I respectfully suggest that rather too much weight is being given to the poll in the header? It's one poll, that's all, and although it's a large sample, the number of young people in that sample is likely to be less than 2,000 if the ages are weighted properly. And I'm not convinced the question is that clear - the phrase "doesn't have to bother with parliament/elections" could be interpreted as "for now".
I'm not persuaded that young people have changed significantly in recent years, or indeed in my lifetime, having a mix of views, hopefully on average more radical than their elders. It's only 5 years since a lot of young people turned out, for good or ill, to vote for Corbyn. Whatever one's views on him, I don't think 'authoritarian' would feature strongly.
TL:DR - lots of bollocks being talked about fascist/authoritarian youth.
Not as bollocks as your point. given a competent pollster and what you concede is an adequately large sample, "It's only 2,000 people it isn't everybody" is gibberish
I watched the NZ Accession ceremony earlier and was suddenly struck by the fact that it is essentially unprecedented.
The last accession in 1952 took place when NZ was barely independent and fully identified as part of a family of *British* nations, with the UK (and the Queen) at its head of the family.
NZ just isn’t that country anymore and the risk for monarchists is that they look irrelevant and at worst imperialist if they pretend otherwise.
If the monarchy wants NZ to avoid becoming a republic, it needs to find a way to renew its relevance. It can’t be a just a bunch of eccentric British aristocrats.
It would need to become - as some have hinted above - a conscious guarantor of NZ’s democracy and constitution - embodied in the Treaty of Waitangi, the founding “partnership” between Crown and Māori.
Charles needs to start practicing his Māori.
I presume similar dynamics are at play in Canada and even Australia.
Most New Zealanders want to keep the monarchy and the Governor General is Maori. In Canada the Governor General is now Inuk and both PM Trudeau and Leader of the Opposition Poilievre wish to keep the monarchy
Very relevant to your point, the Monarch's representative in both New Zealand and Canada is already of indigenous heritage for goodness sake, unthinkable in 1952
On topic, may I respectfully suggest that rather too much weight is being given to the poll in the header? It's one poll, that's all, and although it's a large sample, the number of young people in that sample is likely to be less than 2,000 if the ages are weighted properly. And I'm not convinced the question is that clear - the phrase "doesn't have to bother with parliament/elections" could be interpreted as "for now".
I'm not persuaded that young people have changed significantly in recent years, or indeed in my lifetime, having a mix of views, hopefully on average more radical than their elders. It's only 5 years since a lot of young people turned out, for good or ill, to vote for Corbyn. Whatever one's views on him, I don't think 'authoritarian' would feature strongly.
TL:DR - lots of bollocks being talked about fascist/authoritarian youth.
Not as bollocks as your point. given a competent pollster and what you concede is an adequately large sample, "It's only 2,000 people it isn't everybody" is gibberish
I love the idea that you since university education is some sort of lie of guaranteed advancement, we should simply cut university education.
Fucking bonkers.
Not cut it. Do it better. Focus funding to courses giving more value. Shorter, more focused courses. Enable students to add more value to themselves while aquiring less debt.
I totally agree with that, but it was not the original argument.
Anyway there is a very basic reason why young people are disillusioned, it's because Thatcher's model of a capitalist property-owning democracy doesn't apply to them.
Young people can't accumulate capital because they're paying 30-40% of their income in rent. Young people can't buy property because housebuilding hasn't kept up with demand. Young people have voted the "wrong" way in every election or referendum since 2010 and were overruled by the elderly who won't have to live with the long term consequences of those decisions.
Incorporate young people into the capitalist property-owning democratic model by resolving these problems.
And control immigration to reduce housing demand
Even if all immigration stopped tomorrow, it wouldn't change the fact that we have a housing crisis right now! The only way to fix a demand problem is either reducing the number of people who need housing through deportation/murder, or increasing supply by building more houses!
Quite surprised by that poll finding - I thought it was older & more conservative people who were keener on authoritarianism.
Older people were taught that there are different points of view and it's important to have a civilised debate between them. Young people are taught that there's only one correct opinion on every subject.
Therefore — authoritarianism.
The best thing we can do for our young people is to teach them critical thinking.
To analyse the evidence, critique it, think for themselves, and keep an open mind to other perspectives if it changes.
