politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Betting on who will be Philip Hammond’s successor
Comments
-
Can anyone explain to me what the government is trying to achieve with this tuition fee review? Presumably its aim is to make Higher Education worse - I would have reframed the debate around the graduate tax (which is pretty much what the current system is)0
-
Yes, that was the system. No fees for me and partial grant. The government paid back by tax.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.Jonathan said:
Means testing . What if you had just failed to get the grant? What then?SouthamObserver said:
I got a full grant in the 1980s after my parents were means-tested. It was no big deal and certainly didn’t make me feel second class.Jonathan said:
Means testing creates a second class student. Why should a talented poor or middle class have to jump through additional hoops? There are enough barriers anyway. Each according to their talent , not daddy's bank account and connections .Charles said:
You misunderstand: in government).Jonathan said:
Nasty regressive solution. The students ability to pay should not come into. Your so called market will be dominated by the wealthy.Charles said:
I am going to go with option 3....ydoethur said:
We have two options:TGOHF said:Oh dear - is Peston really this thick ?
https://twitter.com/peston/status/965131399459205120
1) abolish the cap on fees ants from poorer backgrounds as cost of living is also a consideration (Carlisle is not the world's best university but it's a hell of a lot cheaper to live in than Reading).
2) accept that universities are a public good, will run at a headline loss and therefore need taxpayer subsidy, in which case we need to dramatically restructure and shrink the entire HE sector.
I don't know which, but we need to decide fast.
Incidentally Radio 5 had somebody from the Higher Education Policy Institute on this morning. He talked a lot of sense especially on part time learners. Well worth listening to if you can find it.
The issue is there are 2 questions that get conflated: (a) how do we finance tertiary education and (b) how to we capture the social benefit from higher education. You need to separate these.
The answer and institutions.
Then there is a government resource allocation decision to capture social benefit. This is a political decision and to spend on tertiary education and on how those resources should be allocated.
If some rich thick kid wants to pay £100,000 to study basket weaving at Pontypandy University that’s fine, but they shouldn’t expect support from the taxpayer to do so0 -
In practice the rich kid would get the place. Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the chancellor anyway, might like to make a little extra donation.Charles said:
By focusing resources on those who can’t afford it otherwise you are reducing the deadweight cost of supporting those who wold go anyway
If you position it correctly I suspect - for example - a university would choose a kid with a state academic scholarship over a full fee paying kid because it signals they are smart0 -
If someone's parents can afford Eton fees they can easily afford supporting their children at university so grants and bursaries should be focused on those students who need it.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.
Linking fees to graduate earning premium repaid after graduation would also ensure the individual student was still responsible for their actual tuition costs based on what they were likely to earn in future.0 -
"possibly as a springboard for the premiership" might be why the PM does not take this advice. She has just promoted Williamson who'd barely got his feet under the Cabinet table before starting on manoeuvres. The last thing she needs is yet another would-be PM.stevef said:I love the way that the word "hardline" is often added for leavers who want to implement the referendum result, but never to remoaners who want to frustrate democracy.
Perhaps May will promote a woman to chancellor for the first time. Perhaps she will be bold, and not promote a big beast to the job and make one of the newer younger ministers chancellor, possibly as a springboard for the premiership.0 -
You can make the source of funding blind at the point of offer.Jonathan said:
In practice the rich kid would get the place. Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the chancellor anyway, might like to make a little extra donation.Charles said:
By focusing resources on those who can’t afford it otherwise you are reducing the deadweight cost of supporting those who wold go anyway
If you position it correctly I suspect - for example - a university would choose a kid with a state academic scholarship over a full fee paying kid because it signals they are smart
But I can tell from your second point it is just a question of prejudice0 -
Trump's problem is he not winning new converts. Everyone who will vote him now voted for him last time. As he won on the narrowest of margins he will lose next time on current projections. Still I think the possibility of that changing is higher than it was before. Particularly if the Democrats choose a candidate that is less popular than Hillary Clinton.AndyJS said:Trump's approval rating is 41.4% according to the latest 538 figures. He won the election with 46% so he's retaining about 90% of his support at the moment.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/0 -
Nope, experience.Charles said:
You can make the source of funding blind at the point of offer.Jonathan said:
In practice the rich kid would get the place. Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the chancellor anyway, might like to make a little extra donation.Charles said:
By focusing resources on those who can’t afford it otherwise you are reducing the deadweight cost of supporting those who wold go anyway
If you position it correctly I suspect - for example - a university would choose a kid with a state academic scholarship over a full fee paying kid because it signals they are smart
But I can tell from your second point it is just a question of prejudice0 -
Ditto. I was on a full State Scholarship which paid all fees and provided a generous maintenance grant. Some of my college friends with middle-class parents were much poorer than me as their parents couldn't afford/didn't want to top up their grants to my level. I certainly didn't feel second class!SouthamObserver said:
I got a full grant in the 1980s after my parents were means-tested. It was no big deal and certainly didn’t make me feel second class.Jonathan said:
Means testing creates a second class student. Why should a talented poor or middle class have to jump through additional hoops? There are enough barriers anyway. Each according to their talent , not daddy's bank account and connections .Charles said:
You misunderstand: in my model the taxpayer would subsidise kids from poor backgrounds to make courses affordable to everyone who justifies a place on them (within the overall spending envelope allocated the government).Jonathan said:
Nasty regressive solution. The students ability to pay should not come into. Your so called market will be dominated by the wealthy.Charles said:
I am going to go with option 3....ydoethur said:TGOHF said:Oh dear - is Peston really this thick ?
https://twitter.com/peston/status/965131399459205120
.
The issue is there are 2 questions that get conflated: (a) how do we finance tertiary education and (b) how to we capture the social benefit from higher education. You need to separate these.
The answer is to make universities entirely free standing and independent of government and allow them to charge what they feel appropriate for their courses. This will ensure clear market pricing and reflect the relative value of different courses and institutions.
