politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Theresa May is set to conduct a major reshuffle in January, bu
Options
Comments
-
I know a number of people who could only get on the housing ladder thanks to shared ownership, especially those who did not have parents with enough savings to help with a depositDavid_Evershed said:
You can not buy 100% of an 'affordable housing' house. The maximum is 80% purchased with the remainder rented.HYUFD said:
No, mainly affordable homes to buy, even if a small percentage will be social housingMaxPB said:
Affordable rental housing, which does nothing for us. We need to create more homeowners, not more social renters.HYUFD said:
Well Javid and Hammond are now pushing more affordable housing on councils in their local plansMaxPB said:
Heartening to see nationalise rail and energy so low on both priority lists.The_Apocalypse said:
A party which pledges to give the NHS "£350m per week" by 2022, raise the minimum wage to £12.50 per hour by the end of 2022 and commission a million affordable homes for sale exclusively to non-investor FTBs would do very well.
I think all of that is well within the realms of possibility for either party tbh, though Labour would probably make them social housing for rent rather than affordable housing for private ownership, which is why the Tories must offer ownership before Labour can create 2-3m new social tenants.
The only 'affordable' element of affordable housing is the rented part which must be no more than 80% that of the market rental.
So for shared ownership (part rental part purchase), the rented element can be subsidised but the purchased element should be at market value.0 -
Domestos only [claims to] kill[s] 99.5% of germs. I am sure that there is a lickle bit of space for HB within the Conservative party.Sunil_Prasannan said:
TSE Will Never Be A Tory.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm all in favour of social mobility.Richard_Tyndall said:
Given your disdain for social mobility you would ensure the continuation of lowest common denominator education.TheScreamingEagles said:
She should make me Education Secretary.ydoethur said:Can't see her sacking Grayling after losing Green.
Will be a disaster if Greening goes and is replaced by another meddlesome fool in the Gove/Morgan/Balls tradition.
Overall I would be surprised if the reconstruction was as extensive as predicted. That would mean a third of the Cabinet removed in less than three months, which would compare with Macmillan's Night of the Long Knives. She doesn't have Macmillan's majority and cannot afford the trouble it would cause.
If she does go for it, I expect her to be out by Easter with Hammond taking over.
I'd put a strong emphasis on history, maths, and the sciences.
I'd be the greatest Education Secretary ever, as I'd push up standards like never before.
One of the reasons why I'm in favour of abolishing the monarchy.0 -
In Buckinghamshire, whilst those that go to grammar school do better on average than they would in non grammar areas, the overall child performance is lower than the overall performance in non grammar areas.HYUFD said:
Buckinghamshire and Trafford are both fully selective and both have above average GCSE resultsTheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
Which means Buckinghamshire is letting down those who don't go to grammar school and do worse than they would in a non grammar area.
0 -
Hi Francis. Saw The Last Jedi for a third timeFrancisUrquhart said:New year resolution time - I will be doing a seanT flounce.
0 -
As does Lincolnshire. TSE is propagating myths in a desperate attempt to justify his elitist attitudes.HYUFD said:
Buckinghamshire and Trafford are both fully selective and both have above average GCSE resultsTheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.0 -
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them0 -
AgreedRichard_Tyndall said:
As does Lincolnshire. TSE is propagating myths in a desperate attempt to justify his elitist attitudes.HYUFD said:
Buckinghamshire and Trafford are both fully selective and both have above average GCSE resultsTheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.0 -
Actually the Sutton Trust report showed nothing of the sort. Another TSE lie in support of the indefensible.TheScreamingEagles said:
Grammar schools damage social mobility overall as organisations like the Sutton Trust have shown.Richard_Tyndall said:
And would remain so in a Republic. All you would do is replace a stable figurehead position with the illusion of social mobility. Like so much else you extol as 'improvement' the real effect is to reduce mobility and opportunity whilst hiding behind the illusion that things are getting better. The idea of the proles having any real power or position of authority scares the hell out of you and your privately educated attitudes.TheScreamingEagles said:
Social mobility should be about ensuring no matter your background you should have the opportunity to get any job if you have the talent to do so.Richard_Tyndall said:
Those two points do not equate to each other. I suspect your A level in history was long after they had started to go down in value. Mine was in 1983, back when A levels still had some validity.TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm all in favour of social mobility.Richard_Tyndall said:
Given your disdain for social mobility you would ensure the continuation of lowest common denominator education.TheScreamingEagles said:
She should make me Education Secretary.ydoethur said:Can't see her sacking Grayling after losing Green.
Will be a disaster if Greening goes and is replaced by another meddlesome fool in the Gove/Morgan/Balls tradition.
Overall I would be surprised if the reconstruction was as extensive as predicted. That would mean a third of the Cabinet removed in less than three months, which would compare with Macmillan's Night of the Long Knives. She doesn't have Macmillan's majority and cannot afford the trouble it would cause.
If she does go for it, I expect her to be out by Easter with Hammond taking over.
I'd put a strong emphasis on history, maths, and the sciences.
I'd be the greatest Education Secretary ever, as I'd push up standards like never before.
One of the reasons why I'm in favour of abolishing the monarchy.
So the top job in this country is limited to a select few.
If you're in favour of grammar schools, then you're an enemy of social mobility.0 -
Free-edit for young master Morris-Dancer. Signing-off until next year.Richard_Tyndall said:As does Lincolnshire.TSE is propagating mythsin a desperate attempt to justify his elitist attitudes.
0 -
That is simply not true, the overall GCSE results in Buckinghamshire for grammar and high school pupils combined are above averageDavid_Evershed said:
In Buckinghamshire, whilst those that go to grammar school do better on average than they would in non grammar areas, the overall child performance is lower than the overall performance in non grammar areas.HYUFD said:
Buckinghamshire and Trafford are both fully selective and both have above average GCSE resultsTheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
Which means Buckinghamshire is letting down those who don't go to grammar school and do worse than they would in a non grammar area.0 -
Seems to me as dumb and unnecessary as when royal mail decided to become Consignia.ydoethur said:
Well, the current name isn't that old - it was Newport Grammar when my grandfather was there.FrancisUrquhart said:I presume you are aware of the scandalous name change.
