The Tories will surely wait for the new boundaries before calling an election.
Possibly, although calling the election now would almost certainly produce a more comfortable Con majority, so the risk of waiting would have to be balanced against the prize of fairer boundaries.
The provisional boundaries will be released next month before the conferences (assuming they happen), so MPs and party members will have an idea of the lie of the land.
The bigger problem with an early election, as always, is 'how?' No Confidencing yourself looks daft and the public often don't like that kind of stunt. It might also backfire with the risk that Corbyn might be invited to form a government and go into the election as PM. On the other hand, finding the 434 MPs needed to vote through an early election will be almost impossible.
She has a majority in the Commons to repeal the fixed term parliament act, and would the House of Lords really deny the country an election ?
Would be a casus belli for reforming the House of Lords.
No, it wouldn't. The Lords would be perfectly entitled to block the repeal legislation, which was designed to end precisely the kind of act she'd be trying on: taking advantage of potentially short-term popularity to skew the system to the government.
There is clearly still a mindset that says it's fair game for governments to call an election when they fancy it. It's not. It's not fair to the other parties and it's not fair to the public. The FTPA wasn't a perfectly-designed piece of legislation but whether by accident or design, it's left the system better than it was before.
If there is genuinely a need for an election then the government should put down the requisite notice in the Commons, as provided for by the Act.
I have to agree with David on this one. I know there are other problems with the FTPA for some, but the biggest complaint and reason for its repeal that seems to come up is it is inconvenient when a PM wants to take advantage of short term political positions to call a snap election, and like David I don't think that's particularly fair game, even if the motivation for the act was short term political consideration of the coalition.
Truly opportunistic snap elections are rare, In fact it is hard to think of one.
Mr. M, it's interesting being in the generation on the crest of the internet wave. I can remember nobody having mobile phones, and it being a bit weird to shop online.
It's already changing society drastically.
I would walk down to the village - pockets full of 10p and 20p coins - to the payphone to make a 'private' call to my girlfriend.
'And did you travel by horse and cart as well, Dad?'
FPT David L, you were fortunate. My step-daughter went to an all-girls' school in the late 90's early 00's where the teachers seem to have regarded it as one of the perks of their job to ogle the girls in the showers.
Mine did that in the 80s - seriously creepy. Only one member of the PE staff didn't come across as a sadistic predatory lesbian.
The two worst offenders, according to my step-daughter, were a pair of nuns who were later found to be having an affair with each other.
To be honest, when talking about schooldays, I've not encountered anyone who can't tell stories about dodgy teachers. I remember one who took a real shine to a very pretty boy in my Latin class, and used to read him Latin homosexual love poetry.
We'd one male teacher who spanked across his knee one of my classmates - in a girls' school. A couple at the boy's next door were notorious spankers/caressers.
I only recall one girl getting hit with a ruler across the back of her hand. The boys' school regularly had tales of ruler backsides/sticking bog roll down their pants if they thought it was likely. Throwing a board rubber was another - those chalk marks never came out of a blazer.
Yeah, we had one French teacher who loved spanking boys' bottoms.The odd thing was, everyone knew it was wrong, but it was also thought of as being very funny.
And, none of this stuff happened long ago. I have a friend whose sister got fired from her prestigious public girls' school, a few years ago, after she complained to the Head about the behaviour of one of the maths teachers towards the girls. He was obsessed with measuring their breasts, and was infatuated with one girl who he described as a "little whore" in front of the class.
There is also the assumption that male teachers were worst - I would have said it was evens. One primary female teacher (young (25?) attractive and a single mum) had a queue of young chaps queuing up for kisses at her flat one summer. She was not there for the autumn term. Bizarre when I look back but still nice...
It never seems weird at the time. Kids are innocent, naive, easily amused and still learning. Teenagers are so pumped full of hormones they don't even think. Later on you look back and think.. Hang on?
Exactly. But as a chap I viewed the attentions of an older woman as less of a problem than the reverse. When 17, the friendly attention of a lady in her 20s was something to errr aspire to?
FPT David L, you were fortunate. My step-daughter went to an all-girls' school in the late 90's early 00's where the teachers seem to have regarded it as one of the perks of their job to ogle the girls in the showers.
Mine did that in the 80s - seriously creepy. Only one member of the PE staff didn't come across as a sadistic predatory lesbian.
The two worst offenders, according to my step-daughter, were a pair of nuns who were later found to be having an affair with each other.
To be honest, when talking about schooldays, I've not encountered anyone who can't tell stories about dodgy teachers. I remember one who took a real shine to a very pretty boy in my Latin class, and used to read him Latin homosexual love poetry.
We'd one male teacher who spanked across his knee one of my classmates - in a girls' school. A couple at the boy's next door were notorious spankers/caressers.
I only recall one girl getting hit with a ruler across the back of her hand. The boys' school regularly had tales of ruler backsides/sticking bog roll down their pants if they thought it was likely. Throwing a board rubber was another - those chalk marks never came out of a blazer.
Yeah, we had one French teacher who loved spanking boys' bottoms.The odd thing was, everyone knew it was wrong, but it was also thought of as being very funny.
And, none of this stuff happened long ago. I have a friend whose sister got fired from her prestigious public girls' school, a few years ago, after she complained to the Head about the behaviour of one of the maths teachers towards the girls. He was obsessed with measuring their breasts, and was infatuated with one girl who he described as a "little whore" in front of the class.
I got the cane in 1990.
To my own children, it will probably seem as anachronistic and medieval as the stocks, or dunking.
Undoubtedly. I find it hard to fathom how widespread it was for so long, but like Sean F those I know who experienced it seemed to think it was in some ways funny.
"It never did me any harm"
Out of curiosity - did you get a say in boarding school? I was given the choice of which day school I went to. Thankfully. The 'best' rated at the time felt like Colditz to me and the pupils gave off scared vibes as they rushed about the corridors. I picked the second one as it felt positive and fun.
Mr. M, it's interesting being in the generation on the crest of the internet wave. I can remember nobody having mobile phones, and it being a bit weird to shop online.
It's already changing society drastically.
I would walk down to the village - pockets full of 10p and 20p coins - to the payphone to make a 'private' call to my girlfriend.
'And did you travel by horse and cart as well, Dad?'
Learning all that SWALK, HOLLAND ITALY stuff for letters to gf's at a Boarding School and waiting for the mauve coloured letters to come back. What an exciting life I had at 13/14.
FPT David L, you were fortunate. My step-daughter went to an all-girls' school in the late 90's early 00's where the teachers seem to have regarded it as one of the perks of their job to ogle the girls in the showers.
Mine did that in the 80s - seriously creepy. Only one member of the PE staff didn't come across as a sadistic predatory lesbian.
The two worst offenders, according to my step-daughter, were a pair of nuns who were later found to be having an affair with each other.
To be honest, when talking about schooldays, I've not encountered anyone who can't tell stories about dodgy teachers. I remember one who took a real shine to a very pretty boy in my Latin class, and used to read him Latin homosexual love poetry.
