So without recycling and renewables where does the rubbish we make go? More and more landfill? That's a hell if a legacy to leave for the future generations who will leave on our small island.
Meh, forget about that. "Jonathan" downthread says "BTW Never bought the "stealing from future generations" line. We live solely in the here and now."
So that's neatly sorted out then. Cheers Jonathan. Next.
''To equate keeping green taxes with elderly people freezing to death and industries closing is pure hyperbole.''
You call a potential 8% reduction in fuel bills 'pure hyperbole?'
Fair enough. Good luck with that one on the doorstep.
All politicians of the main parties are going to have to explain to the electorate why its a good idea to close down 'dirty' power stations BEFORE establishing that we could produce enough green energy cheaply enough to look after our society.
But the Lib dems are the high priests of this idea. And now its going sour they should be made to wear that particular t shirt.
What is and was acceptable for green energy such as windfarms was incentives and subsidies to allow it to gear up to the point that the savings of mass manufacturing were available.
What is completely unacceptable is that we accept or invest in long term energy production at a cost that adversely affects the rest of our economy by either discouraging manufacturing or for that matter absorbing an excessive share of consumption to the detriment of other parts of the economy.
Wind has had more than its fair share of subsidies. It is time for it to stand on its own. If it can't it is a bad investment that we would be better advised to write off rather than continue to destroy value in investing in. Solar, which was subsidised, does seem to have done better.
It is a good thing if we can reduce our consumption of finite resources such as hydrocarbons as it increases the long term stability of our economy. It is a good thing if we create more of our own energy from our own resources because it improves employment and the balance of payments. But it is not a good thing to commit ourselves to a policy designed to create expensive energy indefinitely. There needs to be a change in priorities there.
It is not necessary to clothe these arguments in global warning theses nor is it helpful. Our choices are so insignificant in the overall scheme of things as to make these arguments irrelevant. This does not make green energy bad. It simply means that we need to focus more clearly on our national interests without the dogoodery or the delusions.
On the renewables debate, there's a very good article in the latest Economist about green energy in Germany. I can't yet find it on-line, but it is in the 'Briefings' section.
It's got something for everyone, but perhaps should be read by anyone supporting Miliband's madness. The by-line is 'Europe's electricity providers face an existential threat', and shows the unexpected consequences of Europe's green energy market.
You are absolutely right that the biggest element in solving the demographic issues we face has to be a very substantial increase in the retirement age over the next quarter century. My favourite fact on longevity is that female life expectancy in the UK had risen by four months a year, in pretty much a straight line, since 1840.
But it is worth remembering that, if our TFR remains below 2.1, then the dependancy ratio will continue to worsen. If you wish to abolish the free movement of labour, then you are going to need to pursue some seriously pro-natal policies. Something which, as the Singaporeans have discovered, is incredibly difficult.
The problem with increasing retirement ages is that they keep younger people out of jobs - especially ones that do not involve much physical activity.
The lump of labour fallacy is still a fallacy whether it's applied to immigrants or people in their sixties.
In theory, perhaps. In practice, a primary school with, say, 12 classes will only recruit a new teacher to replace one who leaves.
You are absolutely right that the biggest element in solving the demographic issues we face has to be a very substantial increase in the retirement age over the next quarter century. My favourite fact on longevity is that female life expectancy in the UK had risen by four months a year, in pretty much a straight line, since 1840.
But it is worth remembering that, if our TFR remains below 2.1, then the dependancy ratio will continue to worsen. If you wish to abolish the free movement of labour, then you are going to need to pursue some seriously pro-natal policies. Something which, as the Singaporeans have discovered, is incredibly difficult.
I'd let anyone come here provided they can earn £1000 per week. I think that would show how many of our immigrants were 'highly skilled'.
With millions unemployed and falling productivity, not to mention our housing, infrastructure and transport problems, I don't see any benefit in letting in more people to wash cars, wipe tables or pick potatoes no matter how young they are.
Very few world class scientific researchers in their late 20s/early 30s will earn £50,000 plus. Not sure we want to keep them out.
You are absolutely right that the biggest element in solving the demographic issues we face has to be a very substantial increase in the retirement age over the next quarter century. My favourite fact on longevity is that female life expectancy in the UK had risen by four months a year, in pretty much a straight line, since 1840.
But it is worth remembering that, if our TFR remains below 2.1, then the dependancy ratio will continue to worsen. If you wish to abolish the free movement of labour, then you are going to need to pursue some seriously pro-natal policies. Something which, as the Singaporeans have discovered, is incredibly difficult.
The problem with increasing retirement ages is that they keep younger people out of jobs - especially ones that do not involve much physical activity.
The lump of labour fallacy is still a fallacy whether it's applied to immigrants or people in their sixties.
Which is essentially derived from the law of supply and demand.
The way increasing the supply of labour increases the demand for labour is by putting downward pressure on pay rates.
Aside from thus causing a wealth transfer from the young and low paid to the rich it also acts as a disincentive for capital investment and productivity improvements.
The problem we have which underlies everything is that governments around the world have made promises to their peoples which are impossible to be honoured.
The big discussion during the next generation are which groups in society are going to suffer the largest breaking of these promises.
Yet the Guardian will fight, until its dying breath, for the BBC to survive as it is. Most odd. This could easily be a blog. Mmm.
Anon.
Seant
Re competition between the BBC and Guardian, there’s also the practice of business clustering: if one were to go bust the other might actually have less chance of survival, not more.... the bookshops on Charing Cross Road, musical instruments in Denmark Street, shoe shops in Neal Street, Anne Summers and friends on Oxford Street etc. People go there to have a look around and the shops’ existence validates what they’re selling.
I am sure you could think of less flattering analogy but I think the BBC is a bit like Selfridges in the way it houses many boutiques selling fashionable gear. Whereas the Guardian, Channel 4, Mirror etc are those trendy boutiques across the road in New Bond Street. If Selfridges went under, none of those smaller outlets would be big enough to take over and New Bond Street would be in big trouble because people wouldn’t make the journey.
I guess that’s why the leftwing media was so jubilant at the killing the NOTW. Last week when the Mail hysteria was at crescendo I heard a presenter BBC presenter wondering out load whether advertisers might start boycotting the Mail. Absolutely disgraceful of them to try and get that meme going - dog in the fight etc. Dacre is totally right about the partiality and double-standards at the BBC re its treatment of the on-going MI5/Guardian stories. Be interesting to see if the BBC gives him an Op Ed. I doubt it somehow.
This battle between different sides of the media in utterly phoney. These journalists are all quite happy to appear in each other's output. It's complete guff designed to create interest and PB is falling for it.
Tell that to the 300 people who lost their jobs at the NOTW.
They know who closed it and why. No amount of right wing conspiracy nonsense will change that.
If the NotW was closed down for phone hacking, then the Guardian should be closed down for Wikileaks. Not for publishing the stories, but releasing the password for the encrypted file in a published book, meaning that the unredacted secrets got out into the open.