Then there is a government resource allocation decision to capture social benefit. This is a political decision and to spend on tertiary education and on how those resources should be allocated.
If some rich thick kid wants to pay £100,000 to study basket weaving at Pontypandy University that’s fine, but they shouldn’t expect support from the taxpayer to do so0 -
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students today.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.0 -
I do not know about his ability to be a doctor but he is not going to COEFF43 said:Surely not Liam Fox as Chancellor?' I know that post requires no ability with with numbers, but not someone who is unaware that a 90% fall in Foreign Direct Investments is not a "record breaking year", except in a sense he didn't intend.
Does Liam Fox have any ability in ANYTHING? Was he any good as a doctor?0 -
That is a good thing for society and the economy.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.0 -
Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit0
-
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
“Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the Chancellor anyway...”Jonathan said:
Nope, experience.Charles said:
You can make the source of funding blind at the point of offer.Jonathan said:
In practice the rich kid would get the place. Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the chancellor anyway, might like to make a little extra donation.Charles said:
By focusing resources on those who can’t afford it otherwise you are reducing the deadweight cost of supporting those who wold go anyway
If you position it correctly I suspect - for example - a university would choose a kid with a state academic scholarship over a full fee paying kid because it signals they are smart
But I can tell from your second point it is just a question of prejudice0 -
Lot of wasted money in there as well with people who would be far better doing a trade than wasting years at University hosing up public money that is just wasted.Jonathan said:
That is a good thing for society and the economy.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.0 -
Because my parents had, on paper, a decent income ..... they ran a small group of pharmacies... I only got a ‘fees’ grant. I don’t recall any differences in student attitudes.Jonathan said:
Means testing . What if you had just failed to get the grant? What then?SouthamObserver said:
I got a full grant in the 1980s after my parents were means-tested. It was no big deal and certainly didn’t make me feel second class.Jonathan said:
Means testing creates a second class student. Why should a talented poor or middle class have to jump through additional hoops? There are enough barriers anyway. Each according to their talent , not daddy's bank account and connections .Charles said:
You misunderstand: in my model the taxpayer would subsidise kids from poor backgrounds to make courses affordable to everyone who justifies a place on them (within the overall spending envelope allocated the government).Jonathan said:
Nasty regressive solution. The students ability to pay should not come into. Your so called market will be dominated by the wealthy.Charles said:ydoethur said:
We have two options:TGOHF said:Oh dear - is Peston really this thick ?
https://twitter.com/peston/status/965131399459205120
1) abolish the cap on fees ants from poorer backgrounds as cost of living is also a consideration (Carlisle is not the world's best university but it's a hell of a lot cheaper to live in than Reading).
2) accept that universities are a public good, will run at a headline loss and therefore need taxpayer subsidy, in which case we need to dramatically restructure and shrink the entire HE sector.
I don't know which, but we need to decide fast.
Incidentally Radio 5 had somebody from the Higher Education Policy Institute on this morning. He talked a lot of sense especially on part time learners. Well worth listening to if you can find it.
Then there is a government resource allocation decision to capture social benefit. This is a political decision and to spend on tertiary education and on how those resources should be allocated.
If some rich thick kid wants to pay £100,000 to study basket weaving at Pontypandy University that’s fine, but they shouldn’t expect support from the taxpayer to do so
It was a bit difficult for them because my sister’s and my Uni time overlapped.
Trouble was that the tax system encouraged them to take directors fees, but commercial interests required them to use those fees in the business. I worked in the vacations and funded my social life that way.0 -
It is not good for the economy which needs many more in vocational training than at UniJonathan said:
That is a good thing for society and the economy.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.0 -
Unless you wanted to be a doctor or a lawyer or a teacher or academic or senior civil servant very few went to university as few jobs needed graduates.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students today.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.
You could be an accountant or a stockbroker or a middle manager or a journalist with just A Levels, a police officer or nurse with just GCSEs or O Levels, now most of those who do those jobs have degrees.0 -
Are you saying familial connections with colleges do not exist and do not influence who gets accepted?Charles said:
“Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the Chancellor anyway...”Jonathan said:
Nope, experience.Charles said:
You can make the source of funding blind at the point of offer.Jonathan said:
In practice the rich kid would get the place. Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the chancellor anyway, might like to make a little extra donation.Charles said:
By focusing resources on those who can’t afford it otherwise you are reducing the deadweight cost of supporting those who wold go anyway
If you position it correctly I suspect - for example - a university would choose a kid with a state academic scholarship over a full fee paying kid because it signals they are smart
But I can tell from your second point it is just a question of prejudice0 -
Charles said:
We’ll make a Conservative of you yet...Barnesian said:
I agree with that analysis. I think I'll pinch it and add it to "in my opinion". . Hope you don't mind.Charles said:
I am going to go with option 3....ydoethur said:TGOHF said:Oh dear - is Peston really this thick ?
https://twitter.com/peston/status/965131399459205120
The issue is there are 2 questions that get conflated: (a) how do we finance tertiary education and (b) how to we capture the social benefit from higher education. You need to separate these.
The answer is to make universities entirely free standing and independent of government and allow them to charge what they feel appropriate for their courses. This will ensure clear market pricing and reflect the relative value of different courses and institutions.
Then there is a government resource allocation decision to capture social benefit. This is a political decision and rightly one to debate at that level. This could be to subsidise certain courses which are seen as adding greater social value (eg STEM or Medicine); or to support individuals financially for academic or other social reasons (eg poverty or social exclusion); or perhaps to support specific institutions that are seeing as adding extra value (eg Open University). At election times there would then be a debate on the right amount to spend on tertiary education and on how those resources should be allocated.
No chance of that! If it wasn't for the ideology, the members and the attitude ... But, as a pragmatist I am open-minded to well argued ideas.