We'd one male teacher who spanked across his knee one of my classmates - in a girls' school. A couple at the boy's next door were notorious spankers/caressers.
I only recall one girl getting hit with a ruler across the back of her hand. The boys' school regularly had tales of ruler backsides/sticking bog roll down their pants if they thought it was likely. Throwing a board rubber was another - those chalk marks never came out of a blazer.
Yeah, we had one French teacher who loved spanking boys' bottoms.The odd thing was, everyone knew it was wrong, but it was also thought of as being very funny.
There is also the assumption that male teachers were worst - I would have said it was evens. One primary female teacher (young (25?) attractive and a single mum) had a queue of young chaps queuing up for kisses at her flat one summer. She was not there for the autumn term. Bizarre when I look back but still nice...
It never seems weird at the time. Kids are innocent, naive, easily amused and still learning. Teenagers are so pumped full of hormones they don't even think. Later on you look back and think.. Hang on?
Exactly. But as a chap I viewed the attentions of an older woman as less of a problem than the reverse. When 17, the friendly attention of a lady in her 20s was something to errr aspire to?
At sixteen I was dating a 21year old. My peers thought I was a living God. Mind you, so did I.
Mr. Royale, works going further back too. My parents didn't have calculators. Which just seems weird.
Incidentally, my uncle (into such things) showed me a mechanical calculator from some time ago (the example was new but it was based on an old design, maybe inter-war?). If I write a Victorian/inter-war style story, that kind of mechanical technology is what I'd aim for.
But then, technology has always led to interesting innovations. The Colosseum's mostly concrete, and Germany only became agriculturally viable on a large scale once an improved plough was invented.
The Tories will surely wait for the new boundaries before calling an election.
Possibly, although calling the election now would almost certainly produce a more comfortable Con majority, so the risk of waiting would have to be balanced against the prize of fairer boundaries.
The provisional boundaries will be released next month before the conferences (assuming they happen), so MPs and party members will have an idea of the lie of the land.
The bigger problem with an early election, as always, is 'he.
She has a majority in the Commons to repeal the fixed term parliament act, and would the House of Lords really deny the country an election ?
Would be a casus belli for reforming the House of Lords.
No, it wouldn't. The Lords would be perfectly entitled to block the repeal legislation, which was designed to end precisely the kind of act she'd be trying on: taking advantage of potentially short-term popularity to skew the system to the government.
There is clearly still a mindset that says it's fair game for governments to call an election when they fancy it. It's not. It's not fair to the other parties and it's not fair to the public. The FTPA wasn't a perfectly-designed piece of legislation but whether by accident or design, it's left the system better than it was before.
If there is genuinely a need for an election then the government should put down the requisite notice in the Commons, as provided for by the Act.
I have to agree with David on this one. I know there are other problems with the FTPA for some, but the biggest complaint and reason for its repeal that seems to come up is it is inconvenient when a PM wants to take advantage of short term political positions to call a snap election, and like David I don't think that's particularly fair game, even if the motivation for the act was short term political consideration of the coalition.
Truly opportunistic snap elections are rare, In fact it is hard to think of one.
And yet the very premise of this piece, and the concern many have with the FTPA, is that people have the temptation. Just the possibility of it causes disruption, recriminations at lost opportunities (if we had no FTPA and May did not got for a snap election now then, somehow, lost the next election, you can bet there'd be complaints).
The negative of binding a future parliament (except it is not really bound, since repeal will always be possible, it will just be politically more costly to try) would seem to me to be less than the positive of eliminating the possibility of partisan based scheduling of elections, whether they are likely or not.
FPT David L, you were fortunate. My step-daughter went to an all-girls' school in the late 90's early 00's where the teachers seem to have regarded it as one of the perks of their job to ogle the girls in the showers.
Mine did that in the 80s - seriously creepy. Only one member of the PE staff didn't come across as a sadistic predatory lesbian.
The two worst offenders, according to my step-daughter, were a pair of nuns who were later found to be having an affair with each other.
To be honest, when talking about schooldays, I've not encountered anyone who can't tell stories about dodgy teachers. I remember one who took a real shine to a very pretty boy in my Latin class, and used to read him Latin homosexual love poetry.
We'd one male teacher who spanked across his knee one of my classmates - in a girls' school. A couple at the boy's next door were notorious spankers/caressers.
I only recall one girl getting hit with a ruler across the back of her hand. The boys' school regularly had tales of ruler backsides/sticking bog roll down their pants if they thought it was likely. Throwing a board rubber was another - those chalk marks never came out of a blazer.
Yeah, we had one French teacher who loved spanking boys' bottoms.The odd thing was, everyone knew it was wrong, but it was also thought of as being very funny.
There is also the assumption that male teachers were worst - I would have said it was evens. One primary female teacher (young (25?) attractive and a single mum) had a queue of young chaps queuing up for kisses at her flat one summer. She was not there for the autumn term. Bizarre when I look back but still nice...
It never seems weird at the time. Kids are innocent, naive, easily amused and still learning. Teenagers are so pumped full of hormones they don't even think. Later on you look back and think.. Hang on?
Exactly. But as a chap I viewed the attentions of an older woman as less of a problem than the reverse. When 17, the friendly attention of a lady in her 20s was something to errr aspire to?
At sixteen I was dating a 21year old. My peers thought I was a living God. Mind you, so did I.
Yes. One uplift in respect I had was when at 15yo the summer guest from France, a 17 year old , took me to his dance with his fellow pupils and all I could do was dance with 17 year old french girls etc and a mate spotted me on opposite side of the road of the hall....
Mr. M, it's interesting being in the generation on the crest of the internet wave. I can remember nobody having mobile phones, and it being a bit weird to shop online.
It's already changing society drastically.
I would walk down to the village - pockets full of 10p and 20p coins - to the payphone to make a 'private' call to my girlfriend.
'And did you travel by horse and cart as well, Dad?'
Learning all that SWALK, HOLLAND ITALY stuff for letters to gf's at a Boarding School and waiting for the mauve coloured letters to come back. What an exciting life I had at 13/14.
The Conference debacle is such a deliciously loony-left conundrum, the reductio ad absurdum of all the bonkers policies and attitudes which the UK and the rest of the world, apart from a few sorry places like Venezuela, chucked in the bin thirty years ago.
I was too young to remember the Looney left councils in London, did they really have an effect on the following GE, or was it a myth?
Open to all.
The Loony 80s - especially in London were ace. Nothing was too daft or ridiculous.
For all the stories about how awful things were for kids in the old days, I'm not sure that 2016 has got much to boast of in that respect. Objective measures of mental health amongst children and young people - by 'objective' I means ones which don't depend on the opinions of either laymen or experts, i.e. statistics such as teenage suicide rates, self-harm generally, substance abuse, eating disorders, and so on - don't look terribly good compared with the past. This seems to be especially true of girls.
The Tories will surely wait for the new boundaries before calling an election.
Possibly, although calling the election now would almost certainly produce a more comfortable Con majority, so the risk of waiting would have to be balanced against the prize of fairer boundaries.
The provisional boundaries will be released next month before the conferences (assuming they happen), so MPs and party members will have an idea of the lie of the land.