Not one person lost their job over that. It was either an incredibly negligent thing to do, or a deliberate act. Either way, someone should have gone.
The NOTW was closed down because Murdoch decided to close it down. His reasons for doing so were entirely commercial and financial. In short, shareholders and advertisers needed to see some decisive action. They got it and were partially, at least, reassured. In the great scheme of things the NOTW was entirely expendable - even though it was profitable it made virtually no overall contribution to NI's bottom line. In fact, being profitable - and relatively uninfluential - is what made it such an obvious candidate for closure. It was an easy sacrifice for Murdoch to make. The 300 jobs were neither here nor there to him.
Sorry, but that's shortsighted bs that doesn't address the issue. There was a campaign against NI that strangely did not extend to the (censored) who were also doing it, and were known to have done it.
What the Guardian did with Wikileaks had grave consequences. Yet it barely caused a ripple.
Take yesterday's abhorrent Guardian article and Campbell's rants. The left's media and personalities treat themselves to a much lower standard than they do their opponents.
Yet the Guardian will fight, until its dying breath, for the BBC to survive as it is. Most odd. This could easily be a blog. Mmm.
Anon.
Seant
Re competition between the BBC and Guardian, there’s also the practice of business clustering: if one were to go bust the other might actually have less chance of survival, not more.... the bookshops on Charing Cross Road, musical instruments in Denmark Street, shoe shops in Neal Street, Anne Summers and friends on Oxford Street etc. People go there to have a look around and the shops’ existence validates what they’re selling.
I am sure you could think of less flattering analogy but I think the BBC is a bit like Selfridges in the way it houses many boutiques selling fashionable gear. Whereas the Guardian, Channel 4, Mirror etc are those trendy boutiques across the road in New Bond Street. If Selfridges went under, none of those smaller outlets would be big enough to take over and New Bond Street would be in big trouble because people wouldn’t make the journey.
I guess that’s why the leftwing media was so jubilant at the killing the NOTW. Last week when the Mail hysteria was at crescendo I heard a presenter BBC presenter wondering out load whether advertisers might start boycotting the Mail. Absolutely disgraceful of them to try and get that meme going - dog in the fight etc. Dacre is totally right about the partiality and double-standards at the BBC re its treatment of the on-going MI5/Guardian stories. Be interesting to see if the BBC gives him an Op Ed. I doubt it somehow.
Dacre refused to defend his position with any of the broadcast media and sent substitutes instead.
"Or maybe we should burn it all and just increase pollution levels, with all the health problems these cause."
SO, I'm a fan of well controlled incinerators - they reduce pollution considerably and leave a lot less ash. They also produce electricity. People still equate them with dirty smoke whereas the stuff issuing from the chimney is virtually all steam.
You are absolutely right that the biggest element in solving the demographic issues we face has to be a very substantial increase in the retirement age over the next quarter century. My favourite fact on longevity is that female life expectancy in the UK had risen by four months a year, in pretty much a straight line, since 1840.
But it is worth remembering that, if our TFR remains below 2.1, then the dependancy ratio will continue to worsen. If you wish to abolish the free movement of labour, then you are going to need to pursue some seriously pro-natal policies. Something which, as the Singaporeans have discovered, is incredibly difficult.
I'd let anyone come here provided they can earn £1000 per week. I think that would show how many of our immigrants were 'highly skilled'.
With millions unemployed and falling productivity, not to mention our housing, infrastructure and transport problems, I don't see any benefit in letting in more people to wash cars, wipe tables or pick potatoes no matter how young they are.
Very few world class scientific researchers in their late 20s/early 30s will earn £50,000 plus. Not sure we want to keep them out.
In which case the term 'world class' must be as misused for scientific researchers as it is for England footballers.
A genuine 'world class' scientific researcher will generate income worth multi-millions, they are also likely to have only a short period when they do this. In which case £50,000 per year would be a bargain.
You are absolutely right that the biggest element in solving the demographic issues we face has to be a very substantial increase in the retirement age over the next quarter century. My favourite fact on longevity is that female life expectancy in the UK had risen by four months a year, in pretty much a straight line, since 1840.
But it is worth remembering that, if our TFR remains below 2.1, then the dependancy ratio will continue to worsen. If you wish to abolish the free movement of labour, then you are going to need to pursue some seriously pro-natal policies. Something which, as the Singaporeans have discovered, is incredibly difficult.
I'd let anyone come here provided they can earn £1000 per week. I think that would show how many of our immigrants were 'highly skilled'.
With millions unemployed and falling productivity, not to mention our housing, infrastructure and transport problems, I don't see any benefit in letting in more people to wash cars, wipe tables or pick potatoes no matter how young they are.
Very few world class scientific researchers in their late 20s/early 30s will earn £50,000 plus. Not sure we want to keep them out.
In which case the term 'world class' must be as misused for scientific researchers as it is for England footballers.
A genuine 'world class' scientific researcher will generate income worth multi-millions, they are also likely to have only a short period when they do this. In which case £50,000 per year would be a bargain.
That's not how publicly-funded universities and other research institutions work. A lot of the stuff they do is blue sky and may only lead to actual products many years down the line.
"Or maybe we should burn it all and just increase pollution levels, with all the health problems these cause."
SO, I'm a fan of well controlled incinerators - they reduce pollution considerably and leave a lot less ash. They also produce electricity. People still equate them with dirty smoke whereas the stuff issuing from the chimney is virtually all steam.
And it counts as being renewable.
Well there you go then! And presumably next generation incinerators can be developed that will do an even better job.
''To equate keeping green taxes with elderly people freezing to death and industries closing is pure hyperbole.''
You call a potential 8% reduction in fuel bills 'pure hyperbole?'
No , I am calling your hysterical blubberings of elderly people freezing to death and industries closing down as pure hyperbole and scaremongering of the basest sort .
Ripping off the taxpayer @DavidHillier: Royal Mail most underpriced UK privatisation IPO. Royal Mail (38%), Rolls-Royce (37%), BA (35%), BT (32%), British Gas (9.5%).
Anyone know the proportions which were sold to foreign buyers ?
So only five privatisations have ever taken place? The unthinkable alternative (whisper it softly) is that particular figures have been chosen selectively to create a point.
You are absolutely right that the biggest element in solving the demographic issues we face has to be a very substantial increase in the retirement age over the next quarter century. My favourite fact on longevity is that female life expectancy in the UK had risen by four months a year, in pretty much a straight line, since 1840.
But it is worth remembering that, if our TFR remains below 2.1, then the dependancy ratio will continue to worsen. If you wish to abolish the free movement of labour, then you are going to need to pursue some seriously pro-natal policies. Something which, as the Singaporeans have discovered, is incredibly difficult.
I'd let anyone come here provided they can earn £1000 per week. I think that would show how many of our immigrants were 'highly skilled'.
