If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
People should be able to spend their own money on whatever they see fit. For many, educating their own children comes high up that list.
Why does Labour want to prevent people from educating their own children?
Why do Labour bigwigs always manage to end up living in the parts of London where the state schools are excellent? Name me one MP whose own child went to a school that was failing or under special measures in their constituency?
For added hypocrisy, the likes of Diane Abbot who sent her child to a £10k private school because “West Indian mums will go to the wall for their children”.
Entrenched privilege of their own, masquerading as concern for the average child.
I agree with 1st para. Abolition of private schools is too illiberal. I support disincentives. Don't understand the 2nd. Labour do not want to do that. The objective is to reduce the extent to which money can buy educational privilege.
Hypocrisy to want to reduce privilege but use it yourself to the benefit of your own child? Not really. That is just placing your children's interests over your politics. I'm sure if a politician deliberately sent their child to a sink school to prove their virtue to the world you would be all over them.
And you didn't answer my question -
Is 'apartheid' the right word to describe the segregation caused by private schools?
I think this idea of Labours is a sick joke
I have said before my youngest was a broken child, broken by the school system and its uncaring and rigid approach to dealing with a Dyslexic child who also has Aspergers and severe anxiety and (at the time) huge intolerance to noise.
After a huge fight we got him into a private school who understood and nurtured kids like him.
The state system couldn't care a toss about him or us, they said he would never be able to write and his reading would be very poor at best.
The transformation was amazing.
By coincidence I was on the edge of tears this morning looking at a video of him in a school play when he had been at the private school 2 years.
He was still fragile and nervous, but by god the progress he had made.
I look at him now, a reasonably confident young man and I could swing for arseholes who would deny others that chance.
By the way - before people start squealing about "privilege" - Let me remind you all of a principle we have in our education system called "parent choice" - no matter how much those ...... tried to deny us it.
Article 50, paragraph 1 states: "Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements." With our "constitutional requirements" now a matter of dispute on several fronts the EU might conclude that our decision to leave has fallen at the first hurdle. They could impose an extension without one being requested, until all the constitutional issues are resolved. Or they could impose a revocation, arguing "if all else fails, read the bloody instructions".
As I said many top grammar schools nonetheless manage to beat some private schools in the rankings as indeed do a few outstanding comprehensive, academies and free schools
Yes. Some state schools outperform some private schools. We agree on that. Tis a fact.
But you are suggesting that a state school's standards will be lifted by having to compete with a nearby private school.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
But the marxists have captured Labour - it is far too dangerous to let them near power.
Are Labour really saying they could seize it if they got into power?
Been there, Floater. What are you going to do? I'm sorry to say it's highly unlikely your father will ever 'go home'! TBH, there's little point, at this stage in hanging on to it, and hoping. Unless your Mother's in some sort of care and might need it. Fair better to sell it and move on. As I say, been there. It can be hard.
Unless one is lucky enough (parents or children) to be able to afford several thousand pounds a month for care, presumably the authority in charge of the care will require the house to be sold off sooner rather than later to pay for it? Even in slightly more benign Scotland that was what I had to set in process, even though my mother unfortunately died before she left hospital care.
Are Labour really saying they could seize it if they got into power?
Been there, Floater. What are you going to do? I'm sorry to say it's highly unlikely your father will ever 'go home'! TBH, there's little point, at this stage in hanging on to it, and hoping. Unless your Mother's in some sort of care and might need it. Fair better to sell it and move on. As I say, been there. It can be hard.
Unless one is lucky enough (parents or children) to be able to afford several thousand pounds a month for care, presumably the authority in charge of the care will require the house to be sold off sooner rather than later to pay for it? Even in slightly more benign Scotland that was what I had to set in process even though my mother unfortunately died before she left hospital care.
A promise was made to dad and he has sufficient other assets for a couple of years yet.
PISA, which runs an international assessment in behalf of the OECD, assumes that educational policy and systems matter. These differences will show up in rankings, which can't be explained fully by demographic or cultural differences. So for example Finland does better than Sweden, which has seen a gal in recent years; while Poland has improved dramatically compared compared with similar Central European peers.
PISA then looks at the common characteristics of successful systems, so it can present a " what good looks like" to inform policy decisions.
As I recall there are three main things successful educational systems have in common:
1. Standardisation. Everyone goes to the same kind of school following similar curriculums. 2. Head teachers have a high degree of autonomy and accountability 3. Teachers are well paid and highly professionalised.
Class sizes don't make a difference to outcomes, suggesting fewer better paid teachers beats more lower paid ones. Streaming has advantages that are balanced by disadvantages.
Are Labour really saying they could seize it if they got into power?
Been there, Floater. What are you going to do? I'm sorry to say it's highly unlikely your father will ever 'go home'! TBH, there's little point, at this stage in hanging on to it, and hoping. Unless your Mother's in some sort of care and might need it. Fair better to sell it and move on. As I say, been there. It can be hard.
Unless one is lucky enough (parents or children) to be able to afford several thousand pounds a month for care, presumably the authority in charge of the care will require the house to be sold off sooner rather than later to pay for it? Even in slightly more benign Scotland that was what I had to set in process even though my mother unfortunately died before she left hospital care.
A promise was made to dad and he has sufficient other assets for a couple of years yet.
Glad to hear it, hope it works out for you and your dad (or as well as it can in the circs).
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
Placing your own child at a private school, while advocating their abolition for everyone else is almost the definition of hypocrisy.
My use of the word “apartheid” wasn’t related to private schools, but rather the way in which selection by house price dominates the best state schools. Those who have £1m to spend on a house, can send their kids to the local “state” school along with all the other parents who can afford to live in the local £1m houses. This is a million times removed from the average parent and the average “bog standard comprehensive” that is the only place their kids can go to school.
Education requires competition, and for parents to be able to choose schools, rather than schools choosing parents.
Hypocrisy is criticizing somebody for doing something you yourself do. If you criticize others for going private AND do so yourself, you are a hypocrite. But it is not hypocrisy to take advantage of a system you oppose. For example, if I think City traders should not be paid so much but I am a City trader, it does not make me a hypocrite if I fail to refuse a pay rise or insist on working for less.
I know you used 'apartheid' to describe school segregation by house price. My question was (and still is) - is it therefore also an appropriate term to describe the segregation by fees, i.e. state vs private? And if not, why is it not?
Your last point - competition - if this is what you want then it should surely extend to all. So parents get to choose between a number of competing non-fee paying schools in their locale. That is competition. The current scenario is the very opposite. It's rigged.
Political slogans that crush your opponent often are. Little Ed Miliband peering out of Salmond's pocket, anyone?