The feature I would add to you suggestion is that in return for a free market in courses and fees I would insist that universities picked up some/most of the cost of means-tested maintenance grants and fees. I would also introduce a free market in student loans with the government as guarantor and collector rather than let the Student Loan Company have a monopoly with exorbitant interest rates.0 -
Morning Malc - good to see we agree again - enjoy your daymalcolmg said:
Lot of wasted money in there as well with people who would be far better doing a trade than wasting years at University hosing up public money that is just wasted.Jonathan said:
That is a good thing for society and the economy.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.0 -
Is it?Jonathan said:
That is a good thing for society and the economy.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.
Or are we just in a paper chase arms race where job applicants have to have degrees whether it makes sense or not ( eg at a local university where all the admin staff have to have degrees regardless!).
We’re getting kids into debt to get a piece of paper that 40% plus of their age cohort also have - it’s wrong. Better to limit the numbers far more drastically, and have state grants etc for a bigger percentage to allow the able but less well off to go.0 -
"What The Actual Fuck! #Marr excuses Cox's behaviour because of what he went through"
Not seen the programme but if true it is odd because:
1. It really doesn't excuse the behaviour
&
2. The behaviour preceded his wife's murder.0 -
Yes, hence the Tories gained seats like Moray from the SNP post BrexitBig_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
Or as the head of Oxfam maintains they did not murdsr babies in their cots.felix said:"What The Actual Fuck! #Marr excuses Cox's behaviour because of what he went through"
Not seen the programme but if true it is odd because:
1. It really doesn't excuse the behaviour
&
2. The behaviour preceded his wife's murder.
0 -
Emily Thornberry confirms Labour wants to be in 'some form of Customs Union' but is committed to leaving the Single Market in order to manage migration into the UK0
-
Teaching required a two year diploma course. OK for most secondary and prinmary. Grammar schools needed degrees for lots of subjects, except I think PE.HYUFD said:
Unless you wanted to be a doctor or a lawyer or a teacher or academic or senior civil servant very few went to university as few jobs needed graduates.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students today.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.
You could be an accountant or a stockbroker or a middle manager or a journalist with just A Levels, a police officer or nurse with just GCSEs or O Levels, now most of those who do those jobs have degrees.
Old school friend of mine, whom I met up with again about a year ago after 50+ years, said that he’d done very well in banking with O levels.0 -
Morning G , same to you.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Morning Malc - good to see we agree again - enjoy your daymalcolmg said:
Lot of wasted money in there as well with people who would be far better doing a trade than wasting years at University hosing up public money that is just wasted.Jonathan said:
That is a good thing for society and the economy.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.0 -
Still cuckoo I seeHYUFD said:
Yes, hence the Tories gained seats like Moray from the SNP post BrexitBig_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
My wife's home CountyHYUFD said:
Yes, hence the Tories gained seats like Moray from the SNP post BrexitBig_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
I think even students from very rich families would get a partial grant if two or more were in further education at the same time.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.Jonathan said:
Means testing . What if you had just failed to get the grant? What then?SouthamObserver said:
I got a full grant in the 1980s after my parents were means-tested. It was no big deal and certainly didn’t make me feel second class.Jonathan said:
Means testing creates a second class student. Why should a talented poor or middle class have to jump through additional hoops? There are enough barriers anyway. Each according to their talent , not daddy's bank account and connections .Charles said:
You misunderstand: in government).Jonathan said:
Nasty regressive solution. The students ability to pay should not come into. Your so called market will be dominated by the wealthy.
If some rich thick kid wants to pay £100,000 to study basket weaving at Pontypandy University that’s fine, but they shouldn’t expect support from the taxpayer to do so
Rich families were also able to get the tax benefits from covenants when their children were in further education - thus giving them an incentive to make the parental contribution.0 -
So cigarette paper difference from the Govt. “Some kind of” could mean anything you want. Which in fairness is exactly what she wants I’m sure. Studied ambivalence, masterfully inactivity, or indeed cake and eat it.HYUFD said:Emily Thornberry confirms Labour wants to be in 'some form of Customs Union' but is committed to leaving the single market in order to manage migration into the UK
0 -
She also knows Gove has already said he will give it away to help the city etc. The idiots voting Tory in Moray will get their just desserts. When have Tories ever done anything to help Scotland ever.Big_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
She only wants what is good for her , only fishing she cares about is for an MP seat in England before she gets thrashed at Holyrood.Big_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
Absolutely on both counts.John_M said:
That's correct. We need to stop this reflexive dislike of 'means testing'. We do need robust controls to stop the middle classes gaming the system, naturally.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.Jonathan said:
Means testing . What if you had just failed to get the grant? What then?SouthamObserver said:
I got a full grant in the 1980s after my parents were means-tested. It was no big deal and certainly didn’t make me feel second class.Jonathan said:
Means testing creates a second class student. Why should a talented poor or middle class have to jump through additional hoops? There are enough barriers anyway. Each according to their talent , not daddy's bank account and connections .Charles said:
You misunderstand: in government).Jonathan said:
Nasty regressive solution. The students ability to pay should not come into. Your so called market will be dominated by the wealthy.Charles said:
I am going to go with option 3....ydoethur said:
We have two options:TGOHF said:Oh dear - is Peston really this thick ?
https://twitter.com/peston/status/965131399459205120
1) abolish the cap on fees ants from poorer backgrounds as cost of living is also a consideration (Carlisle is not the world's best university but
I don't know which, but we need to decide fast.
Incidentally Radio 5 had somebody from the Higher Education Policy Institute on this morning. He talked a lot of sense especially on part time learners. Well worth listening to if you can find it.
The issue is there are 2 questions that get conflated: (a) how do we finance tertiary education and (b) how to we capture the social benefit from higher education. You need to separate these.
The answer and institutions.
Then there is a government resource allocation decision to capture social benefit. This is a political decision and to spend on tertiary education and on how those resources should be allocated.