I am intrigued however that it is making the link to the independent sector (and it always has been de facto an independent school) so very explicit. I wonder if this presages a Manchester style Declaration of Independence?
Edit - if you thought my comment was an oblique reference to that, unfortunately it wasn't. It was a reference to the standard of teaching in the History department at Adams.0 -
When something positive happens.Rebourne_Fluffy said:
You make my old jokes look fresh and invigurating. When are you going to post something positive?Jonathan said:Deckchairs. Titanic.
0 -
As George osborne might say, LOUISSSSSSEEEEEEE....Sunil_Prasannan said:
Hi Francis. Saw The Last Jedi for a third timeFrancisUrquhart said:New year resolution time - I will be doing a seanT flounce.
0 -
Why? What did you do that needed that level of punishment?Sunil_Prasannan said:
Hi Francis. Saw The Last Jedi for a third timeFrancisUrquhart said:New year resolution time - I will be doing a seanT flounce.
0 -
I took A-level further maths in 1994. In preparation I took every previous paper back to the early seventies (my old man was my teacher so he had access to all of the old papers and the marking guides. Each year either the questions became easier or the grade boundaries were adjusted. There was one big revamp of the format halfway through (1984?) which resulted in a much bigger slippage in standards than usual.Omnium said:
When did serious grade inflation start? I'd have imagined it was it was from 1997 onwards, but I'm sure there was (and is) a background level of inflation.
Exam boards competing for business is sure to lead to erosion of standards.
0 -
HYUFD said:
That is simply not true, the overall GCSE results in Buckinghamshire for grammar and high school pupils combined are above averageDavid_Evershed said:
In Buckinghamshire, whilst those that go to grammar school do better on average than they would in non grammar areas, the overall child performance is lower than the overall performance in non grammar areas.HYUFD said:
Buckinghamshire and Trafford are both fully selective and both have above average GCSE resultsTheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
Which means Buckinghamshire is letting down those who don't go to grammar school and do worse than they would in a non grammar area.
See the FT study.
http://ig-legacy.ft.com/content/cb1e02f4-7461-3fd1-ac5d-9fd9befb20dd0 -
Only a third? I've not watched it since before Xmas, and I saw it 3 times before then!Sunil_Prasannan said:
Hi Francis. Saw The Last Jedi for a third timeFrancisUrquhart said:New year resolution time - I will be doing a seanT flounce.
0 -
what is your opinion of homeschooling?TheScreamingEagles said:
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
0 -
Jeremy Hunt will be in a strong position if he gets the cabinet committee chairmanships that were Damian Green's.
I respect him for this tweet:
https://twitter.com/Jeremy_Hunt/status/938067406886506496?
What is his religious denomination BTW? He supports a 12-week limit for elective abortion.
I don't think Boris will get demoted. "He came in from nowhere in national politics to a very senior cabinet position and performed badly in it, so let's create another powerful government position and give him that" doesn't make much sense. On the other hand, he could probably make an awful nuisance of himself, from Theresa May's point of view, outside the tent.0 -
How did you know the grade boundaries?initforthemoney said:
I took A-level further maths in 1994. In preparation I took every previous paper back to the early seventies (my old man was my teacher so he had access to all of the old papers and the marking guides. Each year either the questions became easier or the grade boundaries were adjusted. There was one big revamp of the format halfway through (1984?) which resulted in a much bigger slippage in standards than usual.Omnium said:
When did serious grade inflation start? I'd have imagined it was it was from 1997 onwards, but I'm sure there was (and is) a background level of inflation.
Exam boards competing for business is sure to lead to erosion of standards.
I can tell you that from my experience that late 70's vs early 80's A level exams were much the same. There was a degree of progress in that some questions in the earlier years seemed trivial, but also some questions from the earlier years were harder because that wasn't the current focus. So broadly the test was the same. I have no idea about whether the marking reflected that.
I got an 'S' level grade 1 in Physics. There was a degree of 'wow' about that at the time. As far as I'm aware there isn't such a distinguishing thing for high achievement now.
0 -
Surprised to learn he keeps goats, and am even more surprised to learn there is a Facebook app for them...in my experience even if they don't eat the message kids or even adult goats are very bad messengers anyway. Too wilful.Charlotte said:I respect him for this tweet:
https://twitter.com/Jeremy_Hunt/status/938067406886506496?
Oh, and welcome.0 -
If anybody else was PM Karen Bradley and James Brokenshire would be out but they are both former Home Office Ministers and as such however poor they are at their ministerial jobs presumably safe.
With Priti Patel out surely there is a need for another ethnic Cabinet minister.0 -
He lacks judgement: in one situation recently he chose words poorly for someone of his scenario (it was an unimportant conversation in private but shows carelessness - he described an potential action by a friendly third country as "tantamount to a declaration of war" when it clear was notRebourne_Fluffy said:Grayling appears not to be a loss: His skills and abilities are not known to me but his appearance does not offer much. A change may be required in the Cabinet but I cannot see if the talent is available: Maybe minor changes and some swappsies for now.
0 -
What a headline....
Huddersfield NOT the worst place to live in England
http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/west-yorkshire-news/huddersfield-not-worst-place-live-140919480 -
"Amazing. Every word of what you just said was wrong."ydoethur said:
Why? What did you do that needed that level of punishment?Sunil_Prasannan said:
Hi Francis. Saw The Last Jedi for a third timeFrancisUrquhart said:New year resolution time - I will be doing a seanT flounce.
0 -
May would be doing exactly the right thing by cutting out the old wood and bringing in young shoots. She needs to bring in younger talent which might succeed her and take on the stale geriatric Marxism of Corbyn in 2022. Then post 2022 after the shock of Labour's fourth defeat Labour can get on with being a viable alternative government again after many years of either Blairism or Corbynism with the mainstream neglected.0
-
I’m sure they would.MaxPB said:
Yes, we should dump empirical sciences and prioritise gender equality, intersectional feminism and Islamic studies for feminists. I'm pretty sure the teaching unions would get on board with that curriculum change.ydoethur said:
I'm afraid while you have some positive ideas on the only really important subject, your willingness to waste time on unimportant subjects like maths and science would rule you out.TheScreamingEagles said:
She should make me Education Secretary.ydoethur said:Can't see her sacking Grayling after losing Green.