Are you suggesting that young people do not think critically because they think differently to you on certain issues?
I am suggesting there is evidence that young people are not thinking critically if many of them are so tempted by authoritarianism.
Many do think differently to me on certain issues, yes, and from my experience in discussing these with them they have not thought them through particularly well, and are unprepared to deal with a counter-argument.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
There are now many more mixed-mode jobs , requiring both intellectual and physical skills. In addition the pay and social class issues against such jobs have greatly changed.
As someone actually in that generation, university isn't seen by young people as some kind of pathway to easy money, it's pretty much a basic requirement for most jobs beyond stacking shelves or delivering takeaways. If you want to be a police officer, teacher, civil servant, accountant, whatever, you need a degree. If you don't have a degree, you'll be at a disadvantage when applying for work compared to the 50% of your cohort who do.
Certainly so. I have a nephew who did an apprenticeship in IT, as he never liked the bookstuff. He is industrious and punctual, good with customers and has a sound knowledge base.
In his company he is being overlooked for promotion in favour of graduates who keep overtaking him. He is thinking of going to Uni after all.
Quite surprised by that poll finding - I thought it was older & more conservative people who were keener on authoritarianism.
Older people were taught that there are different points of view and it's important to have a civilised debate between them. Young people are taught that there's only one correct opinion on every subject.
Therefore — authoritarianism.
The best thing we can do for our young people is to teach them critical thinking.
To analyse the evidence, critique it, think for themselves, and keep an open mind to other perspectives if it changes.
I quite agree. You'll be relieved to know that's what our educators, at all levels, are doing. To a greater degree than was the case 50 years ago, when many were just taught 'facts'.
Putting this as politely as possible, I was getting educated 50 years ago and I don't recognise your claim, perhaps you are thinking of Thomas Gradgrind and have skipped a century?
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
There are now many more mixed-mode jobs , requiring both intellectual and physical skills. In addition the pay and social class issues against such jobs have greatly changed.
As someone actually in that generation, university isn't seen by young people as some kind of pathway to easy money, it's pretty much a basic requirement for most jobs beyond stacking shelves or delivering takeaways. If you want to be a police officer, teacher, civil servant, accountant, whatever, you need a degree. If you don't have a degree, you'll be at a disadvantage when applying for work compared to the 50% of your cohort who do.
Certainly so. I have a nephew who did an apprenticeship in IT, as he never liked the bookstuff. He is industrious and punctual, good with customers and has a sound knowledge base.
In his company he is being overlooked for promotion in favour of graduates who keep overtaking him. He is thinking of going to Uni after all.
Is he in London? I suggest he move companies. I employed many IT people in my time and never gave a fuck about their education.
Anyway there is a very basic reason why young people are disillusioned, it's because Thatcher's model of a capitalist property-owning democracy doesn't apply to them.
Young people can't accumulate capital because they're paying 30-40% of their income in rent. Young people can't buy property because housebuilding hasn't kept up with demand. Young people have voted the "wrong" way in every election or referendum since 2010 and were overruled by the elderly who won't have to live with the long term consequences of those decisions.
Incorporate young people into the capitalist property-owning democratic model by resolving these problems.
Dont be daft the golden generation will keep on demanding more and more for themselves sod the other generations.
Quite surprised by that poll finding - I thought it was older & more conservative people who were keener on authoritarianism.
Older people were taught that there are different points of view and it's important to have a civilised debate between them. Young people are taught that there's only one correct opinion on every subject.
Therefore — authoritarianism.
The best thing we can do for our young people is to teach them critical thinking.
To analyse the evidence, critique it, think for themselves, and keep an open mind to other perspectives if it changes.
I quite agree. You'll be relieved to know that's what our educators, at all levels, are doing. To a greater degree than was the case 50 years ago, when many were just taught 'facts'.
The problem is, there is so much more evidence to analyse these days. The amount of information, data, opinion; the number of sources; the number of voices - has grown exponentially. Critical thinking has paradoxically gor much harder.
Quite surprised by that poll finding - I thought it was older & more conservative people who were keener on authoritarianism.
Older people were taught that there are different points of view and it's important to have a civilised debate between them. Young people are taught that there's only one correct opinion on every subject.
Therefore — authoritarianism.
The best thing we can do for our young people is to teach them critical thinking.