Yes, that worked out well,"chaos with Ed Milliband " or whatever you call this shit you support.
So let's have an election then.
But your guy is shit scared of one.
He is not my guy. Never voted for him. However I do agree, Corbyn has a very small chance of winning, at this time. Whether it will change after 311019, I do not know. Maybe he thinks that might be his best chance. If the chaos predicted by your chum, occurs under Johnson,rather than Milliband.
I'm less worried about Swinson turning into Clegg than I am about Corbyn continuing to be Corbyn.
Also, what's with posting your own tweets here which are just text? I see why people do it for image hosting, but for a simple textual post, it seems a rather vain way of getting your opinion displayed in big letters.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
I see that Labour party supporters here have moved on from Jew-baiting to the safer target of class war. Presumably maximum vote advantage has been extracted from the former.
Placing your own child at a private school, while advocating their abolition for everyone else is almost the definition of hypocrisy.
My use of the word “apartheid” wasn’t related to private schools, but rather the way in which selection by house price dominates the best state schools. Those who have £1m to spend on a house, can send their kids to the local “state” school along with all the other parents who can afford to live in the local £1m houses. This is a million times removed from the average parent and the average “bog standard comprehensive” that is the only place their kids can go to school.
Education requires competition, and for parents to be able to choose schools, rather than schools choosing parents.
Hypocrisy is criticizing somebody for doing something you yourself do. If you criticize others for going private AND do so yourself, you are a hypocrite. But it is not hypocrisy to take advantage of a system you oppose. For example, if I think City traders should not be paid so much but I am a City trader, it does not make me a hypocrite if I fail to refuse a pay rise or insist on working for less.
I know you used 'apartheid' to describe school segregation by house price. My question was (and still is) - is it therefore also an appropriate term to describe the segregation by fees, i.e. state vs private? And if not, why is it not?
Your last point - competition - if this is what you want then it should surely extend to all. So parents get to choose between a number of competing non-fee paying schools in their locale. That is competition. The current scenario is the very opposite. It's rigged.
Hypocrisy is doing something you criticise other for doing - like Diane Abbott sending her own child to a private school.
No, it’s not an appropriate term to describe state v private schools. It’s an appropriate term to describe the very elitist schools such as London Oratory (where Blair’s children went) which are notionally state schools yet utterly unavailable to those outside an elite who can afford to live in central London.
Think I agree with your last point. schools should be competing for parents, who should have a choice of competing state-sector schools.
Does sterling have a plausible way of producing a return? Is it priced fairly? Surely its value is what the market is willing to pay.
Eth can't be trusted as it is both inflationary and has already been hard forked to "correct" a hack. Hence proving it can be confiscated.
What I'm saying is bitcoin has a value due to its essential properties of decentralisation, fungibilityy and scarcity. In my view it remains undervalued and has demonstrated its use case for almost a decade now... But I forget pb is pretty much boomer central...
Sterling is used as money. If the UK adopts a different currency without redeeming the old one and nobody buys or sells anything with it any more, and it's just traded among people who know other people currently think it's valuable, you should definitely get rid of it yours while people are still exchanging usable money for them.
This was originally the idea for bitcoin, but its inner pyramid scheme ended up taking over, and there's now minimal effort towards making it happen, so try to avoid being left holding the hot potato.
That's a fair criticism.
What I often think goes unnoticed is the fact that a lot of people have gone "hang on a second, why do governments control currencies? Surely there must be a better way.
Whether that way is bitcoin or not I'm not sure yet, but it does have first mover advantage.
I'm aware that this is the "digital gold" argument but if gold was a) invisible and b) weightless how much more do you think it would be worth...
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
Not kowtowing to Labour? They betray the left by not just doing what Labour want, which as a separate party is clearly their job.
At the risk of repeating myself, Article 50, Para 1: 1. "Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements." Breaking the law would be an interesting way to achieve this.
The article ended where it did because it reached a natural end, but I did consider a conclusion in which I would point out that Gambling Commission betting (fixed-odds and exchange betting) does occupy quite a nice niche between the high-risk/high-reward spread betting and low-risk/low-reward currency conversion.
GC betting also has the advantage that it is "fire-and-forget": once the bet is placed, no further work is required. Wheras currency conversion requires a watching brief and a further decision on when to trade out, hence greater stress.
I used to be a trader so I think that is also part of why I stick to simple recreational betting these days. Don't want it feeling like work!
Couple of things I would stress that often get overlooked.
Basis risk - where your 'hedge' is not properly correlated to your underlying.
Credit risk - your profits are useless if the entity who owes you don't pay.
She is saying the opposite. She wants Socialism in the EU
Indeed she is, yet EU law expliticly outlaws the nationalisation of industry and many other aspects of a socialist programme.
Many Utilities and Railway companies are state owned. Indeed some of UK's rail and power companies are State owned companies in the EU.
And some of those are heavily subsidising our industries because of losses incurred!
EU law does what?
EDF/France is state-owned. ESB/Ireland is state-owned. NI water is state owned. Scottish water is state-owned.
UK railway tracks and signals are state-owned although the service is atrocious thanks to the un-integrated system and trains being run by multiple operators which don't even hold connecting trains. Not that I admired BR much but it was less inefficient than this mess. If one wants an example of a vertically-integrated and fairly cost-efficient railway, the Swiss one has been nationalised since, er, a peoples' vote in ~1902.
Hard left rubbish, most private schools now provide plenty of scholarships and bursaries and share facilities with the local community and local state schools
Free places are usually at token levels. If they became material, the negative impact on fees would render the institution inviable.
Are Labour really saying they could seize it if they got into power?
Been there, Floater. What are you going to do? I'm sorry to say it's highly unlikely your father will ever 'go home'! TBH, there's little point, at this stage in hanging on to it, and hoping. Unless your Mother's in some sort of care and might need it. Fair better to sell it and move on. As I say, been there. It can be hard.
Unless one is lucky enough (parents or children) to be able to afford several thousand pounds a month for care, presumably the authority in charge of the care will require the house to be sold off sooner rather than later to pay for it? Even in slightly more benign Scotland that was what I had to set in process even though my mother unfortunately died before she left hospital care.
A promise was made to dad and he has sufficient other assets for a couple of years yet.
Who made the promise? You and your siblings? Very noble, but as Bro.Divvie and I point out you’re on a downward slope. And we’re not at all unsympathetic; you’re in a dreadful situation.
Hard left rubbish, most private schools now provide plenty of scholarships and bursaries and share facilities with the local community and local state schools
Free places are usually at token levels. If they became material, the negative impact on fees would render the institution inviable.
The social filtering aspect is Hard Left rubbish?