Will be a disaster if Greening goes and is replaced by another meddlesome fool in the Gove/Morgan/Balls tradition.
Overall I would be surprised if the reconstruction was as extensive as predicted. That would mean a third of the Cabinet removed in less than three months, which would compare with Macmillan's Night of the Long Knives. She doesn't have Macmillan's majority and cannot afford the trouble it would cause.
If she does go for it, I expect her to be out by Easter with Hammond taking over.
I'd put a strong emphasis on history, maths, and the sciences.
I'd be the greatest Education Secretary ever, as I'd push up standards like never before.
Alternatively we can prioritise STEM subjects and give honours to the likes of Adrian Newey and Paddy Lowe, two Brits who have designed the last seven F1 winning cars between them.0 -
-
The grade boundaries were in the guides published after the event. I suspect marking guide is not the correct name for them though. There were plenty of examples of questions with various parts where the hardest part would disappear or be replaced with something easier.Omnium said:
How did you know the grade boundaries?initforthemoney said:
I took A-level further maths in 1994. In preparation I took every previous paper back to the early seventies (my old man was my teacher so he had access to all of the old papers and the marking guides. Each year either the questions became easier or the grade boundaries were adjusted. There was one big revamp of the format halfway through (1984?) which resulted in a much bigger slippage in standards than usual.Omnium said:
When did serious grade inflation start? I'd have imagined it was it was from 1997 onwards, but I'm sure there was (and is) a background level of inflation.
Exam boards competing for business is sure to lead to erosion of standards.
I can tell you that from my experience that late 70's vs early 80's A level exams were much the same. There was a degree of progress in that some questions in the earlier years seemed trivial, but also some questions from the earlier years were harder because that wasn't the current focus. So broadly the test was the same. I have no idea about whether the marking reflected that.
I got an 'S' level grade 1 in Physics. There was a degree of 'wow' about that at the time. As far as I'm aware there isn't such a distinguishing thing for high achievement now.
That it took 10 years for the proportion of A* grades to be similar to the proportion of A grades before A* grades were introduced is pretty telling. Maybe inflation was swifter during that decade.0 -
He has obviously never been to Stoke.Jonathan said:0 -
Seems a bit excessive to make you sit through it three times just because you make a few silly mistakes.Sunil_Prasannan said:
"Amazing. Every word of what you just said was wrong."ydoethur said:
Why? What did you do that needed that level of punishment?Sunil_Prasannan said:
Hi Francis. Saw The Last Jedi for a third timeFrancisUrquhart said:New year resolution time - I will be doing a seanT flounce.
I mean, where would Alistair Campbell be if that was the criteria?0 -
What ever happened to that story? Oh yes. He edits a local free-sheet. No one cares.....FrancisUrquhart said:
As George osborne might say, LOUISSSSSSEEEEEEE....Sunil_Prasannan said:
Hi Francis. Saw The Last Jedi for a third timeFrancisUrquhart said:New year resolution time - I will be doing a seanT flounce.
0 -
He is wrong. ABs voted strongly Remain, C1s were split, C2s and DEs voted strongly Leave in large part over immigrationJonathan said:0 -
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/947472890261319681FrancisUrquhart said:
He has obviously never been to Stoke.Jonathan said:0 -
Word Clouds - which rather helps explain why repeated shrieking about the economy leaves Leavers unmoved and exercises Remainers:
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/9475113574229319690 -
I crashed and burned, when I took S Level history. I just couldn't answer a single question.Omnium said:
How did you know the grade boundaries?initforthemoney said:
I took A-level further maths in 1994. In preparation I took every previous paper back to the early seventies (my old man was my teacher so he had access to all of the old papers and the marking guides. Each year either the questions became easier or the grade boundaries were adjusted. There was one big revamp of the format halfway through (1984?) which resulted in a much bigger slippage in standards than usual.Omnium said:
When did serious grade inflation start? I'd have imagined it was it was from 1997 onwards, but I'm sure there was (and is) a background level of inflation.
Exam boards competing for business is sure to lead to erosion of standards.
I can tell you that from my experience that late 70's vs early 80's A level exams were much the same. There was a degree of progress in that some questions in the earlier years seemed trivial, but also some questions from the earlier years were harder because that wasn't the current focus. So broadly the test was the same. I have no idea about whether the marking reflected that.
I got an 'S' level grade 1 in Physics. There was a degree of 'wow' about that at the time. As far as I'm aware there isn't such a distinguishing thing for high achievement now.
I got an A for the A level, though.0 -
If his Wikipedia page is even halfway accurate, I would think you're right. Somebody who self-identifies as a champagne socialist is hardly likely to visit an ex-industrial area.FrancisUrquhart said:
He has obviously never been to Stoke.Jonathan said:0 -
Almost entirely focused on those on FSM, not even the average and the number who go from poverty to the upper middle class has always been miniscule regardless of the school systemDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
That is simply not true, the overall GCSE results in Buckinghamshire for grammar and high school pupils combined are above averageDavid_Evershed said:
In Buckinghamshire, whilst those that go to grammar school do better on average than they would in non grammar areas, the overall child performance is lower than the overall performance in non grammar areas.HYUFD said:
Buckinghamshire and Trafford are both fully selective and both have above average GCSE resultsTheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
Which means Buckinghamshire is letting down those who don't go to grammar school and do worse than they would in a non grammar area.