To analyse the evidence, critique it, think for themselves, and keep an open mind to other perspectives if it changes.
I quite agree. You'll be relieved to know that's what our educators, at all levels, are doing. To a greater degree than was the case 50 years ago, when many were just taught 'facts'.
I don't need you to be told, thank you; I have my own child in school.
In my experience, some do and some teach to rule according to consensus.
I watched the NZ Accession ceremony earlier and was suddenly struck by the fact that it is essentially unprecedented.
The last accession in 1952 took place when NZ was barely independent and fully identified as part of a family of *British* nations, with the UK (and the Queen) at its head of the family.
NZ just isn’t that country anymore and the risk for monarchists is that they look irrelevant and at worst imperialist if they pretend otherwise.
If the monarchy wants NZ to avoid becoming a republic, it needs to find a way to renew its relevance. It can’t be a just a bunch of eccentric British aristocrats.
It would need to become - as some have hinted above - a conscious guarantor of NZ’s democracy and constitution - embodied in the Treaty of Waitangi, the founding “partnership” between Crown and Māori.
Charles needs to start practicing his Māori.
I presume similar dynamics are at play in Canada and even Australia.
Most New Zealanders want to keep the monarchy and the Governor General is Maori. In Canada the Governor General is now Inuk and both PM Trudeau and Leader of the Opposition Poilievre wish to keep the monarchy
Very relevant to your point, the Monarch's representative in both New Zealand and Canada is already of indigenous heritage for goodness sake, unthinkable in 1952
It’s not relevant because it doesn’t actually respond to my points.
Anyway there is a very basic reason why young people are disillusioned, it's because Thatcher's model of a capitalist property-owning democracy doesn't apply to them.
Young people can't accumulate capital because they're paying 30-40% of their income in rent. Young people can't buy property because housebuilding hasn't kept up with demand. Young people have voted the "wrong" way in every election or referendum since 2010 and were overruled by the elderly who won't have to live with the long term consequences of those decisions.
Incorporate young people into the capitalist property-owning democratic model by resolving these problems.
And control immigration to reduce housing demand
Even if all immigration stopped tomorrow, it wouldn't change the fact that we have a housing crisis right now! The only way to fix a demand problem is either reducing the number of people who need housing through deportation/murder, or increasing supply by building more houses!
Catching up on the thread I have been attacked by @Gardenwalker for having to have the temerity to point out the misleading nature of Starmer's 6 month energy offer and by @Mexicanpete over beergate
As far as Starmer and labour are concerned they do not get a free pass and indeed those who are really knowledgeable on the subject have called out the reliance on the windfall tax including @Richard_Tyndall who works in the industry
It is a myth that I said Starmer's beergate was a million miles worse than Johnson and indeed I did not say he was guilty of an offence. Beergate was discussed by many on here and it was entirely appropriate Durham Police investigated it and I'm sure nobody questions their decision
I do find at times this forum is almost like a NEC meeting with no tolerance of dissenting views of Starmer and labour, and I am sure that would be a terrible thing to happen
I sought Johnson's loss of office for months and finally now Truss is PM of course I support her and will not give Starmer or labour a free pass
I do my best to be honest and if wrong I do apologise
Maybe I do not need to defend myself but things were said this pm when I was not present that were personal and an exaggeration so I wanted to put the record straight
Quite surprised by that poll finding - I thought it was older & more conservative people who were keener on authoritarianism.
Older people were taught that there are different points of view and it's important to have a civilised debate between them. Young people are taught that there's only one correct opinion on every subject.
Therefore — authoritarianism.
The best thing we can do for our young people is to teach them critical thinking.
To analyse the evidence, critique it, think for themselves, and keep an open mind to other perspectives if it changes.
I can't speak for all of them, but my sixth form in the 2010s made every student do a Critical Thinking course which was pretty thorough on how to make arguments, recognise fallacies, understand differences of opinion, evaluate information, etc.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
There is a partial truth in this, though it is not true in WWC culture that there is any aversion at all to leaving school at 16 and developing classic WWC skills.
Then deeper point is this: suppose young people have been 'sold a lie'. If so this is by universities (some in name only) who have a vested interest in doing so - they automatically want to keep the Dept of Verbiage Studies going as a job creation scheme for tenth rate academics. Of course.