If some rich thick kid wants to pay £100,000 to study basket weaving at Pontypandy University that’s fine, but they shouldn’t expect support from the taxpayer to do so
IMHO Labour's continual opposition to means testing puts them way out of whack with the British public's sense of fairness.0 -
The old secondary moderns may not have needed full degrees no but grammar schools generally did as you say, the rise of comprehensive education largely coincided with the expansion of university education from the mid to late 1960s on.OldKingCole said:
Teaching required a two year diploma course. OK for most secondary and prinmary. Grammar schools needed degrees for lots of subjects, except I think PE.HYUFD said:
Unless you wanted to be a doctor or a lawyer or a teacher or academic or senior civil servant very few went to university as few jobs needed graduates.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students today.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.
You could be an accountant or a stockbroker or a middle manager or a journalist with just A Levels, a police officer or nurse with just GCSEs or O Levels, now most of those who do those jobs have degrees.
Old school friend of mine, whom I met up with again about a year ago after 50+ years, said that he’d done very well in banking with O levels.
The City in the 1980s was certainly full of public schoolboys and Essex boys who never went to university
0 -
Yes and plenty of fishermen thereBig_G_NorthWales said:
My wife's home CountyHYUFD said:
Yes, hence the Tories gained seats like Moray from the SNP post BrexitBig_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
Well probably helped to defeat independence. I also see the conservatives gained votes throughout Scotland and many of them are nice conservatives like me !!!!!malcolmg said:
She also knows Gove has already said he will give it away to help the city etc. The idiots voting Tory in Moray will get their just desserts. When have Tories ever done anything to help Scotland ever.Big_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
One of the flaws with this idea is that Liam Fox is an idiot. And that is unfair on most idiots. Not going to happen.0
-
One of my sons was one of those Essex boys in the late 80’s! Subsequently went to Uni, though.HYUFD said:
The old secondary moderns may not have needed full degrees no but grammar schools generally did as you say, the rise of comprehensive education largely coincided with the expansion of university education from the mid to late 1960s on.OldKingCole said:
Teaching required a two year diploma course. OK for most secondary and prinmary. Grammar schools needed degrees for lots of subjects, except I think PE.HYUFD said:
Unless you wanted to be a doctor or a lawyer or a teacher or academic or senior civil servant very few went to university as few jobs needed graduates.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students today.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.
You could be an accountant or a stockbroker or a middle manager or a journalist with just A Levels, a police officer or nurse with just GCSEs or O Levels, now most of those who do those jobs have degrees.
Old school friend of mine, whom I met up with again about a year ago after 50+ years, said that he’d done very well in banking with O levels.
The City in the 1980s was certainly full of public schoolboys and Essex boys who never went to university0 -
My wife's family are from generations of North East FishermenHYUFD said:
Yes and plenty of fishermen thereBig_G_NorthWales said:
My wife's home CountyHYUFD said:
Yes, hence the Tories gained seats like Moray from the SNP post BrexitBig_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
Yes a strong community up thereBig_G_NorthWales said:
My wife's family are from generations of North East FishermenHYUFD said:
Yes and plenty of fishermen thereBig_G_NorthWales said:
My wife's home CountyHYUFD said:
Yes, hence the Tories gained seats like Moray from the SNP post BrexitBig_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
+1DavidL said:One of the flaws with this idea is that Liam Fox is an idiot. And that is unfair on most idiots. Not going to happen.
0 -
Have you seen who the Foreign Secretary is?DavidL said:One of the flaws with this idea is that Liam Fox is an idiot. And that is unfair on most idiots. Not going to happen.
Have you seen who the Defence Secretary is?0 -
See my post earlier. I think my sister got some support. And no way were we ‘rich’, so no question of covenants.another_richard said:
I think even students from very rich families would get a partial grant if two or more were in further education at the same time.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.Jonathan said:
Means testing . What if you had just failed to get the grant? What then?SouthamObserver said:
I got a full grant in the 1980s after my parents were means-tested. It was no big deal and certainly didn’t make me feel second class.Jonathan said:
Means testing creates a second class student. Why should a talented poor or middle class have to jump through additional hoops? There are enough barriers anyway. Each according to their talent , not daddy's bank account and connections .Charles said:
You misunderstand: in government).Jonathan said:
Nasty regressive solution. The students ability to pay should not come into. Your so called market will be dominated by the wealthy.
If some rich thick kid wants to pay £100,000 to study basket weaving at Pontypandy University that’s fine, but they shouldn’t expect support from the taxpayer to do so
Rich families were also able to get the tax benefits from covenants when their children were in further education - thus giving them an incentive to make the parental contribution.0 -
VeryHYUFD said:
Yes a strong community up thereBig_G_NorthWales said:
My wife's family are from generations of North East FishermenHYUFD said:
Yes and plenty of fishermen thereBig_G_NorthWales said:
My wife's home CountyHYUFD said:
Yes, hence the Tories gained seats like Moray from the SNP post BrexitBig_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
Well quite . Who is the bigger idiot, the idiot or the idiot that appointed them?TheScreamingEagles said:
Have you seen who the Foreign Secretary is?DavidL said:One of the flaws with this idea is that Liam Fox is an idiot. And that is unfair on most idiots. Not going to happen.