See the FT study.
http://ig-legacy.ft.com/content/cb1e02f4-7461-3fd1-ac5d-9fd9befb20dd0 -
I believe there is a term for his tweet.....Fake something....ydoethur said:
If his Wikipedia page is even halfway accurate, I would think you're right. Somebody who self-identifies as a champagne socialist is hardly likely to visit an ex-industrial area.FrancisUrquhart said:
He has obviously never been to Stoke.Jonathan said:0 -
Well, at the head of his Twitter feed, if you look, he quotes the Spectator describing him as a 'purveyor of fake news.' If I was going to post rubbish like that I'm not sure I'd admit people have called me out over it.FrancisUrquhart said:
I believe there is a term for his tweet.....Fake something....ydoethur said:
If his Wikipedia page is even halfway accurate, I would think you're right. Somebody who self-identifies as a champagne socialist is hardly likely to visit an ex-industrial area.FrancisUrquhart said:
He has obviously never been to Stoke.Jonathan said:0 -
General Organic II. Read it once. No ticks for questions I could answer. Read it again. Still no ticks. Oh sod it - make it up. Funnily enough turned out ok whereas the exam where I thought I'd been particularly clever, I hadn't.....Sean_F said:
I just couldn't answer a single question.Omnium said:
How did you know the grade boundaries?initforthemoney said:
I took A-level further maths in 1994. In preparation I took every previous paper back to the early seventies (my old man was my teacher so he had access to all of the old papers and the marking guides. Each year either the questions became easier or the grade boundaries were adjusted. There was one big revamp of the format halfway through (1984?) which resulted in a much bigger slippage in standards than usual.Omnium said:
When did serious grade inflation start? I'd have imagined it was it was from 1997 onwards, but I'm sure there was (and is) a background level of inflation.
Exam boards competing for business is sure to lead to erosion of standards.
I can tell you that from my experience that late 70's vs early 80's A level exams were much the same. There was a degree of progress in that some questions in the earlier years seemed trivial, but also some questions from the earlier years were harder because that wasn't the current focus. So broadly the test was the same. I have no idea about whether the marking reflected that.
I got an 'S' level grade 1 in Physics. There was a degree of 'wow' about that at the time. As far as I'm aware there isn't such a distinguishing thing for high achievement now.0 -
He's still wrong though. Ultimately, insofar as it was a revolt - which is rather an emotive word in any case and I'm not sure the wisest word to use - Brexit was a revolt against people like that, not a revolt guided by them, for all that Farage is cast as a pantomime villain. It was against Cameron, Osborne, Blair, Corbyn to an extent, London in general perhaps.Jonathan said:
However as he himself would fit at least one of his own criteria he may not realise the situation as fully as he thinks he does.0 -
"It's all a machine, partner. Live free, don't join."ydoethur said:
Seems a bit excessive to make you sit through it three times just because you make a few silly mistakes.Sunil_Prasannan said:
"Amazing. Every word of what you just said was wrong."ydoethur said:
Why? What did you do that needed that level of punishment?Sunil_Prasannan said:
Hi Francis. Saw The Last Jedi for a third timeFrancisUrquhart said:New year resolution time - I will be doing a seanT flounce.
I mean, where would Alistair Campbell be if that was the criteria?0 -
I can't see May having a major reshuffle in January. All her reshuffles have been pigmy affairs, so far.0
-
Not sure O'Brien has ever actually been right about anything in his life. He is certainly not beyond making outright false statements during interviews, relying on the interviewee not being in a position to correct or challenge him. One of the nastiest and most dishonest presenters around today.HYUFD said:
He is wrong. ABs voted strongly Remain, C1s were split, C2s and DEs voted strongly Leave in large part over immigrationJonathan said:0 -
Brexit may have been led by upper-middle class activists, but that's true of all political movements. It attracted millions of working class voters. Working class does not necessarily equate to very poor, which is perhaps the point he's trying to make.ydoethur said:
If his Wikipedia page is even halfway accurate, I would think you're right. Somebody who self-identifies as a champagne socialist is hardly likely to visit an ex-industrial area.FrancisUrquhart said:
He has obviously never been to Stoke.Jonathan said:0 -
It's like listening to Eyeore.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure O'Brien has ever actually been right about anything in his life. He is certainly not beyond making outright false statements during interviews, relying on the interviewee not being in a position to correct or challenge him. One of the nastiest and most dishonest presenters around today.HYUFD said:
He is wrong. ABs voted strongly Remain, C1s were split, C2s and DEs voted strongly Leave in large part over immigrationJonathan said:
He has the irritating habit of assuming his opponents must have base motives.0 -
No it's not.Sean_F said:
Brexit may have been led by upper-middle class activists, but that's true of all political movements.0 -
Bring back Paxman!Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure O'Brien has ever actually been right about anything in his life. He is certainly not beyond making outright false statements during interviews, relying on the interviewee not being in a position to correct or challenge him. One of the nastiest and most dishonest presenters around today.HYUFD said:
He is wrong. ABs voted strongly Remain, C1s were split, C2s and DEs voted strongly Leave in large part over immigrationJonathan said:0 -
Dennis Skinner, Paul Nuttall, Andrew Rosindell etc plenty of working class figures leading the Leave side tooJonathan said:0 -
You in SF Thurs 11 Jan and fancy a drink?RobD said:Sunil_Prasannan said:
Adult Videos?TheScreamingEagles said:Right, I'm off to party in Manchester and see in the new year, play nicely and next week's threads might be on AV.
This is what I get for logging out of PB for a few hours.0 -
On that logic you should make every school a grammarDavid_Evershed said:
In Buckinghamshire, whilst those that go to grammar school do better on average than they would in non grammar areas, the overall child performance is lower than the overall performance in non grammar areas.HYUFD said:
Buckinghamshire and Trafford are both fully selective and both have above average GCSE resultsTheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
Which means Buckinghamshire is letting down those who don't go to grammar school and do worse than they would in a non grammar area.0 -
Although turnout among DE voters was comparatively low:HYUFD said:
He is wrong. ABs voted strongly Remain, C1s were split, C2s and DEs voted strongly Leave in large part over immigrationJonathan said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/how-did-turnout-affect-the-eu-referendum-result/0 -
He sounds like just about every LBC presenter there is!Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure O'Brien has ever actually been right about anything in his life. He is certainly not beyond making outright false statements during interviews, relying on the interviewee not being in a position to correct or challenge him. One of the nastiest and most dishonest presenters around today.HYUFD said:
He is wrong. ABs voted strongly Remain, C1s were split, C2s and DEs voted strongly Leave in large part over immigrationJonathan said:
0 -
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them0 -
Welcome, it's pygmy, and are reshuffles as major political drama a thing of the past? (Good thing, if so). Have we had a PM since Thatcher who positively relished them?Barnam said:I can't see May having a major reshuffle in January. All her reshuffles have been pigmy affairs, so far.