Try telling that to the parents who pay the fees.
As has already been pointed out down thread the social filtering comes when those parents able to afford a £1m house can all send their children to the same school. Paid for by the state.
Unless one is lucky enough (parents or children) to be able to afford several thousand pounds a month for care, presumably the authority in charge of the care will require the house to be sold off sooner rather than later to pay for it? Even in slightly more benign Scotland that was what I had to set in process, even though my mother unfortunately died before she left hospital care.
What about equity release to access money to pay the fees?
Is that a realistic option if one particularly does not want to sell?
Hard left rubbish, most private schools now provide plenty of scholarships and bursaries and share facilities with the local community and local state schools
Free places are usually at token levels. If they became material, the negative impact on fees would render the institution inviable.
The social filtering aspect is Hard Left rubbish?
Try telling that to the parents who pay the fees.
One of my grandchildren has a ‘scholarship’ at her fee-paying school. Cuts the fees by, at maximum, 10%.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
OK, I've been through the comments and noted your kind responses. I need to break off and do some work this afternoon so I can't respond in depth: instead I summarise as follows:
@MikeL (IGIndex): Please see my response to you on this thread @DavidL (currency is problematic): Please see my response to you on this thread @Chris (probabilities are skewed): Yes, I know. But what to do about it? @Casino_Royale (liked the article): Thank you: I appreciate it @Casino_Royale (BE beats SPIN): Yes, I agree @OblitusSumMe (Revolut!): Please see my response to you on this thread @Kinabalu (BE is good): Yes, I agree @CaptainBuzzkill (currency hedged fund): Good suggestion. May be out of my league. @Foxy (portfolio advice): Please see my response to you on this thread. @Kinabalu (basis risk and credit risk): I mentioned basis risk in the previous article
If anybody has any further questions please put them here marked @viewcode and I'll look at them late tonight.
Hard left rubbish, most private schools now provide plenty of scholarships and bursaries and share facilities with the local community and local state schools
Free places are usually at token levels. If they became material, the negative impact on fees would render the institution inviable.
The social filtering aspect is Hard Left rubbish?
Try telling that to the parents who pay the fees.
One of my grandchildren has a ‘scholarship’ at her fee-paying school. Cuts the fees by, at maximum, 10%.
I attended public school via the assisted places scheme that new labour scrapped, my fees were all paid. Public schools are ridiculous and I detested my time there.
Quite apart from it being wrong to break the law when you don't get your way, I don't think it would be as effective a path as he thinks.
It's the idea that we are some sort of colony of the EU and leaving it is like a war for independence that gets me. And this guy is supposed to be a historian? Lol.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
The Euro election results would suggest the LDs have rather better prospects of picking up seats in London than you contend.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
The Euro election results would suggest the LDs have rather better prospects of picking up seats in London than you contend.
Euro elections have never been a good guide to later Parliamentary elections - the 2014 Euro election results were very different to the 2015 General Election less than a year later. I will be surprised if the LibDems take any London seats from Labour.
I have said before my youngest was a broken child, broken by the school system and its uncaring and rigid approach to dealing with a Dyslexic child who also has Aspergers and severe anxiety and (at the time) huge intolerance to noise.
After a huge fight we got him into a private school who understood and nurtured kids like him.
The state system couldn't care a toss about him or us, they said he would never be able to write and his reading would be very poor at best.
The transformation was amazing.
By coincidence I was on the edge of tears this morning looking at a video of him in a school play when he had been at the private school 2 years.
He was still fragile and nervous, but by god the progress he had made.
I look at him now, a reasonably confident young man and I could swing for arseholes who would deny others that chance.
By the way - before people start squealing about "privilege" - Let me remind you all of a principle we have in our education system called "parent choice" - no matter how much those ...... tried to deny us it.
That is great to hear. You were both unlucky and lucky there, by the sounds of it. Unlucky to be so ill served by the mainstream sector. And lucky to able to find (and fund) a brilliant private school that has transformed things. And not merely lucky - as you say it was a fight too.
However, it is not part of the case against private schools that they do not sometimes benefit the children who attend them in ways that go beyond just better grades.
As for your 'arseholes' comment, I think it's unfair. I could equally well use the word to describe people who utter platitudes about how important 'equality of opportunity' is but are never up for anything serious to be done to promote it.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
It would be quite helpful to know what the Lib Dems intend to do about Brexit if there is a hung parliament.
In particular, if Labour negotiated an alternative Soft Brexit deal, would the Lib Dems continue to vote against it on the basis that they'd rather Revoke?
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
The Euro election results would suggest the LDs have rather better prospects of picking up seats in London than you contend.
Er…. GE2017: Con 42.4%, Lab 40.0%, LD 7.4%. The #Labour candidate is #Remain. The Tory MP is Theresa Villiers, arch-Leaver. And, you'd vote LD. Maybe you are not such a #Remainer after all.
Nursing home fees will consume all the wealth of even quite affluent people, unless it's short term.
Edit the one I'm dealing with has fees of £220 a day. You could base yourself in the Ritz Hotel for that, probably.
I was involved in a discussion yesterday where someone's very elderly aunt (or similar) had sold all her worldly goods and spent the lot on a world cruise.She can, apparently, go at least twice round the world and it'll be a lot more interesting than being in a Care Home. Her, and her family's, attitude was 'if she dies, she dies. Buried at sea.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
It would be quite helpful to know what the Lib Dems intend to do about Brexit if there is a hung parliament.
In particular, if Labour negotiated an alternative Soft Brexit deal, would the Lib Dems continue to vote against it on the basis that they'd rather Revoke?
I'd hope both parties are agreed on a #peoplesvote in such a situation with #Remain as an option.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
The Euro election results would suggest the LDs have rather better prospects of picking up seats in London than you contend.
Euro elections have never been a good guide to later Parliamentary elections - the 2014 Euro election results were very different to the 2015 General Election less than a year later. I will be surprised if the LibDems take any London seats from Labour.
I certainly am no fan of the LDs but I think they will be taking a number of seats in London off both the tories and Labour.. On the Labour side H&WG needs a big swing but was held recently by LDs so is an option and bermondsey must be a very strong chance.. Beyond that I expect some huge swings in London which could depose some seemingly safe seats.
Labour's saving grace may be the large none white vote in London which I expect to be more reliable for Lab than the white vote which will allow them some cover
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
The Euro election results would suggest the LDs have rather better prospects of picking up seats in London than you contend.
Er…. GE2017: Con 42.4%, Lab 40.0%, LD 7.4%. The #Labour candidate is #Remain. The Tory MP is Theresa Villiers, arch-Leaver. And, you'd vote LD. Maybe you are not such a #Remainer after all.