Have you seen who the Defence Secretary is?0 -
G even the nice ones are deluded. The Tories are doing nothing in Scotland. The 13 no-users in Westminster do or say nothing other than parrot the London line. Davidson has been invisible for last 6 months , only ever appears on tame shows , like BBC where she does not get questions. She gets a doing every week on FM's questions and has no policies for Scotland whatsoever. She is totally self seeking and will for sure become an English MP. We will be well rid of the empty vessel.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Well probably helped to defeat independence. I also see the conservatives gained votes throughout Scotland and many of them are nice conservatives like me !!!!!malcolmg said:
She also knows Gove has already said he will give it away to help the city etc. The idiots voting Tory in Moray will get their just desserts. When have Tories ever done anything to help Scotland ever.Big_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
They used to in my day (70s-80s) - irrefutable cases of the Snodgrass extension of the college buildings going up the same year as young Tommy Snodgrass matriculated. Nowadays, I doubt it because the admissions procedure tends to be in the hands of a large committee which presumably has a fair old left wing bias, academics being what they are.Jonathan said:
Are you saying familial connections with colleges do not exist and do not influence who gets accepted?Charles said:
“Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the Chancellor anyway...”Jonathan said:
Nope, experience.Charles said:
You can make the source of funding blind at the point of offer.Jonathan said:
In practice the rich kid would get the place. Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the chancellor anyway, might like to make a little extra donation.Charles said:
By focusing resources on those who can’t afford it otherwise you are reducing the deadweight cost of supporting those who wold go anyway
If you position it correctly I suspect - for example - a university would choose a kid with a state academic scholarship over a full fee paying kid because it signals they are smart
But I can tell from your second point it is just a question of prejudice0 -
She is just quoting stated policy of Mrs May and the governmentAlistair said:
I see she's gone on another journey then.HYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
Even in Scotland 38 per cent of voters voted leave - and I expect a lot of those will be Tory voters.0 -
Yes, there is virtually no difference between May's position on Brexit and Corbyn's position on Brexit now, both want to leave the EU and Single Market and Customs Union as it is now and end free movement but get a comprehensive FTA with the EU.welshowl said:
So cigarette paper difference from the Govt. “Some kind of” could mean anything you want. Which in fairness is exactly what she wants I’m sure. Studied ambivalence, masterfully inactivity, or indeed cake and eat it.HYUFD said:Emily Thornberry confirms Labour wants to be in 'some form of Customs Union' but is committed to leaving the single market in order to manage migration into the UK
May is now closer to Corbyn on Brexit than she is to JRM and Corbyn is now closer to May on Brexit than he is to Chuka Umunna.
0 -
I have no doubt she has her critics and of course I am not in the cut and thrust of Scots politics as I was when I lived in Edinburghmalcolmg said:
G even the nice ones are deluded. The Tories are doing nothing in Scotland. The 13 no-users in Westminster do or say nothing other than parrot the London line. Davidson has been invisible for last 6 months , only ever appears on tame shows , like BBC where she does not get questions. She gets a doing every week on FM's questions and has no policies for Scotland whatsoever. She is totally self seeking and will for sure become an English MP. We will be well rid of the empty vessel.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Well probably helped to defeat independence. I also see the conservatives gained votes throughout Scotland and many of them are nice conservatives like me !!!!!malcolmg said:
She also knows Gove has already said he will give it away to help the city etc. The idiots voting Tory in Moray will get their just desserts. When have Tories ever done anything to help Scotland ever.Big_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
Yes. The route for Mogg to become Chancellor relies on his making a deal to deliver his followers to a leadership rival in return for the Treasury. So Mogg might be a bet if you can find good odds and do not mind tying your stake up, possibly for years. Of course, you'd also need to know if Mogg even wants the job; you'd feel a bit of a clot if he sells his support in return for becoming Foreign Secretary.Nigelb said:
Surely it's precisely because he's seen as a possible leadership contender that there is no way May would promote him directly from the backbencher to so powerful a cabinet post ?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. CD13, ah, good.
Mr. Meeks, that is odd. Whether you like Mogg or not, if he's in the running (in markets, at least) for next PM he should be a potential Chancellor, even if it's a long shot.
Mr. Felix, I forget who, (not Adonis) but one frequent Twitterer compared leaving the EU to the Black Death a week or two ago.
(If we're seriously considering Fox as a possibility, then actual qualification for the post is obviously an irrelevance.)0 -
Left wingers do nepotism . Arguably they're worse. Look at the Labour Party. If you think bureaucracy and committees can't be influenced, I suspect you're likely to be disappointed.Ishmael_Z said:
They used to in my day (70s-80s) - irrefutable cases of the Snodgrass extension of the college buildings going up the same year as young Tommy Snodgrass matriculated. Nowadays, I doubt it because the admissions procedure tends to be in the hands of a large committee which presumably has a fair old left wing bias, academics being what they are.Jonathan said:
Are you saying familial connections with colleges do not exist and do not influence who gets accepted?Charles said:
“Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the Chancellor anyway...”Jonathan said:
Nope, experience.Charles said:
You can make the source of funding blind at the point of offer.Jonathan said:
In practice the rich kid would get the place. Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the chancellor anyway, might like to make a little extra donation.Charles said:
By focusing resources on those who can’t afford it otherwise you are reducing the deadweight cost of supporting those who wold go anyway
If you position it correctly I suspect - for example - a university would choose a kid with a state academic scholarship over a full fee paying kid because it signals they are smart
But I can tell from your second point it is just a question of prejudice0 -
https://order-order.com/2018/02/18/labour-mps-back-brendan-cox/
So as long as you say sorry and cry all is forgiven by Jess Philips - rather different from the line she used for Joby Young. It's a puzzle this morality business. and there was me looking forward to some Yvette Cooper 'outrage' to brighten up a dull week.0 -
What a dunderheid, there are a fraction of the fishermen left in Scotland since Tories in Westminster sold them down the river. Been in perpetual decline for a long time.HYUFD said:
Yes and plenty of fishermen thereBig_G_NorthWales said:
My wife's home CountyHYUFD said:
Yes, hence the Tories gained seats like Moray from the SNP post BrexitBig_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
Helped no doubt by university expansionOldKingCole said:
One of my sons was one of those Essex boys in the late 80’s! Subsequently went to Uni, though.HYUFD said:
The old secondary moderns may not have needed full degrees no but grammar schools generally did as you say, the rise of comprehensive education largely coincided with the expansion of university education from the mid to late 1960s on.OldKingCole said:
Teaching required a two year diploma course. OK for most secondary and prinmary. Grammar schools needed degrees for lots of subjects, except I think PE.HYUFD said:
Unless you wanted to be a doctor or a lawyer or a teacher or academic or senior civil servant very few went to university as few jobs needed graduates.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students today.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.