And while I'm here, "Foreign aid to be shifted to support UK policy, Johnson says". That's not a dogwhistle, it's a foghorn, intended for the ears of kippers, and the sort of tory member who voted in the Quiet Man.
HNY to everybody.
edit: the bojo story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-425287120 -
And there you have the prime argument against grammar schools.Charles said:
On that logic you should make every school a grammarDavid_Evershed said:
In Buckinghamshire, whilst those that go to grammar school do better on average than they would in non grammar areas, the overall child performance is lower than the overall performance in non grammar areas.HYUFD said:
Buckinghamshire and Trafford are both fully selective and both have above average GCSE resultsTheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
Which means Buckinghamshire is letting down those who don't go to grammar school and do worse than they would in a non grammar area.
0 -
That was the pitch behind comprehensive schooling - Wilson's government referred to 'Grammar schools for all.'Charles said:
On that logic you should make every school a grammarDavid_Evershed said:
In Buckinghamshire, whilst those that go to grammar school do better on average than they would in non grammar areas, the overall child performance is lower than the overall performance in non grammar areas.HYUFD said:
Buckinghamshire and Trafford are both fully selective and both have above average GCSE resultsTheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
Which means Buckinghamshire is letting down those who don't go to grammar school and do worse than they would in a non grammar area.
There was a very interesting series of articles about that in the recent Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, although the author of them did spout a load of rubbish when it came to modern teaching in schools.0 -
It may or may not happen, but she won't be reshuffling from a position of strength. She'll be reshuffling to see off a coup.Barnam said:I can't see May having a major reshuffle in January. All her reshuffles have been pigmy affairs, so far.
Her British dream lies in tatters.0 -
If you are referring to academic segregation I'd agree. In my view setting is the best way to educateSouthamObserver said:
And there you have the prime argument against grammar schools.Charles said:
On that logic you should make every school a grammarDavid_Evershed said:
In Buckinghamshire, whilst those that go to grammar school do better on average than they would in non grammar areas, the overall child performance is lower than the overall performance in non grammar areas.HYUFD said:
Buckinghamshire and Trafford are both fully selective and both have above average GCSE resultsTheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
Which means Buckinghamshire is letting down those who don't go to grammar school and do worse than they would in a non grammar area.0 -
Are you saying she will chicken out?Pong said:
It may or may not happen, but she won't be reshuffling from a position of strength. She'll be reshuffling to see off a coup.Barnam said:I can't see May having a major reshuffle in January. All her reshuffles have been pigmy affairs, so far.
Her British dream lies in tatters.
(Yes, I know it's both spelled and pronounced differently!)0 -
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most parents do not have capital of £30k a year lying around which is why if they are not high earners grammar schools and top academies are so sought afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them0 -
I have to say, I’m not seeing what some others are seeing in Dominic Raab re that Sunday Times Report.0
-
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most parents do not have capital of £30k a year lying around which is why if they are not high earners grammar schools and top academies are so sought afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them0 -
Why not make private schools illegal then?TheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
Comprehensives leave plenty of poor kids behind of course - because they operate on the basis of catchment areas where you can buy your way into the best state schools by being able to afford the house prices in the catchment areas of the best state schools. Ask any estate agent - it's the dirty secret of the well heeled liberal middle classes!
I am not sure that selection by how well off your parents are (via their ability to afford a nice house in a nice area) - is any less likely to leave kids behind than selection by ability and intelligence. Allocating places by lottery and bussing poor kids from poor areas to the rich catchment areas of the best state schools are would solve the problem!0 -
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most parents do not have capital of £30k a year lying around which is why if they are not high earners grammar schools and top academies are so sought afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them0 -
The Daily Mail thinks that a UKIP councillor has been arrested on suspicion of murdering his wife
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5224261/Man-arrested-suspicion-murder-woman-dead.html
But the man named came 4th in the county council election this year, and is therefore, er, not a councillor
https://elections.suffolk.gov.uk/division/2200 -
Um... yes.... durrh?HYUFD said:
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most parents do not have capital of £30k a year lying around which is why if they are not high earners grammar schools and top academies are so sought afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them0 -
A voucher system would be better as that way good schools would expand, bad ones would closebrendan16 said:
Why not make private schools illegal then?TheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
Comprehensives leave plenty of poor kids behind of course - because they operate on the basis of catchment areas where you can buy your way into the best state schools by being able to afford the house prices in the catchment areas of the best state schools. Ask any estate agent - it's the dirty secret of the well heeled liberal middle classes!
I am not sure that selection by how well off your parents are (via their ability to afford a nice house in a nice area) - is any less likely to leave kids behind than selection by ability and intelligence. Allocating places by lottery and bussing poor kids from poor areas to the rich catchment areas of the best state schools are would solve the problem!0 -
So back to my original point thenCharles said:
Um... yes.... durrh?HYUFD said:
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most parents do not have capital of £30k a year lying around which is why if they are not high earners grammar schools and top academies are so sought afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them0 -
One of the more bizarre elements of Corbyn's manifesto - in a field of stiff competition - was the treatment of private schools. He didn't propose to make them illegal but he did propose to slap heavy additional taxes on them that would in practice have put most albeit not all of them out of business.brendan16 said:
Why not make private schools illegal then?TheScreamingEagles said:
I've seen the data and stats, grammar schools help a few, but they damage even more, so they are a net loser.CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
I'm in favour of not leaving any child behind.
Comprehensives leave plenty of poor kids behind of course - because they operate on the basis of catchment areas where you can buy your way into the best state schools by being able to afford the house prices in the catchment areas of the best state schools. Ask any estate agent - it's the dirty secret of the well heeled liberal middle classes!