And the Euro elections?! Which took place when?! And the current Labour poll rating? Go take a hook - you can't rely on my vote anymore.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
The Euro election results would suggest the LDs have rather better prospects of picking up seats in London than you contend.
Euro elections have never been a good guide to later Parliamentary elections - the 2014 Euro election results were very different to the 2015 General Election less than a year later. I will be surprised if the LibDems take any London seats from Labour.
I certainly am no fan of the LDs but I think they will be taking a number of seats in London off both the tories and Labour.. On the Labour side H&WG needs a big swing but was held recently by LDs so is an option and bermondsey must be a very strong chance.. Beyond that I expect some huge swings in London which could depose some seemingly safe seats.
Labour's saving grace may be the large none white vote in London which I expect to be more reliable for Lab than the white vote which will allow them some cover
Bermondsey would be a possibility were Simon Hughes standing again - but he has retired apparently. I don't see the Horsey & Wood Green seat as a likely loss - the 'Tories' Little Helpers' label is likely to still be pretty toxic in such seats.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
The Euro election results would suggest the LDs have rather better prospects of picking up seats in London than you contend.
Er…. GE2017: Con 42.4%, Lab 40.0%, LD 7.4%. The #Labour candidate is #Remain. The Tory MP is Theresa Villiers, arch-Leaver. And, you'd vote LD. Maybe you are not such a #Remainer after all.
And the Euro elections?! Which took place when?! And the current Labour poll rating? Go take a hook - you can't rely on my vote anymore.
Euro elections are treated much more frivolously - even by the 35% or so who bother to vote.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
The Euro election results would suggest the LDs have rather better prospects of picking up seats in London than you contend.
Euro elections have never been a good guide to later Parliamentary elections - the 2014 Euro election results were very different to the 2015 General Election less than a year later. I will be surprised if the LibDems take any London seats from Labour.
I certainly am no fan of the LDs but I think they will be taking a number of seats in London off both the tories and Labour.. On the Labour side H&WG needs a big swing but was held recently by LDs so is an option and bermondsey must be a very strong chance.. Beyond that I expect some huge swings in London which could depose some seemingly safe seats.
Labour's saving grace may be the large none white vote in London which I expect to be more reliable for Lab than the white vote which will allow them some cover
Unless you live in London, you will not realise how strong Labour except in the outer suburbs. Bermondsey was an exception because of Simon Hughes / Peter Tatchell from 1982. Labour will have a majority of more than15k. This is a seat like Vauxhall.
As has already been pointed out down thread the social filtering comes when those parents able to afford a £1m house can all send their children to the same school. Paid for by the state.
More accurately they are BOTH examples of it.
And why should one justify the other?
Why not work to reduce it in either manifestation?
I wonder how BJ's hero Churchill would feel about Gandhi (a “malignant subversive fanatic” and “a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the East, striding half-naked up the steps of the Viceregal palace”) being held up as a model for a UK PM to follow?
That is great to hear. You were both unlucky and lucky there, by the sounds of it. Unlucky to be so ill served by the mainstream sector. And lucky to able to find (and fund) a brilliant private school that has transformed things. And not merely lucky - as you say it was a fight too.
However, it is not part of the case against private schools that they do not sometimes benefit the children who attend them in ways that go beyond just better grades.
As for your 'arseholes' comment, I think it's unfair. I could equally well use the word to describe people who utter platitudes about how important 'equality of opportunity' is but are never up for anything serious to be done to promote it.
A family member had the same experience: the state school had done well for her son, but her daughter (who had some minor special needs) really suffered - especially from bullying, which was not tackled.
The school, and latterly the council, were utterly uninterested, even when things took somewhat darker turns.
They are not rich, but scrimped and saved to get her into a localish private school that somewhat specialises in helping kids with such needs. Since then, she has thrived.
As for your reply to the 'arseholes' comment: I went to both state and public schools. Aside from a good education, I got nothing else out of the public school - I'm only in contact with a handful of my old friends from there, and I can honestly say it hasn't helped me at all in my professional life when it comes to contacts. But it was a good school, that helped lots of local kids.
(As it was a rather sporty school, it was probably the wrong choice for me with hindsight, given health issues I had. That wasn't the schools fault, who tried the darndest to help me.)
As for equality of opportunity: isn't the answer to try to raise state schools up to the level of private schools, not drag the latter down to the former?
Hypocrisy is doing something you criticise other for doing - like Diane Abbott sending her own child to a private school.
No, it’s not an appropriate term to describe state v private schools. It’s an appropriate term to describe the very elitist schools such as London Oratory (where Blair’s children went) which are notionally state schools yet utterly unavailable to those outside an elite who can afford to live in central London.
Think I agree with your last point. schools should be competing for parents, who should have a choice of competing state-sector schools.
Yes, that was the definition of hypocrisy that I gave. So if Abbott (say) criticizes others for going private she is a hypocrite. But she is not a hypocrite simply for using a system she opposes - so long as she does not attack others (personally) for doing so. Agreed. C'est ca. And has she?
OK, we have segregation by house price which allows Blair to send his kids to London Oratory. And we have segregation by fees and contacts which allows Cameron senior to send David to Eton. So I ask again - why is 'apartheid' a suitable way to describe the first but not the second?
As has already been pointed out down thread the social filtering comes when those parents able to afford a £1m house can all send their children to the same school. Paid for by the state.
More accurately they are BOTH examples of it.
And why should one justify the other?
Why not work to reduce it in either manifestation?
Why not allow people to raise their kids any damn way they want?
Whilst we are on schools, one of the things we have to stop - whoever is in power - is schools penalising the bullied, rather than penalising the bullies.
An example (I won't go into specifics, and it was not a relative): a ~10 year old child as being bullied at break time by four lads. The bullied lad was made to stay in at break time to stop the bullying (*), whilst the bullies were free to pay outside. Thus the bullied lad was ostracised because it was 'easier' for the school to tackle the problem that way.
Things just got worse, as the bullied ended up picking on other kids.
As has already been pointed out down thread the social filtering comes when those parents able to afford a £1m house can all send their children to the same school. Paid for by the state.
More accurately they are BOTH examples of it.
And why should one justify the other?
Why not work to reduce it in either manifestation?
Why not allow people to raise their kids any damn way they want?
Exactly , always whining because someone has more than them instead of just making the most of what they have. Things will never ever be equal and when it is tried you get USSR where most people do nothing as no incentive and just like here a small elite can do what they want , it is just the party hangers on instead of millionaires.
Whilst we are on schools, one of the things we have to stop - whoever is in power - is schools penalising the bullied, rather than penalising the bullies.