The bigger problem with an early election, as always, is 'how?' No Confidencing yourself looks daft and the public often don't like that kind of stunt. It might also backfire with the risk that Corbyn might be invited to form a government and go into the election as PM. On the other hand, finding the 434 MPs needed to vote through an early election will be almost impossible.
She has a majority in the Commons to repeal the fixed term parliament act, and would the House of Lords really deny the country an election ?
Would be a casus belli for reforming the House of Lords.
No, it wouldn't. The Lords would be perfectly entitled to block the repeal legislation, which was designed to end precisely the kind of act she'd be trying on: taking advantage of potentially short-term popularity to skew the system to the government.
There is clearly still a mindset that says it's fair game for governments to call an election when they fancy it. It's not. It's not fair to the other parties and it's not fair to the public. The FTPA wasn't a perfectly-designed piece of legislation but whether by accident or design, it's left the system better than it was before.
If there is genuinely a need for an election then the government should put down the requisite notice in the Commons, as provided for by the Act.
I have to agree with David on this one. I know there are other problems with the FTPA for some, but the biggest complaint and reason for its repeal that seems to come up is it is inconvenient when a PM wants to take advantage of short term political positions to call a snap election, and like David I don't think that's particularly fair game, even if the motivation for the act was short term political consideration of the coalition.
Truly opportunistic snap elections are rare, In fact it is hard to think of one.
Wasn't Gordon Brown's decision *not* to go for a snap election in 2007 the start of his downfall?
For all the stories about how awful things were for kids in the old days, I'm not sure that 2016 has got much to boast of in that respect. Objective measures of mental health amongst children and young people - by 'objective' I means ones which don't depend on the opinions of either laymen or experts, i.e. statistics such as teenage suicide rates, self-harm generally, substance abuse, eating disorders, and so on - don't look terribly good compared with the past. This seems to be especially true of girls.
Can you quote the girl/boy historical suicide stats? They're a hard end fact.
For all the stories about how awful things were for kids in the old days, I'm not sure that 2016 has got much to boast of in that respect. Objective measures of mental health amongst children and young people - by 'objective' I means ones which don't depend on the opinions of either laymen or experts, i.e. statistics such as teenage suicide rates, self-harm generally, substance abuse, eating disorders, and so on - don't look terribly good compared with the past. This seems to be especially true of girls.
I think 'life' in general is easier for a median person marginally older than myself compared to marginally younger (I am 35). Of course over time things normally improve, but I'm not convinced that is the case at the moment.
For all the stories about how awful things were for kids in the old days, I'm not sure that 2016 has got much to boast of in that respect. Objective measures of mental health amongst children and young people - by 'objective' I means ones which don't depend on the opinions of either laymen or experts, i.e. statistics such as teenage suicide rates, self-harm generally, substance abuse, eating disorders, and so on - don't look terribly good compared with the past. This seems to be especially true of girls.
I didn't say my childhood was awful. It was certainly very poor and violent, but children are like fish, they don't have opinions about the sea they swim in. Family life is what it is. In fact, thinking about it, maybe that lack of comparators is the advantage we had over today's children. Ignorance is bliss.
For all the stories about how awful things were for kids in the old days, I'm not sure that 2016 has got much to boast of in that respect. Objective measures of mental health amongst children and young people - by 'objective' I means ones which don't depend on the opinions of either laymen or experts, i.e. statistics such as teenage suicide rates, self-harm generally, substance abuse, eating disorders, and so on - don't look terribly good compared with the past. This seems to be especially true of girls.
I think 'life' in general is easier for a median person marginally older than myself compared to marginally younger (I am 35). Of course over time things normally improve, but I'm not convinced that is the case at the moment.
Overall life is undoubtedly better for all - the one exception is housing compared to the 1980s. We need a few years of building 300,000+ a year.
Mr. M, it's interesting being in the generation on the crest of the internet wave. I can remember nobody having mobile phones, and it being a bit weird to shop online.
It's already changing society drastically.
I would walk down to the village - pockets full of 10p and 20p coins - to the payphone to make a 'private' call to my girlfriend.
'And did you travel by horse and cart as well, Dad?'
Learning all that SWALK, HOLLAND ITALY stuff for letters to gf's at a Boarding School and waiting for the mauve coloured letters to come back. What an exciting life I had at 13/14.
As a young soldier I found NORWICH worked very well.
For all the stories about how awful things were for kids in the old days, I'm not sure that 2016 has got much to boast of in that respect. Objective measures of mental health amongst children and young people - by 'objective' I means ones which don't depend on the opinions of either laymen or experts, i.e. statistics such as teenage suicide rates, self-harm generally, substance abuse, eating disorders, and so on - don't look terribly good compared with the past. This seems to be especially true of girls.
I wonder if too much tech and social media has something to do with that.
There's also a higher than realistic rate of self-diagnosis of psych conditions. Give someone the indicators for psychopathology and they'll think they have half or more.
For all the stories about how awful things were for kids in the old days, I'm not sure that 2016 has got much to boast of in that respect. Objective measures of mental health amongst children and young people - by 'objective' I means ones which don't depend on the opinions of either laymen or experts, i.e. statistics such as teenage suicide rates, self-harm generally, substance abuse, eating disorders, and so on - don't look terribly good compared with the past. This seems to be especially true of girls.
Can you quote the girl/boy historical suicide stats? They're a hard end fact.
It's quite hard to find good UK statistics prior to 2000, but the figures in the US were quite dramatic: between 1950 and 1990, youth-suicide rates tripled:
FPT David L, you were fortunate. My step-daughter went to an all-girls' school in the late 90's early 00's where the teachers seem to have regarded it as one of the perks of their job to ogle the girls in the showers.
Mine did that in the 80s - seriously creepy. Only one member of the PE staff didn't come across as a sadistic predatory lesbian.
The two worst offenders, according to my step-daughter, were a pair of nuns who were later found to be having an affair with each other.
To be honest, when talking about schooldays, I've not encountered anyone who can't tell stories about dodgy teachers. I remember one who took a real shine to a very pretty boy in my Latin class, and used to read him Latin homosexual love poetry.
We'd one male teacher who spanked across his knee one of my classmates - in a girls' school. A couple at the boy's next door were notorious spankers/caressers.
I only recall one girl getting hit with a ruler across the back of her hand. The boys' school regularly had tales of ruler backsides/sticking bog roll down their pants if they thought it was likely. Throwing a board rubber was another - those chalk marks never came out of a blazer.
I got the cane in 1990.
To my own children, it will probably seem as anachronistic and medieval as the stocks, or dunking.
Undoubtedly. I find it hard to fathom how widespread it was for so long, but like Sean F those I know who experienced it seemed to think it was in some ways funny.
"It never did me any harm"
Out of curiosity - did you get a say in boarding school? I was given the choice of which day school I went to. Thankfully. The 'best' rated at the time felt like Colditz to me and the pupils gave off scared vibes as they rushed about the corridors. I picked the second one as it felt positive and fun.
Indirectly. I think I said I found Winchester stuffy and intimidating and Lords Wandsworth too sporty.