I am not sure that selection by how well off your parents are (via their ability to afford a nice house in a nice area) - is any less likely to leave fewer kids behind than selection by ability and intelligence. Allocating places by lottery and bussing poor kids from poor areas to the rich catchment areas of the best state schools are would solve the problem!
Fair enough, if he believes private education to be unethical. However, the bizarre thing was he proposed to use the income from these punitive taxes - which would never have materialised, on account of the schools closing - to fund an increase in state education.
So without realising it what Corbyn and Rayner had actually proposed was a 7% increase in state school numbers and no extra money at all - therefore a further 7% real terms cut in school budgets. Worse, they had on that basis said they would force increased spending on schools - so undoubtedly a large number would have gone bankrupt.
It is to my mind the most striking example of why Labour are currently unfit to govern, far ahead of his links to the IRA and Hamas and the unanswered questions surrounding what he knew about Bernie Bain and when. They have ideas, possibly even ones that they consider well-intentioned, but no idea of what effect they will have on real people in the real world.
Edit- incidentally Bristol Cathedral School, a former private school turned academy, does allocate all places except for those reserved for choristers by lottery. Since it is one of only two, maybe three vaguely good state schools in Bristol, it is popular and that seemed the fairest way of allocating places.0 -
No. You original point was focused on a limited number of high income jobs. I pointed out this was not true.HYUFD said:
So back to my original point thenCharles said:
Um... yes.... durrh?HYUFD said:
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most parents do not have capital of £30k a year lying around which is why if they are not high earners grammar schools and top academies are so sought afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them0 -
It’s also worth saying that there’s a significant difference in costs and pupil-base between London commuting distance and the wider country, at least at the day school level. If you look where I am currently, there are a disproportionate number of Asian families making genuine sacrifices to send their kids to HMC/GDST schools. That’s not inherited wealth but a belief in the standards that those schools have.Charles said:
Um... yes.... durrh?HYUFD said:
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most parents do not have capital of £30k a year lying around which is why if they are not high earners grammar schools and top academies are so sought afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them
In any event even at boarding schools most fees are not in the 30k range.0 -
No, as you have just confirmed. To be able to afford boarding school fees of £30 000 a year on average you need to have a sufficiently high salary to buy an expensive enough property to borrow against to pay those fees in the first place. Either that or you have very wealth parents who you inherit from or who pay their grandchildrens fees themselvesCharles said:
No. You original point was focused on a limited number of high income jobs. I pointed out this was not true.HYUFD said:
So back to my original point thenCharles said:
Um... yes.... durrh?HYUFD said:
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most parents do not have capital of £30k a year lying around which is why if they are not high earners grammar schools and top academies are so sought afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them0 -
Eton fees are £13 000 a term ie £39 000 a yearAnExileinD4 said:
It’s also worth saying that there’s a significant difference in costs and pupil-base between London commuting distance and the wider country, at least at the day school level. If you look where I am currently, there are a disproportionate number of Asian families making genuine sacrifices to send their kids to HMC/GDST schools. That’s not inherited wealth but a belief in the standards that those schools have.Charles said:
Um... yes.... durrh?HYUFD said:
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most t afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them
In any event even at boarding schools most fees are not in the 30k range.
http://www.etoncollege.com/CurrentFees.aspx0 -
You want the state to build a million homes and sell them off at a subsidy? And there I was thinking that Corbyn was the left wing one.MaxPB said:
Heartening to see nationalise rail and energy so low on both priority lists.The_Apocalypse said:
A party which pledges to give the NHS "£350m per week" by 2022, raise the minimum wage to £12.50 per hour by the end of 2022 and commission a million affordable homes for sale exclusively to non-investor FTBs would do very well.
I think all of that is well within the realms of possibility for either party tbh, though Labour would probably make them social housing for rent rather than affordable housing for private ownership, which is why the Tories must offer ownership before Labour can create 2-3m new social tenants.0 -
No. The £30k fee - which is only a very small number of schools - the Etons and Winchesters of the world. Parents with children of 13+ typically bought 15+ years ago when prices were a lot cheaperHYUFD said:
No, as you have just confirmed. To be able to afford boarding school fees of £30 000 a year on average you need to have a sufficiently high salary to buy an expensive enough property to borrow against to pay those fees in the first place. Either that or you have very wealth parents who you inherit from or who pay their grandchildrens fees themselvesCharles said:
No. You original point was focused on a limited number of high income jobs. I pointed out this was not true.HYUFD said:
So back to my original point thenCharles said:
Um... yes.... durrh?HYUFD said:
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most parents do not have capital of £30k a year lying around which is why if they are not high earners grammar schools and top academies are so sought afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford themSean_F said:HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
You really do t need to pretend to be right on every occasion. We're all just having fun, not trying to our do each other0 -
A post that says little about O'B and rather more about you.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure O'Brien has ever actually been right about anything in his life. He is certainly not beyond making outright false statements during interviews, relying on the interviewee not being in a position to correct or challenge him. One of the nastiest and most dishonest presenters around today.HYUFD said:
He is wrong. ABs voted strongly Remain, C1s were split, C2s and DEs voted strongly Leave in large part over immigrationJonathan said:0 -
Evening all
Happy New Year to all on PB from Stodge.