An example (I won't go into specifics, and it was not a relative): a ~10 year old child as being bullied at break time by four lads. The bullied lad was made to stay in at break time to stop the bullying (*), whilst the bullies were free to pay outside. Thus the bullied lad was ostracised because it was 'easier' for the school to tackle the problem that way.
Things just got worse, as the bullied ended up picking on other kids.
Unless one is lucky enough (parents or children) to be able to afford several thousand pounds a month for care, presumably the authority in charge of the care will require the house to be sold off sooner rather than later to pay for it? Even in slightly more benign Scotland that was what I had to set in process, even though my mother unfortunately died before she left hospital care.
What about equity release to access money to pay the fees?
Is that a realistic option if one particularly does not want to sell?
I'd guess it could probably be used as a temporary solution if you had everything (power of attorney etc) in place. It was such a miserable period I've probably expunged most of the research I did at the time from my memory, but afaicr you could keep up to £20k in assets/savings but the rest would have to be available to go toward care home fees including a house unless it was also occupied by a close family member or partner. Even then I think councils would vigorously pursue the value of the cared for person's share.
Rawnsley’s conclusion today, in an article mostly about Labour:
”This is a big and poisonous change in the culture of British politics. Both the Conservatives and Labour used to be proud to call themselves broad churches, capable of encompassing and speaking for many strands of opinion and they made that central to their appeal to the electorate. Now both are behaving like viciously intolerant sects.”
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
If said seat is Labour held then (depending on the character and record of the MP) you might have a point.
But the answer to your question in a Tory held seat is that, on current polls or anything like them, Labour is going to make ZERO gains from the Tories. Therefore voting Labour in such circumstances is always a Wasted Vote - it doesn’t matter whether they fall back in second or fall back to third. Anyone in a Tory held seat who wants some chance of defeating the MP needs to vote LibDem and hope enough others do the same. There’ll be some surprise Tory to LibDem losses and who is to say where they will be?
A family member had the same experience: the state school had done well for her son, but her daughter (who had some minor special needs) really suffered - especially from bullying, which was not tackled.
The school, and latterly the council, were utterly uninterested, even when things took somewhat darker turns.
They are not rich, but scrimped and saved to get her into a localish private school that somewhat specialises in helping kids with such needs. Since then, she has thrived.
As for your reply to the 'arseholes' comment: I went to both state and public schools. Aside from a good education, I got nothing else out of the public school - I'm only in contact with a handful of my old friends from there, and I can honestly say it hasn't helped me at all in my professional life when it comes to contacts. But it was a good school, that helped lots of local kids.
(As it was a rather sporty school, it was probably the wrong choice for me with hindsight, given health issues I had. That wasn't the schools fault, who tried the darndest to help me.)
As for equality of opportunity: isn't the answer to try to raise state schools up to the level of private schools, not drag the latter down to the former?
You seem to be saying 2 things -
(1) Private schools help some kids. (2) Private schools do not help others.
And both of these things are evidence for the DEFENCE.
(1) Because it shows they are doing good. (2) Because it shows they do not confer advantage.
Well I can do similar, watch.
(1) Some private schools genuinely provide better teaching. (2) Others do not. Their better results are purely down to funding and intake.
And both of these things are evidence for the PROSECUTION.
(1) Because that is the purchasing of educational advantage. (2) Because that provides a false benchmark for the state sector.
Your last para, I'm afraid, is a cop out - unless we are prepared to fund state schools to the same level as the private sector.
I wonder how BJ's hero Churchill would feel about Gandhi (a “malignant subversive fanatic” and “a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the East, striding half-naked up the steps of the Viceregal palace”) being held up as a model for a UK PM to follow?
In fairness, as ever, Churchill’s view would depend on what was politically expedient that day...
As has already been pointed out down thread the social filtering comes when those parents able to afford a £1m house can all send their children to the same school. Paid for by the state.
More accurately they are BOTH examples of it.
And why should one justify the other?
Why not work to reduce it in either manifestation?
I am not unsympathetic, but ..
Yet again, Labour are in power in Wales and have been for 20 years. They are in full control of the education system. There are hardly any independent or private schools in Wales, so whatever malign influence they exert is at a minimum.
It is perfectly reasonable to expect Labour to have shown the wonderful things they can do with a country's educational system by now.
What they have done is make Wales the worst place in the UK to get a state education.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
If said seat is Labour held then (depending on the character and record of the MP) you might have a point.
But the answer to your question in a Tory held seat is that, on current polls or anything like them, Labour is going to make ZERO gains from the Tories. Therefore voting Labour in such circumstances is always a Wasted Vote - it doesn’t matter whether they fall back in second or fall back to third. Anyone in a Tory held seat who wants some chance of defeating the MP needs to vote LibDem and hope enough others do the same. There’ll be some surprise Tory to LibDem losses and who is to say where they will be?
Now I can see why Brexit will win in the end. The Lib Dems will always be the Tories little helpers.
I wonder how BJ's hero Churchill would feel about Gandhi (a “malignant subversive fanatic” and “a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the East, striding half-naked up the steps of the Viceregal palace”) being held up as a model for a UK PM to follow?
In fairness, as ever, Churchill’s view would depend on what was politically expedient that day...
Churchill's hatred of Gandhi (even post-mortem) would probably override his slippery inclinations. Trump's antipathy to Obama has nothing on it.
(1) Private schools help some kids. (2) Private schools do not help others.
And both of these things are evidence for the DEFENCE.
(1) Because it shows they are doing good. (2) Because it shows they do not confer advantage.
Well I can do similar, watch.
(1) Some private schools genuinely provide better teaching. (2) Others do not. Their better results are purely down to funding and intake.
And both of these things are evidence for the PROSECUTION.
(1) Because that is the purchasing of educational advantage. (2) Because that provides a false benchmark for the state sector.
Your last para, I'm afraid, is a cop out - unless we are prepared to fund state schools to the same level as the private sector.
I think you're being faintly ridiculous. I would suggest if you really want to campaign for better state schools, then you do that: improve state schools. Closing private schools will not help that; it might even hinder it.
And what about private tutoring? Would that be banned as well, even for kids in state schools, as that is exactly purchasing educational advantage.
(I currently have no intention of sending our little 'un to any of the excellent private schools in the area.)
And both of these things are evidence for the PROSECUTION.
(1) Because that is the purchasing of educational advantage. (2) Because that provides a false benchmark for the state sector.
Your last para, I'm afraid, is a cop out - unless we are prepared to fund state schools to the same level as the private sector.