By 18 and adulthood there is this thing that everyone has to have learned: Not everything people say is true. Your elders are ignorant, venal and self interested. Do Your Own Research.
Anyway there is a very basic reason why young people are disillusioned, it's because Thatcher's model of a capitalist property-owning democracy doesn't apply to them.
Young people can't accumulate capital because they're paying 30-40% of their income in rent. Young people can't buy property because housebuilding hasn't kept up with demand. Young people have voted the "wrong" way in every election or referendum since 2010 and were overruled by the elderly who won't have to live with the long term consequences of those decisions.
Incorporate young people into the capitalist property-owning democratic model by resolving these problems.
Dont be daft the golden generation will keep on demanding more and more for themselves sod the other generations.
I live among these selfish arseholes. They are spectacularly un self-aware, just like their British counterparts in that Telegraph survey.
These crowds are vast, and outside of one or two mad Nits in Edinburgh (roundly jeered by others) there have been no protests.
Self-selected. But also, not a matter of current political debate anyway.
I'm seeing tens of thousands of Scots lining the route two to three deep along the whole route from Balmoral to Edinburgh, which is hundreds of miles long. These are not just a few die-hards.
I love the idea that you since university education is some sort of lie of guaranteed advancement, we should simply cut university education.
Fucking bonkers.
Not cut it. Do it better. Focus funding to courses giving more value. Shorter, more focused courses. Enable students to add more value to themselves while aquiring less debt.
I totally agree with that, but it was not the original argument.
Well if you and I can agree on this we probably have the kernel of an approach which 85% of pb can broadly support.
Quite surprised by that poll finding - I thought it was older & more conservative people who were keener on authoritarianism.
Older people were taught that there are different points of view and it's important to have a civilised debate between them. Young people are taught that there's only one correct opinion on every subject.
Therefore — authoritarianism.
The best thing we can do for our young people is to teach them critical thinking.
To analyse the evidence, critique it, think for themselves, and keep an open mind to other perspectives if it changes.
I can't speak for all of them, but my sixth form in the 2010s made every student do a Critical Thinking course which was pretty thorough on how to make arguments, recognise fallacies, understand differences of opinion, evaluate information, etc.
These crowds are vast, and outside of one or two mad Nits in Edinburgh (roundly jeered by others) there have been no protests.
Self-selected. But also, not a matter of current political debate anyway.
I'm seeing tens of thousands of Scots lining the route two to three deep along the whole route from Balmoral to Edinburgh, which is hundreds of miles long. These are not just a few die-hards.
What are you seeing?
About five million and more who aren't there.
Edit: Also, 'Scots' is not observationally demonstrable. Many will be tourists.
re the topic, here's a thought. The single biggest driver of this is the push towards higher education amongst the young and its ripple effect.
We've sold young people a lie, namely that if you get a degree, it's the route to riches. That was always going to be impossible given the natural small number of high paying jobs out there. All we have done is created a sullen class of individuals who are in debt, feel they have been cheated and, worse, because they view themselves as superior in knowledge, believe their views are right and that they must be accommodated to.
In addition, those who didn't go to university are made to feel worthless, shut out of many careers even those such as nursing which they could have done before.
Contrast that with a few decades back. If you left school at 16, you weren't automatically thought a failure. In fact, it was seen as the default in many cases. You found yourself a job and trade, and you made your own life (in many cases).
Reverse this stupid obsession with pushing people to Higher Education.
You might just as well say "Reverse the second law of thermodynamics" unfortunately.
The problem isn’t university degrees. It is the belief that all university degrees lead to a high paid, pure white collar job.
The problem is the huge waste of resources pouring into quasi-compulsory but largely useless higher education.
"Over their working lives, men will be £130,000 better off on average by going to university after taxes, student loan repayments and foregone earnings are taken into account. For women, this figure is £100,000."
What is your evidence to suggest it is "largely useless"?
If so, that's not a very good return (economically) on a university education.
Comments
1) As a group and individually they have choices, have no choice but to choose, and take responsibility for the outcome
2) Older people don't require younger people to live on damaging social media or fail to vote
3) It isn't possible or desirable for older people to try to live younger people's lives for them, or to solve the dilemmas of being young
4) The problems of democracy (as many younger people have yet to discover) are not solved by having less of it
5) Power is never gifted, it is always taken
6) Self interest is universal.
https://twitter.com/UkraineNewsLive/status/1568965027776065537
There are now many more mixed-mode jobs , requiring both intellectual and physical skills. In addition the pay and social class issues against such jobs have greatly changed.