With millions unemployed and falling productivity, not to mention our housing, infrastructure and transport problems, I don't see any benefit in letting in more people to wash cars, wipe tables or pick potatoes no matter how young they are.
Very few world class scientific researchers in their late 20s/early 30s will earn £50,000 plus. Not sure we want to keep them out.
In which case the term 'world class' must be as misused for scientific researchers as it is for England footballers.
A genuine 'world class' scientific researcher will generate income worth multi-millions, they are also likely to have only a short period when they do this. In which case £50,000 per year would be a bargain.
"World class " scientific researchers may or may not generate income worth multi millions . If you take 100 of them perhaps only 1 or 2 may discover something good enough to generate those riches and perhaps 10 will discover something that generates multi thousands . That is the nature of scientific research together with the fact that it is impossible to predict which of the 100 will prove to be the exceptional 1 or 2 .
You are absolutely right that the biggest element in solving the demographic issues we face has to be a very substantial increase in the retirement age over the next quarter century. My favourite fact on longevity is that female life expectancy in the UK had risen by four months a year, in pretty much a straight line, since 1840.
But it is worth remembering that, if our TFR remains below 2.1, then the dependancy ratio will continue to worsen. If you wish to abolish the free movement of labour, then you are going to need to pursue some seriously pro-natal policies. Something which, as the Singaporeans have discovered, is incredibly difficult.
I'd let anyone come here provided they can earn £1000 per week. I think that would show how many of our immigrants were 'highly skilled'.
With millions unemployed and falling productivity, not to mention our housing, infrastructure and transport problems, I don't see any benefit in letting in more people to wash cars, wipe tables or pick potatoes no matter how young they are.
Very few world class scientific researchers in their late 20s/early 30s will earn £50,000 plus. Not sure we want to keep them out.
In which case the term 'world class' must be as misused for scientific researchers as it is for England footballers.
A genuine 'world class' scientific researcher will generate income worth multi-millions, they are also likely to have only a short period when they do this. In which case £50,000 per year would be a bargain.
That's not how publicly-funded universities and other research institutions work. A lot of the stuff they do is blue sky and may only lead to actual products many years down the line.
So no evidence that they're 'world class' at all. Are they any better than British graduates / scientific researchers or are they simply cheaper ?
Likewise the graduates of the local arts college might be considered 'world class' in 50 years time when their work is 'discovered'.
I see the Guardian are going mental at suggesting genetics may play a role in academic performance. Presumably they believe their pets could get 5 A* - C (not as outlandish as it should be...) with a little bit of extra nurturing, given genetics plays no role.
I'm not surprised Dacre snubbed the BBC's kind invitation to sit on the set of Tiswas under a bucket of gunge. Here's another idea: how about giving the Mail an hour of editorial time on BBC TV to make their point, free from being shouted down or interrupted in the same way they allowed Miliband free comment on their pages?
I'm not surprised Dacre snubbed the BBC's kind invitation to sit on the set of Tiswas under a bucket of gunge. Here's another idea: how about giving the Mail an hour of editorial time on BBC TV to make their point, free from being shouted down or interrupted in the same way they allowed Miliband free comment on their pages?
Has Dacre emerged from his monastery hideout now ?
I see the Guardian are going mental at suggesting genetics may play a role in academic performance. Presumably they believe their pets could get 5 A* - C (not as outlandish as it should be...) with a little bit of extra nurturing, given genetics plays no role.
There's some err emotive misrepresentation going on there between what Gove said and what the Guardian described it as.
I'd let anyone come here provided they can earn £1000 per week. I think that would show how many of our immigrants were 'highly skilled'.
With millions unemployed and falling productivity, not to mention our housing, infrastructure and transport problems, I don't see any benefit in letting in more people to wash cars, wipe tables or pick potatoes no matter how young they are.
Very few world class scientific researchers in their late 20s/early 30s will earn £50,000 plus. Not sure we want to keep them out.
In which case the term 'world class' must be as misused for scientific researchers as it is for England footballers.
A genuine 'world class' scientific researcher will generate income worth multi-millions, they are also likely to have only a short period when they do this. In which case £50,000 per year would be a bargain.
"World class " scientific researchers may or may not generate income worth multi millions . If you take 100 of them perhaps only 1 or 2 may discover something good enough to generate those riches and perhaps 10 will discover something that generates multi thousands . That is the nature of scientific research together with the fact that it is impossible to predict which of the 100 will prove to be the exceptional 1 or 2 .
Obviously.
But if this group of 100 'world class' scientific researchers aren't capable of ultimately producing wealth enough to pay them only £50k per year then I doubt whether they are genuinely 'world class' or that the area they are researching is valid enough for research.
@DavidHillier: Royal Mail most underpriced UK privatisation IPO. Royal Mail (38%), Rolls-Royce (37%), BA (35%), BT (32%), British Gas (9.5%).
Anyone know the proportions which were sold to foreign buyers ?
It rather depends on how you define a foreign buyer. Fidelity and Blackrock (both big American owned fund managers) will almost certainly have been given large positions. However, as their clients are largely UK defined benefit pension schemes, the ultimate beneficiaries are largely British.
At retail, I would guess less than 5%, but the numbers should be fairly easy to find.
"The establishment has a target in its sights; you can always tell from the tone of the Today programme. In this case, it’s Northern Ireland’s abortion law. The occasion is the genuinely tragic case of Sarah Ewart, who travelled to Britain this week in order to abort a foetus with the most severe case of spina bifida, which meant it didn’t have a head. She didn’t want to carry the pregnancy to term and Northern Ireland’s abortion laws at present don’t allow for abortions where the foetus does not actually threaten the life of the mother. Not unlike the intention behind the 1967 abortion law here, then, which is meant only to sanction an abortion where the risk to the mental or physical health of the mother is greater than if the pregnancy continued..." http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/10/the-bbcs-bias-on-abortion-in-northern-ireland-is-breathtaking/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-bbcs-bias-on-abortion-in-northern-ireland-is-breathtaking
I'd let anyone come here provided they can earn £1000 per week. I think that would show how many of our immigrants were 'highly skilled'.
Very few world class scientific researchers in their late 20s/early 30s will earn £50,000 plus. Not sure we want to keep them out.
In which case the term 'world class' must be as misused for scientific researchers as it is for England footballers.
A genuine 'world class' scientific researcher will generate income worth multi-millions, they are also likely to have only a short period when they do this. In which case £50,000 per year would be a bargain.
"World class " scientific researchers may or may not generate income worth multi millions . If you take 100 of them perhaps only 1 or 2 may discover something good enough to generate those riches and perhaps 10 will discover something that generates multi thousands . That is the nature of scientific research together with the fact that it is impossible to predict which of the 100 will prove to be the exceptional 1 or 2 .
Obviously.