Part of the issue here is whether success in life is a zero-sum game, in which if X uses the skills learned and connections made at a private school to get a good job, then Y who hypothetically didn't get those skills and connections but is otherwise equally good misses out. For specific jobs, this is clearly the case (see the Cabinet for a start) - for the country as a whole, less so, since the better educated people are the more we'll all prosper...other things being equal. I'd address inequalities in other ways, starting with a wealth tax.
I think that removing charitable status is simply obvious, and expecting private schools to let state schools use facilities when not otherwise in use is reasonable. I wouldn't go further and ban them altogether, which feels too to-down intrusive - the underlying problem is entrenched elitism, and that will just appear in another form if it's not based on schooling - Cameron and Osborne would recognise each other as kindred spirits even if they both went to Barnsley Comp.
As I said many top grammar schools nonetheless manage to beat some private schools in the rankings as indeed do a few outstanding comprehensive, academies and free schools
Yes. Some state schools outperform some private schools. We agree on that. Tis a fact.
But you are suggesting that a state school's standards will be lifted by having to compete with a nearby private school.
That seems unlikely.
It's not difficult for some state schools to outperform independent schools.
Grammar schools have an entry exam, usually the 11+. If their students don't come out with excellent GCSE grades then there's something wrong with the school. Apart from certain exceptions most independents don't have an entry exam as such. Independent schools also do IGCSE exams which dont count in any league tables so they are bound to be beaten by state schools.
Why not allow people to raise their kids any damn way they want?
Great question. Because I think this does boil down to a value judgment between two positives -
The right of people to do what they want (subject to their financial constraints) about their own kids education. vs Equality of Opportunity.
There is a conflict. One must choose which is the more important. And accept that picking one compromises the other.
It's an uncomfortable choice, unfortunately, which is why we get no end of dissembling in the attempt to avoid it.
If we follow your argument to its logical conclusion, surely you favour taking children away from their parents at birth and raising them collectively in order to ensure equality of opportunity?
Or perhaps the very soul screams out at the horror of this idea, because nothing can be more instinctive than to raise one's own children?
Every little helps mind you, I have same for grandson and saves £1400 a year, so not to be sniffed at.
Very true. I guess my point is that it is unrealistic to expect a private school to offer a large number of genuinely free places, since this would compromise their financial viability. Therefore it can only ever (in most cases) be rather a token thing. Enough to justify charitable status? Hmmm.
surbiton @surbiton19 · 20s21 seconds ago The NEC proposal for a special #LabourConference2019 AFTER a general election win is absolute madness. Basically the posho Marxists want #Brexit , possibly #BrexitShambles so that the glorious revolution will emerge afterwards. Absolutely Barmy ! #PeoplesVote #StopBrexit
I'd guess it could probably be used as a temporary solution if you had everything (power of attorney etc) in place. It was such a miserable period I've probably expunged most of the research I did at the time from my memory, but afaicr you could keep up to £20k in assets/savings but the rest would have to be available to go toward care home fees including a house unless it was also occupied by a close family member or partner. Even then I think councils would vigorously pursue the value of the cared for person's share.
I am really hoping that my two stay independent until the end. I am at the age now (or rather they are) where I am (despite my best efforts) starting to fret about these things.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
If said seat is Labour held then (depending on the character and record of the MP) you might have a point.
But the answer to your question in a Tory held seat is that, on current polls or anything like them, Labour is going to make ZERO gains from the Tories. Therefore voting Labour in such circumstances is always a Wasted Vote - it doesn’t matter whether they fall back in second or fall back to third. Anyone in a Tory held seat who wants some chance of defeating the MP needs to vote LibDem and hope enough others do the same. There’ll be some surprise Tory to LibDem losses and who is to say where they will be?
Now I can see why Brexit will win in the end. The Lib Dems will always be the Tories little helpers.
Simply recognising that people are (currently) moving away from Labour anyway, in significant numbers. As a potential tactical voter - which is the essence of your post - there is no point in going against the tide. If the chance of Labour winning a seat is 0% and of the LibDems winning 1%, you go with the 1% and hope for the best.
Prior to 2015 the LibDems and Liberals had a record of winning seats that no-one saw coming; as just one example, look at the 2010 to 2015 change in vote share in Redcar.
Why not allow people to raise their kids any damn way they want?
Great question. Because I think this does boil down to a value judgment between two positives -
The right of people to do what they want (subject to their financial constraints) about their own kids education. vs Equality of Opportunity.
There is a conflict. One must choose which is the more important. And accept that picking one compromises the other.
It's an uncomfortable choice, unfortunately, which is why we get no end of dissembling in the attempt to avoid it.
How far do you go in chasing 'equality of opportunity', given that good parenting - whether in rich or poor families - is perhaps the biggest 'opportunity' a child can have?
My first thought - rather than leaping into conspiracy theories - is that it is some sort of exchange scheme. These are common the world over so police forces can learn from their counterparts.
If the Labour and Tory leaders are both unfit to be Prime Minister, what should one do?
My own answer to that question as a lifelong Labour voter living in a similar constituency, Ealing Central and Acton. The MP, Rupa Huq has impeccable Remain credentials and I like her personally. But I'm voting Lib Dem in the GE, because Jo Swinson would be an acceptable PM, whereas Johnson and Corbyn are not.
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
If said seat is Labour held then (depending on the character and record of the MP) you might have a point.
But the answer to your question in a Tory held seat is that, on current polls or anything like them, Labour is going to make ZERO gains from the Tories. Therefore voting Labour in such circumstances is always a Wasted Vote - it doesn’t matter whether they fall back in second or fall back to third. Anyone in a Tory held seat who wants some chance of defeating the MP needs to vote LibDem and hope enough others do the same. There’ll be some surprise Tory to LibDem losses and who is to say where they will be?
Now I can see why Brexit will win in the end. The Lib Dems will always be the Tories little helpers.
This is what I find difficult, the arrogance. Just because the lib dems campaign for votes in labour seats, they are called tories little helper. It seems to be labour's way or no other way!
Incidentally, I'll be voting for Sadiq Khan, and not Siobhan Benita, in the mayoral election
You could elect the Tory in Ealing and Acton. Rupa Huq is not a Corbynista.
As long as they take the whip and vote as he tells them they're Corbynistas.
Jo Swinson is behaving like a perfect Tories little helper.
In what way?
By insisting that voters vote Lib Dem in seats where they have effectively zero chance of winning and helping a Tory Leaver win instead. My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
If said seat is Labour held then (depending on the character and record of the MP) you might have a point.
Therefore voting Labour in such circumstances is always a Wasted Vote - it doesn’t matter whether they fall back in second or fall back to third. Anyone in a Tory held seat who wants some chance of defeating the MP needs to vote LibDem and hope enough others do the same. There’ll be some surprise Tory to LibDem losses and who is to say where they will be?