You could be an accountant or a stockbroker or a middle manager or a journalist with just A Levels, a police officer or nurse with just GCSEs or O Levels, now most of those who do those jobs have degrees.
Old school friend of mine, whom I met up with again about a year ago after 50+ years, said that he’d done very well in banking with O levels.
The City in the 1980s was certainly full of public schoolboys and Essex boys who never went to university0 -
-
How surprising she should parrot Westminster policy, that must be a first ......oh wait!brendan16 said:
She is just quoting stated policy of Mrs May and the governmentAlistair said:
I see she's gone on another journey then.HYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
Even in Scotland 38 per cent of voters voted leave - and I expect a lot of those will be Tory voters.0 -
mumsnet are very very disappointed in him.felix said:https://order-order.com/2018/02/18/labour-mps-back-brendan-cox/
So as long as you say sorry and cry all is forgiven by Jess Philips - rather different from the line she used for Joby Young. It's a puzzle this morality business. and there was me looking forward to some Yvette Cooper 'outrage' to brighten up a dull week.0 -
I seem to recall the means test was administered with no great level of competence by the local authority. By the time I went to university my father was at quite a respectable altitude in the Foreign Office hierarchy and I got a full grant after his artful and not particularly truthful completion of the paperwork...another_richard said:
I think even students from very rich families would get a partial grant if two or more were in further education at the same time.
0 -
Was that a freudian slip or did you really mean to say jobbie youngfelix said:https://order-order.com/2018/02/18/labour-mps-back-brendan-cox/
So as long as you say sorry and cry all is forgiven by Jess Philips - rather different from the line she used for Joby Young. It's a puzzle this morality business. and there was me looking forward to some Yvette Cooper 'outrage' to brighten up a dull week.0 -
Not really. Went to one established in the 60’s, with an excellent reputation.HYUFD said:
Helped no doubt by university expansionOldKingCole said:
One of my sons was one of those Essex boys in the late 80’s! Subsequently went to Uni, though.HYUFD said:
The old secondary moderns may not have needed full degrees no but grammar schools generally did as you say, the rise of comprehensive education largely coincided with the expansion of university education from the mid to late 1960s on.OldKingCole said:
Teaching required a two year diploma course. OK for most secondary and prinmary. Grammar schools needed degrees for lots of subjects, except I think PE.HYUFD said:
Unless you wanted to be a doctor or a lawyer or a teacher or academic or senior civil servant very few went to university as few jobs needed graduates.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students today.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.
You could be an accountant or a stockbroker or a middle manager or a journalist with just A Levels, a police officer or nurse with just GCSEs or O Levels, now most of those who do those jobs have degrees.
Old school friend of mine, whom I met up with again about a year ago after 50+ years, said that he’d done very well in banking with O levels.
The City in the 1980s was certainly full of public schoolboys and Essex boys who never went to university0 -
The EU sold them down the river - that is why they want outmalcolmg said:
What a dunderheid, there are a fraction of the fishermen left in Scotland since Tories in Westminster sold them down the river. Been in perpetual decline for a long time.HYUFD said:
Yes and plenty of fishermen thereBig_G_NorthWales said:
My wife's home CountyHYUFD said:
Yes, hence the Tories gained seats like Moray from the SNP post BrexitBig_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
I got a full grant when I went to Uni in the 1960s. My father had retired the year before (he was 78) so was just on a pension and thus qualified.SouthamObserver said:
I got a full grant in the 1980s after my parents were means-tested. It was no big deal and certainly didn’t make me feel second class.Jonathan said:
Means testing creates a second class student. Why should a talented poor or middle class have to jump through additional hoops? There are enough barriers anyway. Each according to their talent , not daddy's bank account and connections .Charles said:
You misunderstand: in my model the taxpayer would subsidise kids from poor backgrounds to make courses affordable to everyone who justifies a place on them (within the overall spending envelope allocated the government).Jonathan said:
Nasty regressive solution. The students ability to pay should not come into. Your so called market will be dominated by the wealthy.Charles said:
I am going to go with option 3....ydoethur said:TGOHF said:Oh dear - is Peston really this thick ?
https://twitter.com/peston/status/965131399459205120
Incidentally Radio 5 had somebody from the Higher Education Policy Institute on this morning. He talked a lot of sense especially on part time learners. Well worth listening to if you can find it.
The issue is there are 2 questions that get conflated: (a) how do we finance tertiary education and (b) how to we capture the social benefit from higher education. You need to separate these.
The answer is to make universities entirely free standing and independent of government and allow them to charge what they feel appropriate for their courses. This will ensure clear market pricing and reflect the relative value of different courses and institutions.
Then there is a government resource allocation decision to capture social benefit. This is a political decision and to spend on tertiary education and on how those resources should be allocated.