But if this group of 100 'world class' scientific researchers aren't capable of ultimately producing wealth enough to pay them only £50k per year then I doubt whether they are genuinely 'world class' or that the area they are researching is valid enough for research.
Picking a "world class" sciebtific researcher is somewhat akin to picking a future Derby winner from a crop of unraced yearlings .. You can look at the breeding and look the horse over but you still have no idea which one will prove to be the future winner and will generate millions at stud . The Saudis tend to try and get around the problem by buying up all the yearlings .
Some of you have forgotten the site rules and are talking about phone hacking
Anyone violating this rule, will find their posting privileges suspended until after the weekend.
Is that clear?
Dear Mr Moderator - would you publish rules on what is acceptable extract length for articles from elsewhere? This seems to be very elastic and doesn't help posters to know what's okay and what isn't.
I'm not surprised Dacre snubbed the BBC's kind invitation to sit on the set of Tiswas under a bucket of gunge. Here's another idea: how about giving the Mail an hour of editorial time on BBC TV to make their point, free from being shouted down or interrupted in the same way they allowed Miliband free comment on their pages?
Probably better if you'd used a BBC kids' program for your metaphor. When was Miliband given an hour of editorial to make his point?
@DavidHillier: Royal Mail most underpriced UK privatisation IPO. Royal Mail (38%), Rolls-Royce (37%), BA (35%), BT (32%), British Gas (9.5%).
Anyone know the proportions which were sold to foreign buyers ?
It rather depends on how you define a foreign buyer. Fidelity and Blackrock (both big American owned fund managers) will almost certainly have been given large positions. However, as their clients are largely UK defined benefit pension schemes, the ultimate beneficiaries are largely British.
At retail, I would guess less than 5%, but the numbers should be fairly easy to find.
I ask because this seems the likely political sore point both to those who opposed the privatisation and those who didn't get all the shares they applied for.
"Why should all those Arabs/Chinese/Russians make a profit out of the Royal Mail" so to speak.
Of course that may not be an accurate portrayal of what has happened but its something which can be easily believed if someone wants to shitstir. And there will be no shortage of people wanting to shitstir.
@DavidHillier: Royal Mail most underpriced UK privatisation IPO. Royal Mail (38%), Rolls-Royce (37%), BA (35%), BT (32%), British Gas (9.5%).
So first day trading in four out of the five examples was all within the range +32-38%?
I'd call that pretty close!
You're going to look awfully foolish if the price goes below 330.......
BA share offer in Feb 1987, launch price 125p. Currently 380. I make that 3.8% compound growth since privatisation. Incidentally, the share price was around 150 twelve months ago, which equates to a compound growth of about nothing. Bargain? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/market_data/shares/3/88628/twelve_month.stm
I think most people know China is looming large on the horizon, but inevitably interest in the excitement of a US presidential campaign or even the ideological battles in Congress will always be greater than that of the staged and pre-planned internal leadership changes of the Chinese Communist Party and its respective factions. Indeed, not only does China not match the West in having a democratic electoral system outside Hong Kong, but even the BRIC nations of Brazil, India and even Russia which all have competitive elections to determine their presidents and governments! How long China will stay a one-party state is yet to be determined
At the beginning of World War II, a government pamphlet led to a massive cull of British pets. As many as 750,000 British pets were killed in just one week. This little-discussed moment of panic is explored in a new book.
@DavidHillier: Royal Mail most underpriced UK privatisation IPO. Royal Mail (38%), Rolls-Royce (37%), BA (35%), BT (32%), British Gas (9.5%).
Anyone know the proportions which were sold to foreign buyers ?
It rather depends on how you define a foreign buyer. Fidelity and Blackrock (both big American owned fund managers) will almost certainly have been given large positions. However, as their clients are largely UK defined benefit pension schemes, the ultimate beneficiaries are largely British.
At retail, I would guess less than 5%, but the numbers should be fairly easy to find.
I ask because this seems the likely political sore point both to those who opposed the privatisation and those who didn't get all the shares they applied for.
"Why should all those Arabs/Chinese/Russians make a profit out of the Royal Mail" so to speak.
Of course that may not be an accurate portrayal of what has happened but its something which can be easily believed if someone wants to shitstir. And there will be no shortage of people wanting to shitstir.
Well, I think the biggest beneficiaries will be the individuals who got 750 quids worth!
It is worth noting that there is no Russian state investment corporation that I'm aware of, and the Chinese one is tiny in Europe. State investments - in stock markets - are dominated by GIC (the Government of Singapore), ADIA (Abu Dhabi), KIA (Kuwait), and the Norwegian state fund. While these may have applied directly for shares, it's unlikely they will have gotten more than - and I'm guessing here, but I doubt I'm far off - 1% of the shares on offer, simply because they aren't that big in comparison with Blackrock, Fidelity or Allianz (all of which have more than $1trillion of assets). Where the ADIAs and GICs will have (indirectly) gotten shares is where they were investors in other people's funds. So, if - for example - ADIA is an investor in RIT Capital Partners Investment Trust plc (and I have no idea if they are), then they may be indirect shareholders. However, measuring this is almost impossible.
''To equate keeping green taxes with elderly people freezing to death and industries closing is pure hyperbole.''
You call a potential 8% reduction in fuel bills 'pure hyperbole?'
No , I am calling your hysterical blubberings of elderly people freezing to death and industries closing down as pure hyperbole and scaremongering of the basest sort .
It is also worth noting that the government has entered into contractually arrangements with the owners of windfarms, which cannot be legally changed. However, (a) the 8% reduction is an overstatement, because it is only looking at the cost of generation (which is half the cost of the bill, as transmission and distribution, etc. is pretty expensive), (b) one can reduce future problems by not subsidising additional windfarms.
You are absolutely right that the biggest element in solving the demographic issues we face has to be a very substantial increase in the retirement age over the next quarter century. My favourite fact on longevity is that female life expectancy in the UK had risen by four months a year, in pretty much a straight line, since 1840.
But it is worth remembering that, if our TFR remains below 2.1, then the dependancy ratio will continue to worsen. If you wish to abolish the free movement of labour, then you are going to need to pursue some seriously pro-natal policies. Something which, as the Singaporeans have discovered, is incredibly difficult.
I'd let anyone come here provided they can earn £1000 per week. I think that would show how many of our immigrants were 'highly skilled'.
With millions unemployed and falling productivity, not to mention our housing, infrastructure and transport problems, I don't see any benefit in letting in more people to wash cars, wipe tables or pick potatoes no matter how young they are.
Very few world class scientific researchers in their late 20s/early 30s will earn £50,000 plus. Not sure we want to keep them out.
In which case the term 'world class' must be as misused for scientific researchers as it is for England footballers.
A genuine 'world class' scientific researcher will generate income worth multi-millions, they are also likely to have only a short period when they do this. In which case £50,000 per year would be a bargain.