Now I can see why Brexit will win in the end. The Lib Dems will always be the Tories little helpers.
Simply recognising that people are (currently) moving away from Labour anyway, in significant numbers. As a potential tactical voter - which is the essence of your post - there is no point in going against the tide. If the chance of Labour winning a seat is 0% and of the LibDems winning 1%, you go with the 1% and hope for the best.
Prior to 2015 the LibDems and Liberals had a record of winning seats that no-one saw coming; as just one example, look at the 2010 to 2015 change in vote share in Redcar.
So you think LD has a better chance of winning in Chipping Barnet from 7.4%, where the Tory Theresa Villiers got 47.4% and Labour received 40%. Even in your glorious Euro election victory, when the Tories got 9% of the votes, you did not achieve a 20% swing. Basically, you are saying because you hate Corbyn so much, you'd rather let the UK do a Brexit than vote for a Remain Labour candidate. At least, you are being honest. And here I am voting for the Tories little helpers in Surbiton to stop the Tories winning.
My first thought - rather than leaping into conspiracy theories - is that it is some sort of exchange scheme. These are common the world over so police forces can learn from their counterparts.
China is the world's up and coming superpower. It has increasing interests in countries all over the world. Why does the USA have military bases all over the UK? We think that it's normal but that's only because we're used to it.
How far do you go in chasing 'equality of opportunity', given that good parenting - whether in rich or poor families - is perhaps the biggest 'opportunity' a child can have?
This is a very important question.
For me, a serious attempt to decouple the quality of education (at school) from parental financial position falls on the right side of the line.
Going further, e.g. have the state rearing the child rather than the parents, is best left to dystopian fiction.
It will always be the case that where and when and to whom you are born is the single biggest determinant of material life outcomes.
I accept this but would like it to be mitigated as far as possible, consistent with basic freedoms.
Comments
Looking at these pictures of their city every year, that investment must pay for itself ten time over.
I have said before my youngest was a broken child, broken by the school system and its uncaring and rigid approach to dealing with a Dyslexic child who also has Aspergers and severe anxiety and (at the time) huge intolerance to noise.
After a huge fight we got him into a private school who understood and nurtured kids like him.
The state system couldn't care a toss about him or us, they said he would never be able to write and his reading would be very poor at best.
The transformation was amazing.
By coincidence I was on the edge of tears this morning looking at a video of him in a school play when he had been at the private school 2 years.
He was still fragile and nervous, but by god the progress he had made.
I look at him now, a reasonably confident young man and I could swing for arseholes who would deny others that chance.
By the way - before people start squealing about "privilege" - Let me remind you all of a principle we have in our education system called "parent choice" - no matter how much those ...... tried to deny us it.
But you are suggesting that a state school's standards will be lifted by having to compete with a nearby private school.
That seems unlikely.
PISA then looks at the common characteristics of successful systems, so it can present a " what good looks like" to inform policy decisions.
As I recall there are three main things successful educational systems have in common:
1. Standardisation. Everyone goes to the same kind of school following similar curriculums.
2. Head teachers have a high degree of autonomy and accountability
3. Teachers are well paid and highly professionalised.
Class sizes don't make a difference to outcomes, suggesting fewer better paid teachers beats more lower paid ones. Streaming has advantages that are balanced by disadvantages.
.... but led by a Brexiteer.
I know you used 'apartheid' to describe school segregation by house price. My question was (and still is) - is it therefore also an appropriate term to describe the segregation by fees, i.e. state vs private? And if not, why is it not?
Your last point - competition - if this is what you want then it should surely extend to all. So parents get to choose between a number of competing non-fee paying schools in their locale. That is competition. The current scenario is the very opposite. It's rigged.
Never voted for him.
However I do agree, Corbyn has a very small chance of winning, at this time.
Whether it will change after 311019, I do not know.
Maybe he thinks that might be his best chance.
If the chaos predicted by your chum, occurs under Johnson,rather than Milliband.
Also, what's with posting your own tweets here which are just text? I see why people do it for image hosting, but for a simple textual post, it seems a rather vain way of getting your opinion displayed in big letters.
No, it’s not an appropriate term to describe state v private schools. It’s an appropriate term to describe the very elitist schools such as London Oratory (where Blair’s children went) which are notionally state schools yet utterly unavailable to those outside an elite who can afford to live in central London.
Think I agree with your last point. schools should be competing for parents, who should have a choice of competing state-sector schools.
https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1175743546093125633?s=20
That's a fair criticism.
What I often think goes unnoticed is the fact that a lot of people have gone "hang on a second, why do governments control currencies? Surely there must be a better way.
Whether that way is bitcoin or not I'm not sure yet, but it does have first mover advantage.
I'm aware that this is the "digital gold" argument but if gold was a) invisible and b) weightless how much more do you think it would be worth...
I used to be a trader so I think that is also part of why I stick to simple recreational betting these days. Don't want it feeling like work!
Couple of things I would stress that often get overlooked.
Basis risk - where your 'hedge' is not properly correlated to your underlying.
Credit risk - your profits are useless if the entity who owes you don't pay.
EDF/France is state-owned.
ESB/Ireland is state-owned.
NI water is state owned.
Scottish water is state-owned.
UK railway tracks and signals are state-owned although the service is atrocious thanks to the un-integrated system and trains being run by multiple operators which don't even hold connecting trains. Not that I admired BR much but it was less inefficient than this mess. If one wants an example of a vertically-integrated and fairly cost-efficient railway, the Swiss one has been nationalised since, er, a peoples' vote in ~1902.
The social filtering aspect is Hard Left rubbish?
Try telling that to the parents who pay the fees.
And we’re not at all unsympathetic; you’re in a dreadful situation.
Er lads, isn’t *this* actually the biggest story of the day? https://twitter.com/thesundaytimes/status/1175656236110503936 …
How can it be ? #LabourParty at #LabourConference2019 is trying to ditch supporting #Remain
Is that a realistic option if one particularly does not want to sell?
Stay classy Labour
Fighting to rid the party of Jews. Nice people.
My Chipping Barnet question: Why should a #Remainer vote #LibDem in a Tory-Labour marginal where the #Labour candidate is #Remain and the Tory candidate is strong #Brexiter.
@MikeL (IGIndex): Please see my response to you on this thread
@DavidL (currency is problematic): Please see my response to you on this thread
@Chris (probabilities are skewed): Yes, I know. But what to do about it?
@Casino_Royale (liked the article): Thank you: I appreciate it
@Casino_Royale (BE beats SPIN): Yes, I agree
@OblitusSumMe (Revolut!): Please see my response to you on this thread
@Kinabalu (BE is good): Yes, I agree
@CaptainBuzzkill (currency hedged fund): Good suggestion. May be out of my league.