As an aside, Mrs Stodge and I did the Auckland-Honolulu journey with Air NZ back in 2006. It's odd to fly out one day and arrive the previous day. That year, we had two March 10ths - all I can tell you it's never the same second time round !!0 -
That’s awesome. But bring back Concorde, which could do the job properlySouthamObserver said:
0 -
Eton fees as I have just shown are closer to £40k now not £30k. You would need to have a property worth at least around a million plus to be even able to consider borrowing against to pay for boarding school fees even with house price inflation and that is almost five times the average house price of just over £200k. Even if private day schools are a bit cheaper and a bit more accessible than boarding schools they are still beyond the reach of the average family without a scholarship or bursaryCharles said:
No. The £30k fee - which is only a very small number of schools - the Etons and Winchesters of the world. Parents with children of 13+ typically bought 15+ years ago when prices were a lot cheaperHYUFD said:
No, as you have just confirmed. To be able to afford boarding school fees ens fees themselvesCharles said:
No. You original point was focused on a limited number of high income jobs. I pointed out this was not true.HYUFD said:
So back to my original point thenCharles said:
Um... yes.... durrh?HYUFD said:
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most parents do not have capital of £30k a year lying around which is why if they are not high earners grammar schools and top academies are so sought afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford themSean_F said:HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top on of Scotland
You really do t need to pretend to be right on every occasion. We're all just having fun, not trying to our do each other0 -
Not necessarily.Recidivist said:
You want the state to build a million homes and sell them off at a subsidy? And there I was thinking that Corbyn was the left wing one.MaxPB said:
Heartening to see nationalise rail and energy so low on both priority lists.The_Apocalypse said:
A party which pledges to give the NHS "£350m per week" by 2022, raise the minimum wage to £12.50 per hour by the end of 2022 and commission a million affordable homes for sale exclusively to non-investor FTBs would do very well.
I think all of that is well within the realms of possibility for either party tbh, though Labour would probably make them social housing for rent rather than affordable housing for private ownership, which is why the Tories must offer ownership before Labour can create 2-3m new social tenants.
You could - for example - sell at just the build cost (ie not for profit). Of if on state labs you could not charge for the land (which I think is about 40% of the cost) but charge rent for it.
If, say, you build start homes with a free market value of £100,000, you could sell for £60k plus annual rent of £2k (£40k @5%). The £20k profit (build cost of £40k) could then be used to fund building social housing on the same site.0 -
Not necessarily.Recidivist said:
You want the state to build a million homes and sell them off at a subsidy? And there I was thinking that Corbyn was the left wing one.MaxPB said:
Heartening to see nationalise rail and energy so low on both priority lists.The_Apocalypse said:
A party which pledges to give the NHS "£350m per week" by 2022, raise the minimum wage to £12.50 per hour by the end of 2022 and commission a million affordable homes for sale exclusively to non-investor FTBs would do very well.
I think all of that is well within the realms of possibility for either party tbh, though Labour would probably make them social housing for rent rather than affordable housing for private ownership, which is why the Tories must offer ownership before Labour can create 2-3m new social tenants.
You could - for example - sell at just the build cost (ie not for profit). Of if on state labs you could not charge for the land (which I think is about 40% of the cost) but charge rent for it.
If, say, you build start homes with a free market value of £100,000, you could sell for £60k plus annual rent of £2k (£40k @5%). The £20k profit (build cost of £40k) could then be used to fund building social housing on the same site.0 -
Your average Home Counties private day school is £11k a year.HYUFD said:
Eton fees are £13 000 a term ie £39 000 a yearAnExileinD4 said:
It’s also worth saying that there’s a significant difference in costs and pupil-base between London commuting distance and the wider country, at least at the day school level. If you look where I am currently, there are a disproportionate number of Asian families making genuine sacrifices to send their kids to HMC/GDST schools. That’s not inherited wealth but a belief in the standards that those schools have.Charles said:
Um... yes.... durrh?HYUFD said:
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most t afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at the top so reduce the public school monopoly of elite schools, indeed many private schools saw falling rolls when grammars were at their peak in the 1950s and early 1960s, why pay for an education you can get free? Plus of course from 1964 we had no private school educated PMs for 33 years, since 1997 In the last 20 years we have had an Old Etonian PM and a PM educated at Fettes, the Eton of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them
In any event even at boarding schools most fees are not in the 30k range.
http://www.etoncollege.com/CurrentFees.aspx0 -
Which you would still need to be close to the top 10% of earners to pay based on the typical calculation of fees being a quarter of salary. Though as I said day school fees are more affordable than boarding school fees and many parents do make sacrifices to educate their children privatelySandpit said:
Your average Home Counties private day school is £11k a year.HYUFD said:
Eton fees are £13 000 a term ie £39 000 a yearAnExileinD4 said:
It’s also worth saying that there’s a significant difference in costs and pupil-base between London commuting distance and the wider country, at least at theCharles said:
Um... yes.... durrh?HYUFD said:
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most t afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:
TSE is a public schoolboy (as indeed am I though my sister went to a grammar and my cousins to comprehensives).CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
Grammar schools increase competition at on of Scotland
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them
In any event even at boarding schools most fees are not in the 30k range.
http://www.etoncollege.com/CurrentFees.aspx0 -
Housing...
Little Boxes, Little Boxes, all made of ticky, tacky
Little Boxes, Little Boxes and they all look just the same
Houses are being built in London - lots of them, the cranes are everywhere, the imported construction workers aren't short of work.
BUT all you see are flats, boxes, being built. Is the answer to the housing problem in London simply about building boxes in blocks on brownfield sites ? To what extent are they homes for families ?
The housing problem has many dimensions - the solution also needs many dimensions and while there has to be a place for flats that's not all the solution. Homes, like the people in them, come in all shapes and sizes.
0 -
No it really doesn't. Indeed with the exception of yourself I have not seen anyone disagreeing with me on here regarding his nature.IanB2 said:
A post that says little about O'B and rather more about you.Richard_Tyndall said:
Not sure O'Brien has ever actually been right about anything in his life. He is certainly not beyond making outright false statements during interviews, relying on the interviewee not being in a position to correct or challenge him. One of the nastiest and most dishonest presenters around today.HYUFD said:
He is wrong. ABs voted strongly Remain, C1s were split, C2s and DEs voted strongly Leave in large part over immigrationJonathan said:0 -
That is reasonable , I pay more in Ayrshire.Sandpit said:
Your average Home Counties private day school is £11k a year.HYUFD said:
Eton fees are £13 000 a term ie £39 000 a yearAnExileinD4 said:
It’s also worth saying that there’s a significant difference in costs and pupil-base between London commuting distance and the wider country, at least at the day school level. If you look where I am currently, there are a disproportionate number of Asian families making genuine sacrifices to send their kids to HMC/GDST schools. That’s not inherited wealth but a belief in the standards that those schools have.Charles said:
Um... yes.... durrh?HYUFD said:
You still need to be a high earner or have a substantial inheritance to have the property wealth to borrow against to pay for expensive private school feesCharles said:
They borrow it against their houseHYUFD said:
Inheritance from grandparents or property wealth may help but most t afterCharles said:
For the last 20 years most people have paid school fees out of capital not incomeHYUFD said:
Certainly if you can get your child into a grammar or a top Church of England Academy etc you do not really need to go private.Sean_F said:
TBH, private school fees seem like a waste of money these days. Ever greater sums are spent on ever more elaborate facilities.HYUFD said:CD13 said:Mr Eagles,
Why are public schoolboys so against Grammar schools? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were a good Grammar school lad, but why was Tony Crossland so against them - the posh git.