That's not how publicly-funded universities and other research institutions work. A lot of the stuff they do is blue sky and may only lead to actual products many years down the line.
On of the classics of serendipity in this area is the discovery of the usefulness of Lithium in psychiatry.
""It isn't well known that so many pets were killed because it isn't a nice story, it doesn't fit with this notion of us as a nation of animal lovers. People don't like to remember that at the first sign of war we went out to kill the pussycat," she says."
I think it reflects very well on Britain as a country as opposed to the subsequent decades of entitlement and whining exhibited by the pet owning fraternity.
"at the first sign of war we went out to kill the pussycat"
And the Nazis.
Makes you proud, and the consequences of the patriotic cat cull were captured in song.
After the PB Tory outrage, utter outrage there was, at Dave forgetting to appoint an Armed Forces Minister, I'm amazed that this story hasn't received more attention
"Ministry of Defence £2bn 'cash pile' scandal as thousands of troops sacked The Armed Forces are suffering “unnecessary” cuts because the Ministry of Defence has failed to spend almost £2 billion of its shrinking budget, senior commanders warn
An “overzealous” austerity drive meant the Forces were missing out on vital equipment, senior military sources have told The Daily Telegraph."
The self styled "friends of the troops" on here must be spitting blood, I mean every time a troop died before the election they were on here within seconds, before knowing any of the circumstances to blame ministers.
A guess it's all dwarfed by the damage done by Gordon Browns handwriting on a letter though.
Given that it's happened under both recent Governments, it does suggest that you wouldn't use the systems in the MoD to run a whelk stall!
On the grounds that if you sell bad whelks the customers could well die!
'"Ministry of Defence £2bn 'cash pile' scandal as thousands of troops sacked The Armed Forces are suffering “unnecessary” cuts because the Ministry of Defence has failed to spend almost £2 billion of its shrinking budget, senior commanders warn'
Small beer compared with Labour's £35 billion defence black hole.
'www.independent.co.uk › News › UK › Home News 24 Aug 2009 - Mr Gray rejects Labour claims that the problems were inherited from the ... There is a catastrophic black hole, so much so that the defence ...
So no evidence that they're 'world class' at all. Are they any better than British graduates / scientific researchers or are they simply cheaper ?
Likewise the graduates of the local arts college might be considered 'world class' in 50 years time when their work is 'discovered'.
We might look at the foreign-born Nobel laureates that came here first as researchers. The nature of world class R&D is that you need the best people the world can offer to do it - not just to lead, but as team members. That means being able to recruit from anywhere. An Indian science post-grad employed at Imperial will earn no more or less than a British one, but you can bet your bottom dollar that he/she will (1) be earning less than £50,000 a year at the outset; and (2) would be coveted by universities across the world. That's just the way it works. Sorry.
Well, whoever would have thought it? It's not something The Times would have done a couple of years back. But it's become just another Tory paper since the new editor took over. There is no paper of record in the UK now, sadly.
5 more years of caravans: Margaret Beckett reselected in Derby South.
An unkind thought crossed my mind when the DP featured the "Westminster Dog of the Year" show - did you catch it? Hunky Dunky owner of one of the winners! (Eric Joyce owner of the other).
We might look at the foreign-born Nobel laureates that came here first as researchers. The nature of world class R&D is that you need the best people the world can offer to do it - not just to lead, but as team members. That means being able to recruit from anywhere. An Indian science post-grad employed at Imperial will earn no more or less than a British one, but you can bet your bottom dollar that he/she will (1) be earning less than £50,000 a year at the outset; and (2) would be coveted by universities across the world. That's just the way it works. Sorry.
So what it comes down to is we must allow anyone to be employed in the hope that a few turn out to be genuine world class.
Of course we could also change university funding so we have a few thousand more STEM graduates and rather fewer in what might be termed less important subjects.
Or perhaps change the earnings priorities within the universities so that genuine world class research scientists get more and the middle managers and executives get less.
As actual scientific research is very expensive to conduct then universities shouldn't find it difficult to give genuine world class scietific researchers higher earnings. That by itself would make scientific research in Britain more attractive to both young British people contemplating a career and those around the world who are genuinely highly talented.
'Now care to explain why troops are being sacked while £2 Billion sits there?'
Care to explain why Labour sent troops without basic equipment whilst presiding over a £35 billion defence black hole?
'Troops killed 'by lack of basic equipment' - Telegraph www.telegraph.co.uk › News › UK News 16 Feb 2008 - "To send soldiers into a combat zone without basic equipment is ... Mastiff vehicles to be used that day but they were all being used elsewhere.
Now care to explain why troops are being sacked while £2 Billion sits there?
The war was cancelled, thanks to the incompetence of the leaders of both British parties and the US Secretary of State who tried to start a war and screwed it up. They should keep some money aside in case we're not as lucky next time.
'"Ministry of Defence £2bn 'cash pile' scandal as thousands of troops sacked The Armed Forces are suffering “unnecessary” cuts because the Ministry of Defence has failed to spend almost £2 billion of its shrinking budget, senior commanders warn'
Small beer compared with Labour's £35 billion defence black hole.
'www.independent.co.uk › News › UK › Home News 24 Aug 2009 - Mr Gray rejects Labour claims that the problems were inherited from the ... There is a catastrophic black hole, so much so that the defence ...
That one was debunked throughly by Chrisg000 a Tory who used to post on here.. Now care to explain why troops are being sacked while £2 Billion sits there?
I normally lurk but I do hate this sort of partisan nonsense. £36Bn was a politically charged, inaccurate number but the last Government were guilty of failing to take top level political decisions to make the MOD live within its means. The military were equally culpable of course. Similarly, a £2Bn underspend is a non story during this sort of period of retrenchment, and doubly so when Departments can use end year flexibility. Someone probably spotted the risk of an overspend next year and acted accordingly. Equally likely, some payments might have slipped their accrual date (though not cash transfer date) into next year. You do understand resource vs. cash accounting don't you?
On your point down thread about the Armed Forces Minister, this just shows that you don't understand Government. The PM selects Junior Ministers but very rarely allocates their roles. The Secretary of State does that. In most reshuffles, it takes a day or two for those roles to stabilise. You normally don't see this on the outside as the Minister's title remains unaltered.
You're obviously quite bright, but your partisan approach blinds you to logic at times. The same is true for many of the more story posters on here.
Martin: only news sound bites MODERATOR: any topics caught your attention? Angela: none have stood out Valerie : no not really usual promises Martin: only electioneering Richard 1: only the fact that we were guaranteed vote-winning policies and ideas Catherine: Not really - its just all soundbites Richard: Conferences seemed very bland comapred to prvious years
Martin: only news sound bites MODERATOR: any topics caught your attention? Angela: none have stood out Valerie : no not really usual promises Martin: only electioneering Richard 1: only the fact that we were guaranteed vote-winning policies and ideas Catherine: Not really - its just all soundbites Richard: Conferences seemed very bland comapred to prvious years
We might look at the foreign-born Nobel laureates that came here first as researchers. The nature of world class R&D is that you need the best people the world can offer to do it - not just to lead, but as team members. That means being able to recruit from anywhere. An Indian science post-grad employed at Imperial will earn no more or less than a British one, but you can bet your bottom dollar that he/she will (1) be earning less than £50,000 a year at the outset; and (2) would be coveted by universities across the world. That's just the way it works. Sorry.