It seems like Russia would be a lot better off not doing any invasions, and just making $$$ exporting natural resources and importing advanced manufactured gods.
https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1568918993188036609
Seems like a plan.
It was at a different time and under different circumstances than Johnson's wrongdoings. Starmer's incident was at a time when we were mainly back at work eating lunch with colleagues. One could argue Starmer was unprofessional drinking alcohol whilst at work, but that wasn't the accusation.
Anyway it matters not a jot as Starmer, for good or ill, is still in post, whilst Johnson is now merely a footnote in history.
There were enough more mature voices around to ensure there were more more generations to follow them.
A Ukrainian intelligence unit on the front line said the Russian chain of command was broken and soldiers were fleeing without putting up a fight, many of them changing into civilian clothes to avoid detection.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2022/09/11/exclusive-russian-soldiers-literally-running-lives-chain-command/
Then deeper point is this: suppose young people have been 'sold a lie'. If so this is by universities (some in name only) who have a vested interest in doing so - they automatically want to keep the Dept of Verbiage Studies going as a job creation scheme for tenth rate academics. Of course.
By 18 and adulthood there is this thing that everyone has to have learned: Not everything people say is true. Your elders are ignorant, venal and self interested. Do Your Own Research.
I don't want to say they're Mickey Mouse degrees. Clearly the likes of English Literature or Ancient Greek are (presumably) intellectually demanding. But I'm not sure we as a nation are benefitting from having people spend three years studying subjects which don't lead anywhere. And many subjects which do lead somewhere should be able to do so in rather less than three years.
This isn't a new point. ISTR Bill Bryson making a similar ppint back in the 80s. But we seem to be gratuitous in our inefficiency in higher education.
I would also disagree that there is a "natural" number of high paying jobs. Whatever pay level you set, there are more jobs above that level and fewer below that level than in 1997, even accounting for inflation. If you compare two countries, the one with higher education levels will almost always have more high paying jobs. Lots of Western countries have chosen Poland as a place for higher skilled back office functions off the back of the number of good graduates vs other Eastern European countries.
Surrender looks to be about your only option. Just as the Ukrainian military planners have crafted. But at least history will remember you are someone who saved tens of thousands of lives rather than fighting a lost cause.
“Who else?”
“Farmers mums”
Probably the Ukrainian Young Farmers will have tank racing at their events in future…
Also, the world is burning, and the Young expect to inherit the ashes.
It really is no surprise they are authoritian-curious.
As per usual.
Impressively audible booing on the Beeb coverage of the proclamation in Edinburgh.
Fucking bonkers.
I simply find that breakdown ridiculously implausible.
A constant theme of Russian warfare seems to be Russian PBIs being terrorised into engaging the enemy, often on pretty hopeless terms, by brutality from their own side. It is rather refreshing to hear of this backfiring for once. Hopefully the Chechens will get a good kicking.
The problem isn’t the degrees - tons of them are including modules on Business etc to make them (partially) worldly.
When I used to help at a volunteer communal workshop - it was full of frustrated young people in dead end, low paid desk jobs, who frantically wanted to Make Stuff.
Being a sparky would have double the wages for many of them.
As to random soundbites, where would PB be without them?
https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2022/09/italy-post-race-analysis-2022.html
Two well-judged bets in two races, both borked by doom.
Prince Charles in his speech to the last Commonwealth Heads of Govts meeting in Rwanda last year:
The Commonwealth contains within it countries that have had constitutional relationships with my Family, some that continue to do so, and increasingly those that have had none. I want to say clearly, as I have said before, that each member’s Constitutional arrangement, as Republic or Monarchy, is purely a matter for each member country to decide. The benefit of long life brings me the experience that arrangements such as these can change, calmly and without rancour.
https://thecommonwealth.org/news/chogm-2022-opening-ceremony-speech-prince-wales
They have nobody to vote for now.
Liberal elite a team or b team
If you don't vote, there's not much point complaining that things are not to your liking."
In the US, life is worse for young people now than it was in the fifties, sixties, seventies, and eighties -- in some ways. And better in other ways.