If you can afford to pay fees, you can certainly afford to move to places where there are good State schools.
Most boarding schools now see the biggest growth in pupils from the Far East, as their fees are so expensive you need to either work in the City, be a celebrity or a top barrister or surgeon to afford them
In any event even at boarding schools most fees are not in the 30k range.
http://www.etoncollege.com/CurrentFees.aspx0 -
An interesting discussion. A few points:
On the reshuffle. Lots of pressure on May from both wings of the party to establish control over the other wing. Surely the best way to reassert her authority is NOT to reshuffle - this is my cabinet, it like me is Strong and Stable...
On Grammar schools - a marvellous idea. Smaller classes, focused teaching, equipment, opportunities. Lets make ALL schools Grammar schools. That way the opportunity afforded to the small minority who are naturally gifted or whose parents hire a tutor to pass the exam can be given to all in a comprehensive pledge to all children. We could call it "comprehensive education" - just needs a shit ton of cash throwing at it. As business keeps not paying taxes and then whining about kids leaving school stupid, simply apply an education levy to large business and challenge them to disown it. You don't want to fund education for our children Mr Starfucks...?
On housing. Its pretty simple really. When people have minimal prospect of ever being able to afford a deposit to buy, and in many bigger cities now struggle to rent without half their salary plus going to the landlord, the system is clearly broken. Rents are high because purchasing costs are high. So build a large number of houses that aren't sold on the market, rent them at a price people can afford, the private landlords can't afford to drop rents and sell up, hey presto houses on the market with falling prices. Rent controls work EVERYWHERE else, its typical post-Thatcher British stupidity to assume everyone else is wrong and we are right even when the evidence is clear and unambiguous.0 -
11 000 houses are going to be built in Epping Forest district as part of the local plan, 40% affordable housingstodge said:Housing...
Little Boxes, Little Boxes, all made of ticky, tacky
Little Boxes, Little Boxes and they all look just the same
Houses are being built in London - lots of them, the cranes are everywhere, the imported construction workers aren't short of work.
BUT all you see are flats, boxes, being built. Is the answer to the housing problem in London simply about building boxes in blocks on brownfield sites ? To what extent are they homes for families ?
The housing problem has many dimensions - the solution also needs many dimensions and while there has to be a place for flats that's not all the solution. Homes, like the people in them, come in all shapes and sizes.0 -
The government wants social media to act on terrorist content.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42526271
The Iranian government -- ditto.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-42529576
0 -
You are part of the problem, you and your father and your careful analysis of past papers. One factor that has driven grade inflation is far better exam preparation. That is not to say that there has not been dumbing down but that there are many drivers, some benign.initforthemoney said:
I took A-level further maths in 1994. In preparation I took every previous paper back to the early seventies (my old man was my teacher so he had access to all of the old papers and the marking guides. Each year either the questions became easier or the grade boundaries were adjusted. There was one big revamp of the format halfway through (1984?) which resulted in a much bigger slippage in standards than usual.Omnium said:
When did serious grade inflation start? I'd have imagined it was it was from 1997 onwards, but I'm sure there was (and is) a background level of inflation.
Exam boards competing for business is sure to lead to erosion of standards.0 -
What is Shippers success rate in giving tips about Govt?0
-
The interesting distinction between Leavers and Remainers is at the second level - control versus rights - after the main distinction of immigration and the economy. Leavers and Remainers have completely different concepts of freedom.CarlottaVance said:Word Clouds - which rather helps explain why repeated shrieking about the economy leaves Leavers unmoved and exercises Remainers:
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/947511357422931969
On topic, it seems Mrs May is feeling confident. Mind you, she was confident before the GE.0 -
Grammar schools actually tend to have larger class sizes than ordinary comprehensives, not smaller, because on average they get less funding per pupil (also it is much easier to control a class of 31 able children who want to learn than 25 who need heavy teacher input and don't want to work). Private schools have smaller ratios, but they have about double the spending per pupil which goes a long way towards explaining classes less than half the size.RochdalePioneers said:On Grammar schools - a marvellous idea. Smaller classes, focused teaching, equipment, opportunities. Lets make ALL schools Grammar schools. That way the opportunity afforded to the small minority who are naturally gifted or whose parents hire a tutor to pass the exam can be given to all in a comprehensive pledge to all children. We could call it "comprehensive education" - just needs a shit ton of cash throwing at it. As business keeps not paying taxes and then whining about kids leaving school stupid, simply apply an education levy to large business and challenge them to disown it. You don't want to fund education for our children Mr Starfucks...?
I would agree that cutting class sizes to below 20 would be a major boost for education. Unfortunately leaving aside the major initial capital cost for additional classrooms, the huge ongoing bill for staff salaries would be more than even Corbyn has proposed putting into education.0 -
Remainers believe rights derive from the State whereas Leavers believe they are inalienable and do not require the EU to deliver them.FF43 said:
The interesting distinction between Leavers and Remainers is at the second level - control versus rights - after the main distinction of immigration and the economy. Leavers and Remainers have completely different concepts of freedom.CarlottaVance said:Word Clouds - which rather helps explain why repeated shrieking about the economy leaves Leavers unmoved and exercises Remainers:
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/947511357422931969
On topic, it seems Mrs May is feeling confident. Mind you, she was confident before the GE.0
This discussion has been closed.