So what it comes down to is we must allow anyone to be employed in the hope that a few turn out to be genuine world class.
Of course we could also change university funding so we have a few thousand more STEM graduates and rather fewer in what might be termed less important subjects.
Or perhaps change the earnings priorities within the universities so that genuine world class research scientists get more and the middle managers and executives get less.
As actual scientific research is very expensive to conduct then universities shouldn't find it difficult to give genuine world class scietific researchers higher earnings. That by itself would make scientific research in Britain more attractive to both young British people contemplating a career and those around the world who are genuinely highly talented.
No, it comes down to a blanket ban on allowing anyone to immigrate here if they won't command a £50,000 pa plus salary is in some cases going to mean we do ourselves more harm than good. That's not the same thing as saying let anyone in, which is not my view at all.
Thank you. Since I'm here, and much more on topic for a betting site: does that current US situation increase the chances of a successful "plague on both your houses" candidate at the next US Presidential Election. Clearly they wouldn't win but could someone get 20%? If so, who? And can one make a decent bet on them?
Is the US system susceptible to in insurgent Green/UKIP effect in the midterms if the Tea Party gets a thumping out of all this. An "I hate the political establishment party" that could make a splash?
Hardly a surprise the way the Times is heading And we lost count of the number of times the PB Tories sliced and diced that 8 sample joke report while studiously ignoring the 12,000 sample Ashcroft marginals poll.
Yet you ignore the massive 12,800 sample phone poll by Lord Ashcroft where, unlike the cheapie Times online focus group, the pollster actually TALKED to all those involved.
That has been the most signficant polling of the year by a big margin and I will be returning to it.
Labour’s former health secretary was told about a string of baby deaths – despite his claims he did not remember any ‘specific’ warnings, it emerged last night.
Andy Burnham said he did not recall being told about the problems at Furness General Hospital in Cumbria.
But documents seen by the Mail show Mr Burnham was briefed about the problems in January 2010, three months before his regulator gave the hospital a clean bill of health.
Somebody is really going for Andy...feels like a daily occurrence that somebody has been shown some document which results in claim that it contradicts what Andy has stated.
We might look at the foreign-born Nobel laureates that came here first as researchers. The nature of world class R&D is that you need the best people the world can offer to do it - not just to lead, but as team members. That means being able to recruit from anywhere. An Indian science post-grad employed at Imperial will earn no more or less than a British one, but you can bet your bottom dollar that he/she will (1) be earning less than £50,000 a year at the outset; and (2) would be coveted by universities across the world. That's just the way it works. Sorry.
So what it comes down to is we must allow anyone to be employed in the hope that a few turn out to be genuine world class.
Of course we could also change university funding so we have a few thousand more STEM graduates and rather fewer in what might be termed less important subjects.
Or perhaps change the earnings priorities within the universities so that genuine world class research scientists get more and the middle managers and executives get less.
As actual scientific research is very expensive to conduct then universities shouldn't find it difficult to give genuine world class scietific researchers higher earnings. That by itself would make scientific research in Britain more attractive to both young British people contemplating a career and those around the world who are genuinely highly talented.
another_richard, you always seem so angry
Research and academia has always been an incredibly international area. I suspect you'd find that the more international a serious academic institution, the more likely it is to produce world class work.
If you want to find fault - and there is much to find - then you'd be best off looking at third and fourth division academic institution, with dubious degrees. (A quick google found an MA in astrology and an MSc in homeopothy.) Direct your ire there, rather than to Warwick or Manchester University or Imperial or Cambridge or even LSE.
That one was debunked throughly by Chrisg000 a Tory who used to post on here.. Now care to explain why troops are being sacked while £2 Billion sits there?
Wee-Timmy,
Just google "MoD whiteboard". Here is the first response....
Plenty of evidence out there highlighting the £8billion equipment underspend and six-billion unallocated funds that have been set-aside up-until the end of 2022: Just look for it....
Mr. 195, others know much more of US politics than me, but given the two-party system I'm not sure a third candidate stands much of a chance.
Certainly not likely. But not possible? As the thread header suggests, things are changing. Something has to happen in US politics, but what's the something? Admittedly their politics is more focussed on individuals, who can shift around within parties, but surely both main parties are running out of the number of times they can play the Washington outsider card?
I can just see a narrative of "decline" that one could build, starting in the mid nineties, and noting things like their debt rating or the role of the dollar. Surely something has to happen? Even if it's just moderate republicans reasserting themselves.
No, it comes down to a blanket ban on allowing anyone to immigrate here if they won't command a £50,000 pa plus salary is in some cases going to mean we do ourselves more harm than good. That's not the same thing as saying let anyone in, which is not my view at all.
Sure, what we're dealing with is whether we should have a black/white boundary or 'shades of grey'. The problem with 'shades of grey' is that exceptions set up to allow 'reasonable' cases get pushed and manipulated into a free-for-all.
I'd be interested in seeing what the effect of my suggestion would be. Give it a trial for five years and we'd have some evidence as to how successful it was.
Research and academia has always been an incredibly international area. I suspect you'd find that the more international a serious academic institution, the more likely it is to produce world class work.
If you want to find fault - and there is much to find - then you'd be best off looking at third and fourth division academic institution, with dubious degrees. (A quick google found an MA in astrology and an MSc in homeopothy.) Direct your ire there, rather than to Warwick or Manchester University or Imperial or Cambridge or even LSE.
I totally agree with you there.
Clearing out the dross and turning many of the lower division 'universities' back into local tech colleges and polys would increase the prestige of 'proper' unviersities and allow better funding of both 'proper' students and 'proper' research.
And with that its time for me to do something different so thanks to both you and Southam for an interesting discussion.
Kelly Mathews @allthingsregal On this day October 12 1984 PM Margaret #Thatcher escaped an assassination attempt when an IRA bomb exploded in the Grand Hotel, #Brighton
Mr. 195, I think a party reinvention (like the Tea Party but, er, more centrist) is more likely.
That said, the two-party system originally had a different party involved (I forget if the Republicans or Democrats replaced the Whigs [if they were the original party]).
Mr. 195, I think a party reinvention (like the Tea Party but, er, more centrist) is more likely.
That said, the two-party system originally had a different party involved (I forget if the Republicans or Democrats replaced the Whigs [if they were the original party]).
I seem to recall it was somewhat more complex than that, Mr Dancer. I think our new friend is anticipating something the Progressive aka the Bull Moose Party of ca 100 years ago.