My parents would make a judgment based upon what they knew of me, what I liked and what they felt would work - but I was never formally asked.
Funnily enough, at the time, I changed schools at 4, 8 and 10 years old, it didn't even occur to me. But by the time I was 15 I was very clear I wanted out.
For all the stories about how awful things were for kids in the old days, I'm not sure that 2016 has got much to boast of in that respect. Objective measures of mental health amongst children and young people - by 'objective' I means ones which don't depend on the opinions of either laymen or experts, i.e. statistics such as teenage suicide rates, self-harm generally, substance abuse, eating disorders, and so on - don't look terribly good compared with the past. This seems to be especially true of girls.
I wonder if too much tech and social media has something to do with that.
The social media angle is that there's much more awareness now among the poor kids growing up, of how the rich kids are growing up very differently.
Mr. Nabavi, old stats (a while since I was at university) but the US has very high levels of psych disorders (four times the rate of psychopathology as the UK, for example).
Some attribute that to the more individualistic nature of society, even compared to the rest of the West.
I never thought I'd say this but huzzah for the French (judiciary)
That was a sensible outcome.
There was a time when someone could be prosecuted for not having enough clothes on. Now someone [ could have been ] prosecuted for wearing too many clothes !
Mr. Nabavi, old stats (a while since I was at university) but the US has very high levels of psych disorders (four times the rate of psychopathology as the UK, for example).
Some attribute that to the more individualistic nature of society, even compared to the rest of the West.
Are you sure that's not a measure of the number of practising psychiatrists, though?
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
As a child, if you have loving parents, a reasonably warm home, regular meals on the table and places to play, what more do you need? My generation was so lucky. We did not have the privations that previous generations went through, or the complications that today's lot have to suffer. From around the mid-50s (post-rationing) to the mid-90s (pre-internet) was the golden age of childhood in GB (though not NI, for obvious reasons).
There's also a higher than realistic rate of self-diagnosis of psych conditions. Give someone the indicators for psychopathology and they'll think they have half or more.
Millennial whining doesn't improve matters.
And then a young person who has convinced themselves that they have a problem can go online and find lots of people who feel the same way and thus undermine parents/carers who are actually talking sense. Been there as a parent. One needs a strong relationship with the child to convince them that you are talking sense and their online "friends" actually need a smack round the ear-hole and should be ignored.
For all the stories about how awful things were for kids in the old days, I'm not sure that 2016 has got much to boast of in that respect. Objective measures of mental health amongst children and young people - by 'objective' I means ones which don't depend on the opinions of either laymen or experts, i.e. statistics such as teenage suicide rates, self-harm generally, substance abuse, eating disorders, and so on - don't look terribly good compared with the past. This seems to be especially true of girls.
I wonder if too much tech and social media has something to do with that.
The social media angle is that there's much more awareness now among the poor kids growing up, of how the rich kids are growing up very differently.
Maybe. One of the best things about growing older is giving a less of a fuck what others think about you.
On the other hand, teenagers seem to live and die by it. In some instances, literally.
Looking back on it, I was obsessed and stressed most of the time when I was 15-20 worried what others thought of me and ultra-sensitive - always thinking any personality clash, or criticism, was a huge deal and my problem not theirs,
Mr. Nabavi, old stats (a while since I was at university) but the US has very high levels of psych disorders (four times the rate of psychopathology as the UK, for example).
Some attribute that to the more individualistic nature of society, even compared to the rest of the West.
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.
No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
Mr. M, it's interesting being in the generation on the crest of the internet wave. I can remember nobody having mobile phones, and it being a bit weird to shop online.
It's already changing society drastically.
Education is what it will change most drastically, IMO. Our daughter came to us aged 15 and said she did not want to waste time going to (bricks and mortar) school anymore. We told her to make the case, she did. Came up with an online, distance learning school, with tutors for each subject at the end of an email or phone call to discuss her work.
No commute, no homework, working at her own speed when she was self-motivated to do so, sleeping in when she needed so she never did schoolwork sleepy. Freed up probably 3-5 hours a day to ride her horses. Happy girl, grades went from B-/C+ average to straight As
From the teacher's perspective, also more efficient. She/he only got involved when the daughter had questions, or to mark assigned work. With many of the assignments tested online, even marking time was reduced.
I am now a huge fan of MOOCs (massive open on-line courses) which means you can get free Bachelor's level university courses and work them at your own speed. Why anyone would pay to go to university is beyond me (as his daughter is about to start her final year at the US' most expensive private university )
On topic: Is there anything to suggest that Labour would do better in a planned campaign? Surely the more thinking time they have, the more chance they have to reach hitherto unimaginable levels of wrongness.
It would be carnage. Putting aside the manifesto and the nonsense it would contain, just think about Corbyn during a GE campaign. He would be constantly asked about his support for the IRA, for Hamas, for Hezbollah, for Stop the War, for the Iranians, putin and so on; then there would be the stuff on NATO. YOu have McDonnell on top of that of course. What's more, Corbyn's PR operation is shambolic and he refuses to engage with the press and TV, while also only doing rallies that people who already agree with him attend. His leadership - though that term of course is not the correct one - guarantees a Tory majority in excess of I50 seats.
Mr. T, that's good to hear. I know home-schooling is much bigger in the US than here, and the internet can only make that easier. Sounds like it's good all round.
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.
No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
Out of curiosity - did you get a say in boarding school? I was given the choice of which day school I went to. Thankfully. The 'best' rated at the time felt like Colditz to me and the pupils gave off scared vibes as they rushed about the corridors. I picked the second one as it felt positive and fun.
I was. The choice was between boarding school in the UK or day school in Cyprus with the family (and school only in the mornings, afternoons on the beach). Surprisingly, I chose the latter.
Mr. M, it's interesting being in the generation on the crest of the internet wave. I can remember nobody having mobile phones, and it being a bit weird to shop online.
It's already changing society drastically.
Education is what it will change most drastically, IMO. Our daughter came to us aged 15 and said she did not want to waste time going to (bricks and mortar) school anymore. We told her to make the case, she did. Came up with an online, distance learning school, with tutors for each subject at the end of an email or phone call to discuss her work.
No commute, no homework, working at her own speed when she was self-motivated to do so, sleeping in when she needed so she never did schoolwork sleepy. Freed up probably 3-5 hours a day to ride her horses. Happy girl, grades went from B-/C+ average to straight As
From the teacher's perspective, also more efficient. She/he only got involved when the daughter had questions, or to mark assigned work. With many of the assignments tested online, even marking time was reduced.
I am now a huge fan of MOOCs (massive open on-line courses) which means you can get free Bachelor's level university courses and work them at your own speed. Why anyone would pay to go to university is beyond me (as his daughter is about to start her final year at the US' most expensive private university )
MIT have stuck all their courses up on the web ...
Mr. M, it's interesting being in the generation on the crest of the internet wave. I can remember nobody having mobile phones, and it being a bit weird to shop online.
It's already changing society drastically.