If some rich thick kid wants to pay £100,000 to study basket weaving at Pontypandy University that’s fine, but they shouldn’t expect support from the taxpayer to do so0 -
G even allowing for my Tory bias, she is a stinker, out for herself and nothing else, a puppet for Westminster.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I have no doubt she has her critics and of course I am not in the cut and thrust of Scots politics as I was when I lived in Edinburghmalcolmg said:
G even the nice ones are deluded. The Tories are doing nothing in Scotland. The 13 no-users in Westminster do or say nothing other than parrot the London line. Davidson has been invisible for last 6 months , only ever appears on tame shows , like BBC where she does not get questions. She gets a doing every week on FM's questions and has no policies for Scotland whatsoever. She is totally self seeking and will for sure become an English MP. We will be well rid of the empty vessel.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Well probably helped to defeat independence. I also see the conservatives gained votes throughout Scotland and many of them are nice conservatives like me !!!!!malcolmg said:
She also knows Gove has already said he will give it away to help the city etc. The idiots voting Tory in Moray will get their just desserts. When have Tories ever done anything to help Scotland ever.Big_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
JRM is sounding great on LBC, standing in for Farage. He is such a posho its brilliant. I could be persuaded to vote Tory in England if he was leader.0
-
G it was Westminster that sold them down the river to suit other policies in England, they were counted as expendable. Very same will happen again and then we will hear them whinging despite their own stupidity.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The EU sold them down the river - that is why they want outmalcolmg said:
What a dunderheid, there are a fraction of the fishermen left in Scotland since Tories in Westminster sold them down the river. Been in perpetual decline for a long time.HYUFD said:
Yes and plenty of fishermen thereBig_G_NorthWales said:
My wife's home CountyHYUFD said:
Yes, hence the Tories gained seats like Moray from the SNP post BrexitBig_G_NorthWales said:
And it will happenHYUFD said:Ruth Davidson backs leaving the Customs Union on Peston on Sunday but wants a comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU post Brexit
And she knows the Scottish Fishing Industry wants out. Indeed they never wanted in in the first place0 -
Two new German polls should slightly steady Social Democrat (and therefore Merkel) nerves:
http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/ 7
Not great, but not awful either.0 -
He says it in a polite form unusual in politics. He is a character but PM - nomalcolmg said:JRM is sounding great on LBC, standing in for Farage. He is such a posho its brilliant. I could be persuaded to vote Tory in England if he was leader.
0 -
You ain't nothing but a hound dogydoethur said:
He can't be hounded out of office.Jonathan said:Fox's career is interesting. Widely seen to be useless, but unflushable. The benefit of friends.
I'll get my coat...
Been snoopin' 'round the door
You ain't nothing but a hound dog
Been snoopin' 'round my door
You can wag your tail
But I ain't gonna feed you no more
You told me you was high-class
But I could see through that
Yes, you told me you was high-class
But I could see through that
And daddy, I know
You ain't no real cool cat0 -
G he could not be worse than previous four we have had. I like him.Big_G_NorthWales said:
He says it in a polite form unusual in politics. He is a character but PM - nomalcolmg said:JRM is sounding great on LBC, standing in for Farage. He is such a posho its brilliant. I could be persuaded to vote Tory in England if he was leader.
0 -
Scots together - my wife likes him toomalcolmg said:
G he could not be worse than previous four we have had. I like him.Big_G_NorthWales said:
He says it in a polite form unusual in politics. He is a character but PM - nomalcolmg said:JRM is sounding great on LBC, standing in for Farage. He is such a posho its brilliant. I could be persuaded to vote Tory in England if he was leader.
0 -
The point is that the sort of dubious office behaviour that he admits to wouldn't rate media coverage at all except for the fact that he's the husband of an MP who was murdered. Since anyone with any empathy at all feels that must have been rough, it's surely reasonable to cut him some slack and let him sort out his life in private. Surely being related to a victim shouldn't make you fair game for trial by media. Can any of us be absolutely sure we've never said anything that we'd be embarrassed by if we were catapulted into celebrity by the murder of a relative?felix said:"What The Actual Fuck! #Marr excuses Cox's behaviour because of what he went through"
Not seen the programme but if true it is odd because:
1. It really doesn't excuse the behaviour
&
2. The behaviour preceded his wife's murder.0 -
Imagine if subsequent events had been different, today’s headline would be that the husband of an MP had stood down from a charity because of allegations of sexual harrasment.felix said:https://order-order.com/2018/02/18/labour-mps-back-brendan-cox/
So as long as you say sorry and cry all is forgiven by Jess Philips - rather different from the line she used for Joby Young. It's a puzzle this morality business. and there was me looking forward to some Yvette Cooper 'outrage' to brighten up a dull week.
The key is that the allegations are from when he was married, not from after he was sadly widowed.0 -
Understandably .TwistedFireStopper said:
mumsnet are very very disappointed in him.felix said:https://order-order.com/2018/02/18/labour-mps-back-brendan-cox/
So as long as you say sorry and cry all is forgiven by Jess Philips - rather different from the line she used for Joby Young. It's a puzzle this morality business. and there was me looking forward to some Yvette Cooper 'outrage' to brighten up a dull week.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/18/brendan-cox-resigns-from-charities-amid-sexual-assault-claims .0 -
-
The 60s was the first big period of university expansion, Warwick, York, Sussex, Essex, UEA, Kent etc all founded thenOldKingCole said:
Not really. Went to one established in the 60’s, with an excellent reputation.HYUFD said:
Helped no doubt by university expansionOldKingCole said:
One of my sons was one of those Essex boys in the late 80’s! Subsequently went to Uni, though.HYUFD said:
The old secondary moderns may not have needed full degrees no but grammar schools generally did as you say, the rise of comprehensive education largely coincided with the expansion of university education from the mid to late 1960s on.OldKingCole said:
Teaching required a two year diploma course. OK for most secondary and prinmary. Grammar schools needed degrees for lots of subjects, except I think PE.HYUFD said:
Unless you wanted to be a doctor or a lawyer or a teacher or academic or senior civil servant very few went to university as few jobs needed graduates.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students today.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.
You could be an accountant or a stockbroker or a middle manager or a journalist with just A Levels, a police officer or nurse with just GCSEs or O Levels, now most of those who do those jobs have degrees.
Old school friend of mine, whom I met up with again about a year ago after 50+ years, said that he’d done very well in banking with O levels.