'"Ministry of Defence £2bn 'cash pile' scandal as thousands of troops sacked The Armed Forces are suffering “unnecessary” cuts because the Ministry of Defence has failed to spend almost £2 billion of its shrinking budget, senior commanders warn'
Small beer compared with Labour's £35 billion defence black hole.
'www.independent.co.uk › News › UK › Home News 24 Aug 2009 - Mr Gray rejects Labour claims that the problems were inherited from the ... There is a catastrophic black hole, so much so that the defence ...
That one was debunked throughly by Chrisg000 a Tory who used to post on here.. Now care to explain why troops are being sacked while £2 Billion sits there?
There is no 2B sitting there, we are borrowing over 100B a year , are you stupid
Mr. Jones, for those of us less well-informed about such matters, could you elaborate?
The gist is they can only support their deficit because of the dollar's reserve currency status so if you look at the size of the deficit and what they'd have to cut to balance the books and then make a judgement about their level of reluctance to cut it fast enough you get Weimar - among other things.
The Chinese won't want to do it because of the dislocation it would cause but eventually I think they will.
Comments
So that's neatly sorted out then. Cheers Jonathan. Next.
You call a potential 8% reduction in fuel bills 'pure hyperbole?'
Fair enough. Good luck with that one on the doorstep.
All politicians of the main parties are going to have to explain to the electorate why its a good idea to close down 'dirty' power stations BEFORE establishing that we could produce enough green energy cheaply enough to look after our society.
But the Lib dems are the high priests of this idea. And now its going sour they should be made to wear that particular t shirt.
It's got something for everyone, but perhaps should be read by anyone supporting Miliband's madness. The by-line is 'Europe's electricity providers face an existential threat', and shows the unexpected consequences of Europe's green energy market.
Another article from earlier in the year:
http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21579149-germanys-energiewende-bodes-ill-countrys-european-leadership-tilting-windmills
I fear that we will reap what we have sown ...
The way increasing the supply of labour increases the demand for labour is by putting downward pressure on pay rates.
Aside from thus causing a wealth transfer from the young and low paid to the rich it also acts as a disincentive for capital investment and productivity improvements.
The problem we have which underlies everything is that governments around the world have made promises to their peoples which are impossible to be honoured.
The big discussion during the next generation are which groups in society are going to suffer the largest breaking of these promises.
Re competition between the BBC and Guardian, there’s also the practice of business clustering: if one were to go bust the other might actually have less chance of survival, not more.... the bookshops on Charing Cross Road, musical instruments in Denmark Street, shoe shops in Neal Street, Anne Summers and friends on Oxford Street etc. People go there to have a look around and the shops’ existence validates what they’re selling.
I am sure you could think of less flattering analogy but I think the BBC is a bit like Selfridges in the way it houses many boutiques selling fashionable gear. Whereas the Guardian, Channel 4, Mirror etc are those trendy boutiques across the road in New Bond Street. If Selfridges went under, none of those smaller outlets would be big enough to take over and New Bond Street would be in big trouble because people wouldn’t make the journey.
I guess that’s why the leftwing media was so jubilant at the killing the NOTW. Last week when the Mail hysteria was at crescendo I heard a presenter BBC presenter wondering out load whether advertisers might start boycotting the Mail. Absolutely disgraceful of them to try and get that meme going - dog in the fight etc. Dacre is totally right about the partiality and double-standards at the BBC re its treatment of the on-going MI5/Guardian stories. Be interesting to see if the BBC gives him an Op Ed. I doubt it somehow.
"Or maybe we should burn it all and just increase pollution levels, with all the health problems these cause."
SO, I'm a fan of well controlled incinerators - they reduce pollution considerably and leave a lot less ash. They also produce electricity. People still equate them with dirty smoke whereas the stuff issuing from the chimney is virtually all steam.
And it counts as being renewable.
A genuine 'world class' scientific researcher will generate income worth multi-millions, they are also likely to have only a short period when they do this. In which case £50,000 per year would be a bargain.
Likewise the graduates of the local arts college might be considered 'world class' in 50 years time when their work is 'discovered'.
RT @HistoricPapers: Today in 1979 - 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' by Douglas Adams is published.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/11/dominic-cummings-genius-menace-michael-gove
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/11/genetics-teaching-gove-adviser
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/oct/11/gove-adviser-thesis-inflammatory-ideas-education
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/interactive/2013/oct/11/dominic-cummings-michael-gove-thoughts-education-pdf
I'm not surprised Dacre snubbed the BBC's kind invitation to sit on the set of Tiswas under a bucket of gunge. Here's another idea: how about giving the Mail an hour of editorial time on BBC TV to make their point, free from being shouted down or interrupted in the same way they allowed Miliband free comment on their pages?
Timothy Bates @timothycbates 1h
#Guardian turns "need to understand impact of genetics on children" into "genes make you smart, not teaching" #fail http://d.pr/b46w
Anyone violating this rule, will find their posting privileges suspended until after the weekend.
Is that clear?
But if this group of 100 'world class' scientific researchers aren't capable of ultimately producing wealth enough to pay them only £50k per year then I doubt whether they are genuinely 'world class' or that the area they are researching is valid enough for research.
At retail, I would guess less than 5%, but the numbers should be fairly easy to find.
"The establishment has a target in its sights; you can always tell from the tone of the Today programme. In this case, it’s Northern Ireland’s abortion law. The occasion is the genuinely tragic case of Sarah Ewart, who travelled to Britain this week in order to abort a foetus with the most severe case of spina bifida, which meant it didn’t have a head. She didn’t want to carry the pregnancy to term and Northern Ireland’s abortion laws at present don’t allow for abortions where the foetus does not actually threaten the life of the mother. Not unlike the intention behind the 1967 abortion law here, then, which is meant only to sanction an abortion where the risk to the mental or physical health of the mother is greater than if the pregnancy continued..." http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/10/the-bbcs-bias-on-abortion-in-northern-ireland-is-breathtaking/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-bbcs-bias-on-abortion-in-northern-ireland-is-breathtaking
I'd call that pretty close!
You're going to look awfully foolish if the price goes below 330.......
Clarity is helpful for everyone.
When was Miliband given an hour of editorial to make his point?
Looking at bets for the race. Still thinking, but one I am tipping is No Safety Car at 2.8. There's a 50/50 chance and the forecast is dry.
"Why should all those Arabs/Chinese/Russians make a profit out of the Royal Mail" so to speak.
Of course that may not be an accurate portrayal of what has happened but its something which can be easily believed if someone wants to shitstir. And there will be no shortage of people wanting to shitstir.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/market_data/shares/3/88628/twelve_month.stm
At the beginning of World War II, a government pamphlet led to a massive cull of British pets. As many as 750,000 British pets were killed in just one week. This little-discussed moment of panic is explored in a new book.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24478532
Number 5 on the BBC's "most read" - and not one of the top 10 (bar the MMR, mentioned briefly) is being discussed here.....