Education is what it will change most drastically, IMO. Our daughter came to us aged 15 and said she did not want to waste time going to (bricks and mortar) school anymore. We told her to make the case, she did. Came up with an online, distance learning school, with tutors for each subject at the end of an email or phone call to discuss her work.
No commute, no homework, working at her own speed when she was self-motivated to do so, sleeping in when she needed so she never did schoolwork sleepy. Freed up probably 3-5 hours a day to ride her horses. Happy girl, grades went from B-/C+ average to straight As
From the teacher's perspective, also more efficient. She/he only got involved when the daughter had questions, or to mark assigned work. With many of the assignments tested online, even marking time was reduced.
I am now a huge fan of MOOCs (massive open on-line courses) which means you can get free Bachelor's level university courses and work them at your own speed. Why anyone would pay to go to university is beyond me (as his daughter is about to start her final year at the US' most expensive private university )
It shows tremendous self-discipline and time management.
A friend's home schooled daughter got great grades, spent hours riding, lots of horsey friends. She didn't enjoy school/bullied and changed about 13yrs old - best thing IMO though initially sceptical.
She's just finishing animal husbandry course now, and very well adjusted independent young lady.
Re the FTPA act. If May stands up in parliament and says, "Hey boys, let's have an election, you're quite right, I need a mandate what say you?", I'd be fascinated to see how Labour respond.
Mr. Royale, works going further back too. My parents didn't have calculators. Which just seems weird.
Mr D, had you pinned as roughly my age. The first calculators hit the scene when I was in 4th form, but their use in exams was still banned by the time I completed A levels. Slide rules and log tables only.
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.
No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
I've very trenchant opinions about this - childcare should be done by parents, unless they're dead or dangerous.
Mr. Royale, works going further back too. My parents didn't have calculators. Which just seems weird.
Mr D, had you pinned as roughly my age. The first calculators hit the scene when I was in 4th form, but their use in exams was still banned by the time I completed A levels. Slide rules and log tables only.
I believe you must be almost an exact contemporary. Born late '60 here. You?
Mr. Royale, works going further back too. My parents didn't have calculators. Which just seems weird.
Mr D, had you pinned as roughly my age. The first calculators hit the scene when I was in 4th form, but their use in exams was still banned by the time I completed A levels. Slide rules and log tables only.
I believe you must be almost an exact contemporary. Born late '60 here. You?
For all the stories about how awful things were for kids in the old days, I'm not sure that 2016 has got much to boast of in that respect. Objective measures of mental health amongst children and young people - by 'objective' I means ones which don't depend on the opinions of either laymen or experts, i.e. statistics such as teenage suicide rates, self-harm generally, substance abuse, eating disorders, and so on - don't look terribly good compared with the past. This seems to be especially true of girls.
I wonder if too much tech and social media has something to do with that.
I feel that pressures on kids are greater today too. I never really had much homework. Sports were mainly for pleasure and not that organized or, really, competitive (at least not compared to how competitive high school team sports are in the US now) and kids were allowed unsupervised play time to goof around and be idiots. We took full advantage of the latter. As the parents were not around, they didn't get to freak out about the antics we got up to. I am sure all that blowing off of steam is good of kids' mental health and it lacking now.
Mr. Royale, works going further back too. My parents didn't have calculators. Which just seems weird.
Mr D, had you pinned as roughly my age. The first calculators hit the scene when I was in 4th form, but their use in exams was still banned by the time I completed A levels. Slide rules and log tables only.
I believe you must be almost an exact contemporary. Born late '60 here. You?
Ditto. 1966 here.
Miss Plato, you are but a child! Forgive me for pegging you as a year or two ahead of me .
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
This is part of the problem: I am sitting very close to three (very attractive) teenage girls on the train. All probably about seventeen.
As I type they are all busy on their iPhones posing and taking selfies of themselves.
Mr. T, that's good to hear. I know home-schooling is much bigger in the US than here, and the internet can only make that easier. Sounds like it's good all round.
Hope she's doing well at university.
Ridiculously so. Told by Uni to apply for a Rhodes. Accepted two years early into GW Med School. Sickening.
Mr. Royale, works going further back too. My parents didn't have calculators. Which just seems weird.
Mr D, had you pinned as roughly my age. The first calculators hit the scene when I was in 4th form, but their use in exams was still banned by the time I completed A levels. Slide rules and log tables only.
I believe you must be almost an exact contemporary. Born late '60 here. You?
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
This is part of the problem: I am sitting very close to three (very attractive) teenage girls on the train. All probably about seventeen.
As I type they are all busy on their iPhones posing and taking selfies of themselves.
It's provided newspapers with an endless supply of photos when they become media fodder. The pouting selfie look is so weird. All head down, shoulders up, eyes coquettish.
I honestly thought the 'selfie stick' was a joke for ages - then saw one. It's vanity on a scale I can't fathom. As a teenager, I'd a boyfriend who spent most of the time admiring himself in shop windows - he'd be in element now, shame he's 50
OT: If Yellen does raise rates on the 21st, Carney's going to look even dafter.
I note she is giving a speech from Jackson Hole today. Is that normal ?
The wilds of Wyoming are about as far from Wall St as you can get
I believe it's the Fed's annual retreat.
Story is that when the Kansas Fed wanted to do an annual retreat that we're v keenvthat Paul Volcker came. He was a noted lover of trout fishing. Hence... Jackson hole.
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
This is part of the problem: I am sitting very close to three (very attractive) teenage girls on the train. All probably about seventeen.
As I type they are all busy on their iPhones posing and taking selfies of themselves.
It's provided newspapers with an endless supply of photos when they become media fodder. The pouting selfie look is so weird. All head down, shoulders up, eyes coquettish.
I honestly thought the 'selfie stick' was a joke for ages - then saw one. It's vanity on a scale I can't fathom. As a teenager, I'd a boyfriend who spent most of the time admiring himself in shop windows - he'd be in element now, shame he's 50
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
This is part of the problem: I am sitting very close to three (very attractive) teenage girls on the train. All probably about seventeen.
As I type they are all busy on their iPhones posing and taking selfies of themselves.
I have no idea why selfies became such a thing. Much prefer to have a proper photo taken at a reasonable distance or be taking one of someone else. Vapid self interest I guess, from a technical point of view most selfies are monstrosities to photography (Camera phones are fine these days from a technical pov imo)
Mr. Royale, works going further back too. My parents didn't have calculators. Which just seems weird.
Mr D, had you pinned as roughly my age. The first calculators hit the scene when I was in 4th form, but their use in exams was still banned by the time I completed A levels. Slide rules and log tables only.
I believe you must be almost an exact contemporary. Born late '60 here. You?
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
This is part of the problem: I am sitting very close to three (very attractive) teenage girls on the train. All probably about seventeen.
As I type they are all busy on their iPhones posing and taking selfies of themselves.
It's provided newspapers with an endless supply of photos when they become media fodder. The pouting selfie look is so weird. All head down, shoulders up, eyes coquettish.
I honestly thought the 'selfie stick' was a joke for ages - then saw one. It's vanity on a scale I can't fathom. As a teenager, I'd a boyfriend who spent most of the time admiring himself in shop windows - he'd be in element now, shame he's 50
Yeah, that's exactly what they were doing.