@Foxy (portfolio advice): Please see my response to you on this thread.
@Kinabalu (basis risk and credit risk): I mentioned basis risk in the previous article
If anybody has any further questions please put them here marked @viewcode and I'll look at them late tonight.
Edit the one I'm dealing with has fees of £220 a day. You could base yourself in the Ritz Hotel for that, probably.
However, it is not part of the case against private schools that they do not sometimes benefit the children who attend them in ways that go beyond just better grades.
As for your 'arseholes' comment, I think it's unfair. I could equally well use the word to describe people who utter platitudes about how important 'equality of opportunity' is but are never up for anything serious to be done to promote it.
In particular, if Labour negotiated an alternative Soft Brexit deal, would the Lib Dems continue to vote against it on the basis that they'd rather Revoke?
GE2017: Con 42.4%, Lab 40.0%, LD 7.4%. The #Labour candidate is #Remain. The Tory MP is Theresa Villiers, arch-Leaver. And, you'd vote LD.
Maybe you are not such a #Remainer after all.
Her, and her family's, attitude was 'if she dies, she dies. Buried at sea.
Labour's saving grace may be the large none white vote in London which I expect to be more reliable for Lab than the white vote which will allow them some cover
And why should one justify the other?
Why not work to reduce it in either manifestation?
The school, and latterly the council, were utterly uninterested, even when things took somewhat darker turns.
They are not rich, but scrimped and saved to get her into a localish private school that somewhat specialises in helping kids with such needs. Since then, she has thrived.
As for your reply to the 'arseholes' comment: I went to both state and public schools. Aside from a good education, I got nothing else out of the public school - I'm only in contact with a handful of my old friends from there, and I can honestly say it hasn't helped me at all in my professional life when it comes to contacts. But it was a good school, that helped lots of local kids.
(As it was a rather sporty school, it was probably the wrong choice for me with hindsight, given health issues I had. That wasn't the schools fault, who tried the darndest to help me.)
As for equality of opportunity: isn't the answer to try to raise state schools up to the level of private schools, not drag the latter down to the former?
OK, we have segregation by house price which allows Blair to send his kids to London Oratory. And we have segregation by fees and contacts which allows Cameron senior to send David to Eton. So I ask again - why is 'apartheid' a suitable way to describe the first but not the second?
An example (I won't go into specifics, and it was not a relative): a ~10 year old child as being bullied at break time by four lads. The bullied lad was made to stay in at break time to stop the bullying (*), whilst the bullies were free to pay outside. Thus the bullied lad was ostracised because it was 'easier' for the school to tackle the problem that way.
Things just got worse, as the bullied ended up picking on other kids.
(*) It didn't work.
”This is a big and poisonous change in the culture of British politics. Both the Conservatives and Labour used to be proud to call themselves broad churches, capable of encompassing and speaking for many strands of opinion and they made that central to their appeal to the electorate. Now both are behaving like viciously intolerant sects.”
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/22/failed-watson-plot-exposes-what-really-scares-corbyn-and-his-coterie
His review of Cammo’s book in today's Paper is also worth a read.
But the answer to your question in a Tory held seat is that, on current polls or anything like them, Labour is going to make ZERO gains from the Tories. Therefore voting Labour in such circumstances is always a Wasted Vote - it doesn’t matter whether they fall back in second or fall back to third. Anyone in a Tory held seat who wants some chance of defeating the MP needs to vote LibDem and hope enough others do the same. There’ll be some surprise Tory to LibDem losses and who is to say where they will be?
(1) Private schools help some kids.
(2) Private schools do not help others.
And both of these things are evidence for the DEFENCE.
(1) Because it shows they are doing good.
(2) Because it shows they do not confer advantage.
Well I can do similar, watch.
(1) Some private schools genuinely provide better teaching.
(2) Others do not. Their better results are purely down to funding and intake.
And both of these things are evidence for the PROSECUTION.
(1) Because that is the purchasing of educational advantage.
(2) Because that provides a false benchmark for the state sector.
Your last para, I'm afraid, is a cop out - unless we are prepared to fund state schools to the same level as the private sector.
Yet again, Labour are in power in Wales and have been for 20 years. They are in full control of the education system. There are hardly any independent or private schools in Wales, so whatever malign influence they exert is at a minimum.
It is perfectly reasonable to expect Labour to have shown the wonderful things they can do with a country's educational system by now.
What they have done is make Wales the worst place in the UK to get a state education.
And what about private tutoring? Would that be banned as well, even for kids in state schools, as that is exactly purchasing educational advantage.
(I currently have no intention of sending our little 'un to any of the excellent private schools in the area.)
I think that removing charitable status is simply obvious, and expecting private schools to let state schools use facilities when not otherwise in use is reasonable. I wouldn't go further and ban them altogether, which feels too to-down intrusive - the underlying problem is entrenched elitism, and that will just appear in another form if it's not based on schooling - Cameron and Osborne would recognise each other as kindred spirits even if they both went to Barnsley Comp.
The right of people to do what they want (subject to their financial constraints) about their own kids education.
vs
Equality of Opportunity.
There is a conflict. One must choose which is the more important. And accept that picking one compromises the other.
It's an uncomfortable choice, unfortunately, which is why we get no end of dissembling in the attempt to avoid it.
https://twitter.com/hugorifkind/status/1175678467117060096?s=20
Grammar schools have an entry exam, usually the 11+. If their students don't come out with excellent GCSE grades then there's something wrong with the school. Apart from certain exceptions most independents don't have an entry exam as such. Independent schools also do IGCSE exams which dont count in any league tables so they are bound to be beaten by state schools.
Or perhaps the very soul screams out at the horror of this idea, because nothing can be more instinctive than to raise one's own children?
The NEC proposal for a special #LabourConference2019 AFTER a general election win is absolute madness. Basically the posho Marxists want #Brexit , possibly #BrexitShambles so that the glorious revolution will emerge afterwards. Absolutely Barmy ! #PeoplesVote #StopBrexit
Prior to 2015 the LibDems and Liberals had a record of winning seats that no-one saw coming; as just one example, look at the 2010 to 2015 change in vote share in Redcar.
For me, a serious attempt to decouple the quality of education (at school) from parental financial position falls on the right side of the line.
Going further, e.g. have the state rearing the child rather than the parents, is best left to dystopian fiction.
It will always be the case that where and when and to whom you are born is the single biggest determinant of material life outcomes.
I accept this but would like it to be mitigated as far as possible, consistent with basic freedoms.