It is worth noting that there is no Russian state investment corporation that I'm aware of, and the Chinese one is tiny in Europe. State investments - in stock markets - are dominated by GIC (the Government of Singapore), ADIA (Abu Dhabi), KIA (Kuwait), and the Norwegian state fund. While these may have applied directly for shares, it's unlikely they will have gotten more than - and I'm guessing here, but I doubt I'm far off - 1% of the shares on offer, simply because they aren't that big in comparison with Blackrock, Fidelity or Allianz (all of which have more than $1trillion of assets). Where the ADIAs and GICs will have (indirectly) gotten shares is where they were investors in other people's funds. So, if - for example - ADIA is an investor in RIT Capital Partners Investment Trust plc (and I have no idea if they are), then they may be indirect shareholders. However, measuring this is almost impossible.
Betting PostBacked Hulkenberg to finish top 6 at 3.25, and No Safety Car at 2.8 (Ladbrokes and Betfair respectively). More details of why, and of how qualifying went down, here:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/japan-pre-race.html
On the grounds that if you sell bad whelks the customers could well die!
"Psychic Found Guilty of Stealing $138,000 From Clients"
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/12/nyregion/greenwich-village-psychic-found-guilty-of-stealing-thousands-from-clients.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&_r=0
'"Ministry of Defence £2bn 'cash pile' scandal as thousands of troops sacked
The Armed Forces are suffering “unnecessary” cuts because the Ministry of Defence has failed to spend almost £2 billion of its shrinking budget, senior commanders warn'
Small beer compared with Labour's £35 billion defence black hole.
'www.independent.co.uk › News › UK › Home News
24 Aug 2009 - Mr Gray rejects Labour claims that the problems were inherited from the ... There is a catastrophic black hole, so much so that the defence ...
Likewise the graduates of the local arts college might be considered 'world class' in 50 years time when their work is 'discovered'.
We might look at the foreign-born Nobel laureates that came here first as researchers. The nature of world class R&D is that you need the best people the world can offer to do it - not just to lead, but as team members. That means being able to recruit from anywhere. An Indian science post-grad employed at Imperial will earn no more or less than a British one, but you can bet your bottom dollar that he/she will (1) be earning less than £50,000 a year at the outset; and (2) would be coveted by universities across the world. That's just the way it works. Sorry.
http://labourlist.org/2013/10/the-facts-behind-that-focus-group/
Of course we could also change university funding so we have a few thousand more STEM graduates and rather fewer in what might be termed less important subjects.
Or perhaps change the earnings priorities within the universities so that genuine world class research scientists get more and the middle managers and executives get less.
As actual scientific research is very expensive to conduct then universities shouldn't find it difficult to give genuine world class scietific researchers higher earnings. That by itself would make scientific research in Britain more attractive to both young British people contemplating a career and those around the world who are genuinely highly talented.
http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/events/westminster-dog-of-the-year/eric-joyce-mp-and-brodie/
'Now care to explain why troops are being sacked while £2 Billion sits there?'
Care to explain why Labour sent troops without basic equipment whilst presiding over a £35 billion defence black hole?
'Troops killed 'by lack of basic equipment' - Telegraph
www.telegraph.co.uk › News › UK News
16 Feb 2008 - "To send soldiers into a combat zone without basic equipment is ... Mastiff vehicles to be used that day but they were all being used elsewhere.
On your point down thread about the Armed Forces Minister, this just shows that you don't understand Government. The PM selects Junior Ministers but very rarely allocates their roles. The Secretary of State does that. In most reshuffles, it takes a day or two for those roles to stabilise. You normally don't see this on the outside as the Minister's title remains unaltered.
You're obviously quite bright, but your partisan approach blinds you to logic at times. The same is true for many of the more story posters on here.
MT @BenSummerskill: Have just received lovely bouquet. 'Care instructions' say 'Please feel free to talk to your flowers' #proudtobebritish
Welcome to PB!
Martin: only news sound bites
MODERATOR: any topics caught your attention?
Angela: none have stood out
Valerie : no not really usual promises
Martin: only electioneering
Richard 1: only the fact that we were guaranteed vote-winning policies and ideas
Catherine: Not really - its just all soundbites
Richard: Conferences seemed very bland comapred to prvious years
David Blackburn in the Coffee House Blog - Paul Dacre teaches the Guardian how to sell newspapers the old fashioned way
Is the US system susceptible to in insurgent Green/UKIP effect in the midterms if the Tea Party gets a thumping out of all this. An "I hate the political establishment party" that could make a splash?
That has been the most signficant polling of the year by a big margin and I will be returning to it.
Andy Burnham said he did not recall being told about the problems at Furness General Hospital in Cumbria.
But documents seen by the Mail show Mr Burnham was briefed about the problems in January 2010, three months before his regulator gave the hospital a clean bill of health.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2455504/Andy-Burnham-DID-know-baby-deaths-NHS-trust.html
Somebody is really going for Andy...feels like a daily occurrence that somebody has been shown some document which results in claim that it contradicts what Andy has stated.
Research and academia has always been an incredibly international area. I suspect you'd find that the more international a serious academic institution, the more likely it is to produce world class work.
If you want to find fault - and there is much to find - then you'd be best off looking at third and fourth division academic institution, with dubious degrees. (A quick google found an MA in astrology and an MSc in homeopothy.) Direct your ire there, rather than to Warwick or Manchester University or Imperial or Cambridge or even LSE.
Just google "MoD whiteboard". Here is the first response....
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/may/14/philip-hammond-defence-secretary
Plenty of evidence out there highlighting the £8billion equipment underspend and six-billion unallocated funds that have been set-aside up-until the end of 2022: Just look for it....
I can just see a narrative of "decline" that one could build, starting in the mid nineties, and noting things like their debt rating or the role of the dollar. Surely something has to happen? Even if it's just moderate republicans reasserting themselves.
I'd be interested in seeing what the effect of my suggestion would be. Give it a trial for five years and we'd have some evidence as to how successful it was. I'm cynical rather than angry ;-) I'm well aware I got a good draw in life's lottery from having a middle class background in the western world. I totally agree with you there.
Clearing out the dross and turning many of the lower division 'universities' back into local tech colleges and polys would increase the prestige of 'proper' unviersities and allow better funding of both 'proper' students and 'proper' research.
And with that its time for me to do something different so thanks to both you and Southam for an interesting discussion.
On this day October 12 1984 PM Margaret #Thatcher escaped an assassination attempt when an IRA bomb exploded in the Grand Hotel, #Brighton
That said, the two-party system originally had a different party involved (I forget if the Republicans or Democrats replaced the Whigs [if they were the original party]).
The Chinese won't want to do it because of the dislocation it would cause but eventually I think they will.