What on earth is the fish pout look about?
Not attractive.
I can only presume they're copying the blowjob in a porn film look. When else would you have your head down, shoulders up and pose like that?
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.
No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
ADHD is a condition that has been brought on by a change from an active lifestyle with natural foods to a sedentary one with processed foods. In many cases a change of diet and structured motor programmes can help.
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
This is part of the problem: I am sitting very close to three (very attractive) teenage girls on the train. All probably about seventeen.
As I type they are all busy on their iPhones posing and taking selfies of themselves.
I have no idea why selfies became such a thing. Much prefer to have a proper photo taken at a reasonable distance or be taking one of someone else. Vapid self interest I guess, from a technical point of view most selfies are monstrosities to photography (Camera phones are fine these days from a technical pov imo)
Apparently it's common for youngsters to have THOUSANDS of photos of themselves. If I wanted a pix taken - I'd ask someone to do it.
I can't have more than a dozen photos of me in total - I'm really awkward about it and it shows. My MiL loved having hers taken and would barge into shot if given a chance. She'd love being a teenager today
Mr. T, that's good to hear. I know home-schooling is much bigger in the US than here, and the internet can only make that easier. Sounds like it's good all round.
Hope she's doing well at university.
Ridiculously so. Told by Uni to apply for a Rhodes. Accepted two years early into GW Med School. Sickening.
Re the FTPA act. If May stands up in parliament and says, "Hey boys, let's have an election, you're quite right, I need a mandate what say you?", I'd be fascinated to see how Labour respond.
Yes that would be fascinating. How would they dissemble not wanting an election, when they're the opposition and supposed to be the government in waiting!
Mr. M, it's interesting being in the generation on the crest of the internet wave. I can remember nobody having mobile phones, and it being a bit weird to shop online.
It's already changing society drastically.
Education is what it will change most drastically, IMO. Our daughter came to us aged 15 and said she did not want to waste time going to (bricks and mortar) school anymore. We told her to make the case, she did. Came up with an online, distance learning school, with tutors for each subject at the end of an email or phone call to discuss her work.
No commute, no homework, working at her own speed when she was self-motivated to do so, sleeping in when she needed so she never did schoolwork sleepy. Freed up probably 3-5 hours a day to ride her horses. Happy girl, grades went from B-/C+ average to straight As
From the teacher's perspective, also more efficient. She/he only got involved when the daughter had questions, or to mark assigned work. With many of the assignments tested online, even marking time was reduced.
I am now a huge fan of MOOCs (massive open on-line courses) which means you can get free Bachelor's level university courses and work them at your own speed. Why anyone would pay to go to university is beyond me (as his daughter is about to start her final year at the US' most expensive private university )
My mate runs Massolit. Might be worth a look?
Not free, but also not expensive. And very good quality.
Mr. Royale, works going further back too. My parents didn't have calculators. Which just seems weird.
Mr D, had you pinned as roughly my age. The first calculators hit the scene when I was in 4th form, but their use in exams was still banned by the time I completed A levels. Slide rules and log tables only.
I believe you must be almost an exact contemporary. Born late '60 here. You?
... er, gulp, 1958.
Same age as my elder sister, grandpa .
Watch out, whipper-snapper, I might shake my walking stick at you ... Or is it the Zimmer frame?
Mr. T, that's good to hear. I know home-schooling is much bigger in the US than here, and the internet can only make that easier. Sounds like it's good all round.
Hope she's doing well at university.
Ridiculously so. Told by Uni to apply for a Rhodes. Accepted two years early into GW Med School. Sickening.
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.
No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
Obviously you are lucky not to have an autistic child or someone with ADHD. Otherwise, you would not have written such a stupid line !
I am sure you don't have to take a 15 year old boy to the toilet and clean him after he does his stuff.
Mr. M, it's interesting being in the generation on the crest of the internet wave. I can remember nobody having mobile phones, and it being a bit weird to shop online.
It's already changing society drastically.
Education is what it will change most drastically, IMO. Our daughter came to us aged 15 and said she did not want to waste time going to (bricks and mortar) school anymore. We told her to make the case, she did. Came up with an online, distance learning school, with tutors for each subject at the end of an email or phone call to discuss her work.
No commute, no homework, working at her own speed when she was self-motivated to do so, sleeping in when she needed so she never did schoolwork sleepy. Freed up probably 3-5 hours a day to ride her horses. Happy girl, grades went from B-/C+ average to straight As
From the teacher's perspective, also more efficient. She/he only got involved when the daughter had questions, or to mark assigned work. With many of the assignments tested online, even marking time was reduced.
I am now a huge fan of MOOCs (massive open on-line courses) which means you can get free Bachelor's level university courses and work them at your own speed. Why anyone would pay to go to university is beyond me (as his daughter is about to start her final year at the US' most expensive private university )
My mate runs Massolit. Might be worth a look?
Not free, but also not expensive. And very good quality.
The below the line comments on Guido's weekly Friday Caption Contest are always worth a read.
" I was desperate for a pee and was rushing for the train bog..And I tripped over this scruffy tramp blocking the doorway."
"Man crushed in stampede for train seat."
"It's not blood. It's raspberry bloody jam. And the entire road was bloody covered in it. A bystander said that some scruffy-looking tramp had dropped it just before I happened to come along..."
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.
No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
Obviously you are lucky not to have an autistic child or someone with ADHD. Otherwise, you would not have written such a stupid line !
I am sure you don't have to take a 15 year old boy to the toilet and clean him after he does his stuff.
So sorry your son has autism. I know several families who have to deal with this and the burden it places on the entire family, no matter how much love they have for the child.
There are, of course, real cases of ADHD. However, there is also clearly an over-diagnosis by doctors, at least in the US, of this disorder, and I think that is what the earlier conversation was parodying, rather than denying that there are any real cases.
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.
No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
You generally are a sensible man (and I think we may have attended the same school in London albeit at different times) so I will cut you some slack
But you clearly have no fucking clue on this matter.
I have 4 children 2 of whom have ADHD perhaps I and my wife just did a shit job with 2 of them.....
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.
No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
Obviously you are lucky not to have an autistic child or someone with ADHD. Otherwise, you would not have written such a stupid line !
I am sure you don't have to take a 15 year old boy to the toilet and clean him after he does his stuff.
I get to agree with Surbiton at least once in my life :-)
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.
No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
ADHD is a condition that has been brought on by a change from an active lifestyle with natural foods to a sedentary one with processed foods. In many cases a change of diet and structured motor programmes can help.
You certainly would be best served keeping those children away from certain foods and drinks.
Mr. M, it's interesting being in the generation on the crest of the internet wave. I can remember nobody having mobile phones, and it being a bit weird to shop online.
It's already changing society drastically.
Education is what it will change most drastically, IMO. Our daughter came to us aged 15 and said she did not want to waste time going to (bricks and mortar) school anymore. We told her to make the case, she did. Came up with an online, distance learning school, with tutors for each subject at the end of an email or phone call to discuss her work.