The most important way it is worse here is the breakdown of families. A young person is far less to have had two parents in their lives while growing up, than a young person would have in the fifties, and even most of the sixties. And if there is a simple way to cure that breakdown by voting, I don't know what it is. (Choosing leaders who set good examples probably helps, a little.)
There are many ways it is better, most of them due to technological advances. For example, young people's teeth are much better now, thanks to widespread fluoridation. (Interestingly, Portland, Oregon does not fluoridate its water, so that is one place where, in principle, voting could easily make a difference.)
Young people can't accumulate capital because they're paying 30-40% of their income in rent. Young people can't buy property because housebuilding hasn't kept up with demand. Young people have voted the "wrong" way in every election or referendum since 2010 and were overruled by the elderly who won't have to live with the long term consequences of those decisions.
Incorporate young people into the capitalist property-owning democratic model by resolving these problems.
Rates of tertiary education here are comparable with our competitors, South Korea being substantially higher still. I don't think Britons are more stupid or less capable than our competitors.
There is a problem of poor quality courses, but that iss not the fault of the students, or the need for a highly skilled workforce, but of the universities themselves.
To analyse the evidence, critique it, think for themselves, and keep an open mind to other perspectives if it changes.
I'm not persuaded that young people have changed significantly in recent years, or indeed in my lifetime, having a mix of views, hopefully on average more radical than their elders. It's only 5 years since a lot of young people turned out, for good or ill, to vote for Corbyn. Whatever one's views on him, I don't think 'authoritarian' would feature strongly.
TL:DR - lots of bollocks being talked about fascist/authoritarian youth.
What is your evidence to suggest it is "largely useless"?
Ed because explosion of HE is unfortunate
We don't mention it because we don't want to seem stuffy or judge, and many such marriages - sadly - infrequently don't work out, but the evidence is irrefutable.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrier_troops
That's my experience too. Extinction Rebellion like to inconvenience people because they deserve it. It's the only like to make the morons sit up and take notice. No wonder they'll never win an election.
It shouldn't be the case. Let's take accountancy: how it should work is that a graduate with a relevant degree should be better placed than an 18 year old school leaver - but not better off than someone who left school at 18 and got three years of relevant experience. But sadly HR departments are often not sophisticated enough for thus to be the case.
This isn't the fault of Bournville and his generarion, it's the fault of the generation offering them jobs (or not).
Hopefully the current labour shortage will force recruiters to be a bit more open minded.
Many do think differently to me on certain issues, yes, and from my experience in discussing these with them they have not thought them through particularly well, and are unprepared to deal with a counter-argument.
In his company he is being overlooked for promotion in favour of graduates who keep overtaking him. He is thinking of going to Uni after all.
I suggest he move companies.
I employed many IT people in my time and never gave a fuck about their education.
(Although I did for other roles).
These crowds are vast, and outside of one or two mad Nits in Edinburgh (roundly jeered by others) there have been no protests.
In my experience, some do and some teach to rule according to consensus.
It's why I changed her school this year.
NZ’s first Māori GG was in 1985 in any case.
Catching up on the thread I have been attacked by @Gardenwalker for having to have the temerity to point out the misleading nature of Starmer's 6 month energy offer and by @Mexicanpete over beergate
As far as Starmer and labour are concerned they do not get a free pass and indeed those who are really knowledgeable on the subject have called out the reliance on the windfall tax including @Richard_Tyndall who works in the industry
It is a myth that I said Starmer's beergate was a million miles worse than Johnson and indeed I did not say he was guilty of an offence. Beergate was discussed by many on here and it was entirely appropriate Durham Police investigated it and I'm sure nobody questions their decision
I do find at times this forum is almost like a NEC meeting with no tolerance of dissenting views of Starmer and labour, and I am sure that would be a terrible thing to happen
I sought Johnson's loss of office for months and finally now Truss is PM of course I support her and will not give Starmer or labour a free pass
I do my best to be honest and if wrong I do apologise
Maybe I do not need to defend myself but things were said this pm when I was not present that were personal and an exaggeration so I wanted to put the record straight
They are spectacularly un self-aware, just like their British counterparts in that Telegraph survey.
What are you seeing?
Edit: Also, 'Scots' is not observationally demonstrable. Many will be tourists.