No commute, no homework, working at her own speed when she was self-motivated to do so, sleeping in when she needed so she never did schoolwork sleepy. Freed up probably 3-5 hours a day to ride her horses. Happy girl, grades went from B-/C+ average to straight As
From the teacher's perspective, also more efficient. She/he only got involved when the daughter had questions, or to mark assigned work. With many of the assignments tested online, even marking time was reduced.
I am now a huge fan of MOOCs (massive open on-line courses) which means you can get free Bachelor's level university courses and work them at your own speed. Why anyone would pay to go to university is beyond me (as his daughter is about to start her final year at the US' most expensive private university )
My mate runs Massolit. Might be worth a look?
Not free, but also not expensive. And very good quality.
Shame it seems to lack science completely. Or have I missed something.
And yet the very premise of this piece, and the concern many have with the FTPA, is that people have the temptation. Just the possibility of it causes disruption, recriminations at lost opportunities (if we had no FTPA and May did not got for a snap election now then, somehow, lost the next election, you can bet there'd be complaints).
The negative of binding a future parliament (except it is not really bound, since repeal will always be possible, it will just be politically more costly to try) would seem to me to be less than the positive of eliminating the possibility of partisan based scheduling of elections, whether they are likely or not.
Yet the governing party can still call an election. It simply has to pass a vote of no confidence in itself, and as no other government can be formed, and election must be called.
I'm also somewhat opposed to legislation that require more than a simple majority of Parliament to get things done. The two thirds majority stinks.
There is unfortunately an incentive on state schools to diagnose children as in a special needs category because they then get more funding than would otherwise be the case. My sister moved out of an urban area when the local (failing) primary was surprised when she did not want her eldest categorised in this way as in "most kids are".
Mr. Nabavi, I don't think so, though it could be a factor.
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
No child is naughty or a fidget or cheeky - it's ADHD or something else - never poor home discipline and lack of boundary setting.
No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
ADHD is an invention created to absolve wealthy parents that they are shit at their prime job in life, i.e. bringing up their kids.
Obviously you are lucky not to have an autistic child or someone with ADHD. Otherwise, you would not have written such a stupid line !
I am sure you don't have to take a 15 year old boy to the toilet and clean him after he does his stuff.
Mr. Urquhart, is that Will Hutton the chap who took over as leader of a centuries old economic thinktank, and managed to achieve its bankruptcy?
Sounds like an expert on poor economic prospects.
Must be a different Will Hutton, as surely nobody as incompetent that should be solicited for an opinion on such matters. This one is apparently Principal of Hertford College, Oxford.
A teenager saw an old photo of me in which I was smiling (as one was wont to do once up a time, "Say Cheese!" and all that) and said how wrong it was, everyone is meant to pout!
But then, I have photos of my great-grandparents from the 19th century, in which they are all practically scowling - to be charitable, they have a severely serious look. But that is the way they used to be posed, in a studio, at a serious event, holding the pose... looking through the family album the smile only really seemed to kick in in the 1920s or so, and that would be a slight one. The more unreserved, light-hearted and "cheesy" smiles only seem to be there from the 60s or 70s onwards - even relatives who I know to have been fun-loving, laugh-a-minute and gregarious types might only seem to manage half-smiles until then.
It's funny seeing someone in a 1920s photograph look so stern as a youth, and looking much more light-hearted and smiley come the 1980s or 1990s in the depths of old age!
Had they shown those later photographs to their parents or studio photographer in the 1920s, no doubt he would have told them to wipe that silly expression off of their face!!
Why do I get the feeling there's something big going to (figuratively) blow up in the face of either or both Clinton or Trump before the election?
They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
And yet the very premise of this piece, and the concern many have with the FTPA, is that people have the temptation. Just the possibility of it causes disruption, recriminations at lost opportunities (if we had no FTPA and May did not got for a snap election now then, somehow, lost the next election, you can bet there'd be complaints).
The negative of binding a future parliament (except it is not really bound, since repeal will always be possible, it will just be politically more costly to try) would seem to me to be less than the positive of eliminating the possibility of partisan based scheduling of elections, whether they are likely or not.
Yet the governing party can still call an election. It simply has to pass a vote of no confidence in itself, and as no other government can be formed, and election must be called.
I'm also somewhat opposed to legislation that require more than a simple majority of Parliament to get things done. The two thirds majority stinks.
It's not perfect. But having to pass a no confidence motion against itself is a much tougher proposition (because it sounds stupid) than a government just deciding it wants an election now thank you very much. And making it tougher to call an election whenever you want, which would be for political purposes, is on balance a good thing.
An interesting question. What would be the actuarial value of the bog standard state pension for someone on the brink of retirement, assuming they had average life expectancy?
Add that to the expected present value of our medical treatment, if we were to pay for it ourselves and crystallising that cashflow as a one-off lump sum payment at the point of retirement?
Why do I get the feeling there's something big going to (figuratively) blow up in the face of either or both Clinton or Trump before the election?
They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
Julian Assanage really seems to be gunning for Clinton.
And yet the very premise of this piece, and the concern many have with the FTPA, is that people have the temptation. Just the possibility of it causes disruption, recriminations at lost opportunities (if we had no FTPA and May did not got for a snap election now then, somehow, lost the next election, you can bet there'd be complaints).
The negative of binding a future parliament (except it is not really bound, since repeal will always be possible, it will just be politically more costly to try) would seem to me to be less than the positive of eliminating the possibility of partisan based scheduling of elections, whether they are likely or not.
Yet the governing party can still call an election. It simply has to pass a vote of no confidence in itself, and as no other government can be formed, and election must be called.
I'm also somewhat opposed to legislation that require more than a simple majority of Parliament to get things done. The two thirds majority stinks.
It's not perfect. But having to pass a no confidence motion against itself is a much tougher proposition (because it sounds stupid) than a government just deciding it wants an election now thank you very much. And making it tougher to call an election whenever you want, which would be for political purposes, is on balance a good thing.
If the Conservatives vote No Confidence in themselves, can't Corbyn approach the Queen and attempt to form a Government? Obviously it'd be voted down but he would go into the election as PM...
A teenager saw an old photo of me in which I was smiling (as one was wont to do once up a time, "Say Cheese!" and all that) and said how wrong it was, everyone is meant to pout!
But then, I have photos of my great-grandparents from the 19th century, in which they are all practically scowling - to be charitable, they have a severely serious look. But that is the way they used to be posed, in a studio, at a serious event, holding the pose... looking through the family album the smile only really seemed to kick in in the 1920s or so, and that would be a slight one. The more unreserved, light-hearted and "cheesy" smiles only seem to be there from the 60s or 70s onwards - even relatives who I know to have been fun-loving, laugh-a-minute and gregarious types might only seem to manage half-smiles until then.
It's funny seeing someone in a 1920s photograph look so stern as a youth, and looking much more light-hearted and smiley come the 1980s or 1990s in the depths of old age!
Had they shown those later photographs to their parents or studio photographer in the 1920s, no doubt he would have told them to wipe that silly expression off of their face!!
I don' think either a duck face, "cheese smile" or overly stern face is correct. A 'light' smile works best in my opinion.
Comments
'And did you travel by horse and cart as well, Dad?'
Incidentally, my uncle (into such things) showed me a mechanical calculator from some time ago (the example was new but it was based on an old design, maybe inter-war?). If I write a Victorian/inter-war style story, that kind of mechanical technology is what I'd aim for.
But then, technology has always led to interesting innovations. The Colosseum's mostly concrete, and Germany only became agriculturally viable on a large scale once an improved plough was invented.
Clinton 42 .. Trump 37
https://twitter.com/icitizen
The negative of binding a future parliament (except it is not really bound, since repeal will always be possible, it will just be politically more costly to try) would seem to me to be less than the positive of eliminating the possibility of partisan based scheduling of elections, whether they are likely or not.
There's also a higher than realistic rate of self-diagnosis of psych conditions. Give someone the indicators for psychopathology and they'll think they have half or more.
Millennial whining doesn't improve matters.
http://www.nber.org/chapters/c10690.pdf
As I understand it, this is part of a world-wide phenomenon.
My parents would make a judgment based upon what they knew of me, what I liked and what they felt would work - but I was never formally asked.
Funnily enough, at the time, I changed schools at 4, 8 and 10 years old, it didn't even occur to me. But by the time I was 15 I was very clear I wanted out.
Some attribute that to the more individualistic nature of society, even compared to the rest of the West.
There was a time when someone could be prosecuted for not having enough clothes on. Now someone [ could have been ] prosecuted for wearing too many clothes !
But that brings us to another point: the relentless pathologising of every quirk. He's not a fat bastard. He has binge eating disorder. He's not fussy. He has mild OCD. And so on.
Jeremy from Islington asks .... "is there a corridor of uncertainty about the offending (Labour) party ....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37198354
On the other hand, teenagers seem to live and die by it. In some instances, literally.
Looking back on it, I was obsessed and stressed most of the time when I was 15-20 worried what others thought of me and ultra-sensitive - always thinking any personality clash, or criticism, was a huge deal and my problem not theirs,
Like Shelter, bleating about small bedrooms.
No teenage angst is a phase - it requires sympathy or medicating.
And that then diminishes general sympathy/empathy for those who have genuine conditions.
In the same way the media's exciting new 'guess the missing word' approach to reporting terrorism isn't exactly enhancing public trust in them.
Mr. JS, for some, it isn't a choice. Well, it is. Just not theirs.
No commute, no homework, working at her own speed when she was self-motivated to do so, sleeping in when she needed so she never did schoolwork sleepy. Freed up probably 3-5 hours a day to ride her horses. Happy girl, grades went from B-/C+ average to straight As
From the teacher's perspective, also more efficient. She/he only got involved when the daughter had questions, or to mark assigned work. With many of the assignments tested online, even marking time was reduced.
I am now a huge fan of MOOCs (massive open on-line courses) which means you can get free Bachelor's level university courses and work them at your own speed. Why anyone would pay to go to university is beyond me (as his daughter is about to start her final year at the US' most expensive private university
Hope she's doing well at university.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7K1sB05pE0A
A friend's home schooled daughter got great grades, spent hours riding, lots of horsey friends. She didn't enjoy school/bullied and changed about 13yrs old - best thing IMO though initially sceptical.
She's just finishing animal husbandry course now, and very well adjusted independent young lady.
Stoke-on-Trent council blasted for using £100,000 for 'bin police' to ...https://www.thesun.co.uk/.../council-blasted-for-using-100000-on-bin-police-to-snoo...
As I type they are all busy on their iPhones posing and taking selfies of themselves.
I honestly thought the 'selfie stick' was a joke for ages - then saw one. It's vanity on a scale I can't fathom. As a teenager, I'd a boyfriend who spent most of the time admiring himself in shop windows - he'd be in element now, shame he's 50
She must've sacrificed many goats to Asclepius.
Mr. Royale, the wisest of men have no mobile telephone. And like classical history.
Mr. T (2), on a forum I used to visit when around 16-20, I was regularly mistaken for a fortysomething. Or older.
Not sure why.
What on earth is the fish pout look about?
Not attractive.
I can't have more than a dozen photos of me in total - I'm really awkward about it and it shows. My MiL loved having hers taken and would barge into shot if given a chance. She'd love being a teenager today
My mate runs Massolit. Might be worth a look?
Not free, but also not expensive. And very good quality.
Yes, but we can't let her know that.
I am sure you don't have to take a 15 year old boy to the toilet and clean him after he does his stuff.
" I was desperate for a pee and was rushing for the train bog..And I tripped over this scruffy tramp blocking the doorway."
"Man crushed in stampede for train seat."
"It's not blood. It's raspberry bloody jam. And the entire road was bloody covered in it. A bystander said that some scruffy-looking tramp had dropped it just before I happened to come along..."
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/769151032676999168
So sorry your son has autism. I know several families who have to deal with this and the burden it places on the entire family, no matter how much love they have for the child.
There are, of course, real cases of ADHD. However, there is also clearly an over-diagnosis by doctors, at least in the US, of this disorder, and I think that is what the earlier conversation was parodying, rather than denying that there are any real cases.
I reference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieqO-QCZJ5I
But you clearly have no fucking clue on this matter.
I have 4 children 2 of whom have ADHD perhaps I and my wife just did a shit job with 2 of them.....
You really have no idea
Muppet.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3760248/I-m-not-wealthy-claims-Jeremy-Corbyn-despite-earning-138-000-year-owning-600-000-home-1-6million-pension.html
I'm so poor I even have to make my own jam.....
I'm also somewhat opposed to legislation that require more than a simple majority of Parliament to get things done. The two thirds majority stinks.
He has handed a list of names to party officials, saying he wants a "fair and open" contest, with all those eligible to take part able to do so.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37184118
Sounds like an expert on poor economic prospects.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/26/hillary-clintons-honest-and-trustworthy-problem-in-one-facial-expression/
But then, I have photos of my great-grandparents from the 19th century, in which they are all practically scowling - to be charitable, they have a severely serious look. But that is the way they used to be posed, in a studio, at a serious event, holding the pose... looking through the family album the smile only really seemed to kick in in the 1920s or so, and that would be a slight one. The more unreserved, light-hearted and "cheesy" smiles only seem to be there from the 60s or 70s onwards - even relatives who I know to have been fun-loving, laugh-a-minute and gregarious types might only seem to manage half-smiles until then.
It's funny seeing someone in a 1920s photograph look so stern as a youth, and looking much more light-hearted and smiley come the 1980s or 1990s in the depths of old age!
Had they shown those later photographs to their parents or studio photographer in the 1920s, no doubt he would have told them to wipe that silly expression off of their face!!
They've both got way too many skeletons and are campaigning far too negatively, for something not to come out that makes one or other of them completely unfit for office in the eyes of the public.
Add that to the expected present value of our medical treatment, if we were to pay for it ourselves and crystallising that cashflow as a one-off lump sum payment at the point of retirement?
We're all a lot richer than we think.