The City in the 1980s was certainly full of public schoolboys and Essex boys who never went to university0 -
It won't when most Tory marginal seats voted LeaveScott_P said:0 -
Some very good names there. High reputations.HYUFD said:
The 60s was the first big period of university expansion, Warwick, York, Sussex, Essex, UEA, Kent etc all founded thenOldKingCole said:
Not really. Went to one established in the 60’s, with an excellent reputation.HYUFD said:
Helped no doubt by university expansionOldKingCole said:
One of my sons was one of those Essex boys in the late 80’s! Subsequently went to Uni, though.HYUFD said:
The old secondary moderns may not have needed full degrees no but grammar schools generally did as you say, the rise of comprehensive education largely coincided with the expansion of university education from the mid to late 1960s on.OldKingCole said:
Teaching required a two year diploma course. OK for most secondary and prinmary. Grammar schools needed degrees for lots of subjects, except I think PE.HYUFD said:
Unless you wanted to be a doctor or a lawyer or a teacher or academic or senior civil servant very few went to university as few jobs needed graduates.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students today.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.
You could be an accountant or a stockbroker or a middle manager or a journalist with just A Levels, a police officer or nurse with just GCSEs or O Levels, now most of those who do those jobs have degrees.
Old school friend of mine, whom I met up with again about a year ago after 50+ years, said that he’d done very well in banking with O levels.
The City in the 1980s was certainly full of public schoolboys and Essex boys who never went to university0 -
Hi Sarah.Awb683 said:Michael Gove has been good in all previous appointments.
0 -
More rarely than you suggestJonathan said:
Are you saying familial connections with colleges do not exist and do not influence who gets accepted?Charles said:
“Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the Chancellor anyway...”Jonathan said:
Nope, experience.Charles said:
You can make the source of funding blind at the point of offer.Jonathan said:
In practice the rich kid would get the place. Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the chancellor anyway, might like to make a little extra donation.Charles said:
By focusing resources on those who can’t afford it otherwise you are reducing the deadweight cost of supporting those who wold go anyway
If you position it correctly I suspect - for example - a university would choose a kid with a state academic scholarship over a full fee paying kid because it signals they are smart
But I can tell from your second point it is just a question of prejudice0 -
If he was "just" the husband of an MP, surely that would still have been a story?NickPalmer said:
The point is that the sort of dubious office behaviour that he admits to wouldn't rate media coverage at all except for the fact that he's the husband of an MP who was murdered. Since anyone with any empathy at all feels that must have been rough, it's surely reasonable to cut him some slack and let him sort out his life in private. Surely being related to a victim shouldn't make you fair game for trial by media. Can any of us be absolutely sure we've never said anything that we'd be embarrassed by if we were catapulted into celebrity by the murder of a relative?felix said:"What The Actual Fuck! #Marr excuses Cox's behaviour because of what he went through"
Not seen the programme but if true it is odd because:
1. It really doesn't excuse the behaviour
&
2. The behaviour preceded his wife's murder.
Personally, I cut a lot of slack to people that own up to past problems which is what he has done.
To say somehow his wife's death relieves him of responsibility if anything is an insult to his sense of agency.0 -
I would say that those with familial connections are better familiar with processes and what to expect, what to say to get in, etc.Charles said:
More rarely than you suggestJonathan said:
Are you saying familial connections with colleges do not exist and do not influence who gets accepted?Charles said:
“Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the Chancellor anyway...”Jonathan said:
Nope, experience.Charles said:
You can make the source of funding blind at the point of offer.Jonathan said:
In practice the rich kid would get the place. Mummy and Daddy, who probably know the chancellor anyway, might like to make a little extra donation.Charles said:
By focusing resources on those who can’t afford it otherwise you are reducing the deadweight cost of supporting those who wold go anyway
If you position it correctly I suspect - for example - a university would choose a kid with a state academic scholarship over a full fee paying kid because it signals they are smart
But I can tell from your second point it is just a question of prejudice
Equally those with money can afford better tutors, easier to study when you aren't working during your A levels, etc.0 -
It is rarely I disagree with you Nick but he has been found out as a sex pest and labour should be focussing on his victims.NickPalmer said:
The point is that the sort of dubious office behaviour that he admits to wouldn't rate media coverage at all except for the fact that he's the husband of an MP who was murdered. Since anyone with any empathy at all feels that must have been rough, it's surely reasonable to cut him some slack and let him sort out his life in private. Surely being related to a victim shouldn't make you fair game for trial by media. Can any of us be absolutely sure we've never said anything that we'd be embarrassed by if we were catapulted into celebrity by the murder of a relative?felix said:"What The Actual Fuck! #Marr excuses Cox's behaviour because of what he went through"
Not seen the programme but if true it is odd because:
1. It really doesn't excuse the behaviour
&
2. The behaviour preceded his wife's murder.
The fact that be is an icon of the left does not excuse the collective way they have tried to mitigate the damage caused and his involvement with save the children0 -
I’d certainly require universities to have bursary schemes so that no qualified kid can’t go to university for financial reasons - not sure I would put them on the hook for government policy directly as you suggest.Barnesian said:Charles said:
We’ll make a Conservative of you yet...Barnesian said:
I agree with that analysis. I think I'll pinch it and add it to "in my opinion". . Hope you don't mind.Charles said:
I am going to go with option 3....ydoethur said:TGOHF said:Oh dear - is Peston really this thick ?
https://twitter.com/peston/status/965131399459205120
The issue is there are 2 questions that get conflated: (a) how do we finance tertiary education and (b) how to we capture the social benefit from higher education. You need to separate these.
The answer is to make universities entirely free standing and independent of government and allow them to charge what they feel appropriate for their courses. This will ensure clear market pricing and reflect the relative value of different courses and institutions.
Then there is a government resource allocation decision to capture social benefit. This is a political decision and rightly one to debate at that level. This could be to subsidise certain courses which are seen as adding greater social value (eg STEM or Medicine); or to support individuals financially for academic or other social reasons (eg poverty or social exclusion); or perhaps to support specific institutions that are seeing as adding extra value (eg Open University). At election times there would then be a debate on the right amount to spend on tertiary education and on how those resources should be allocated. No chance of that! If it wasn't for the ideology, the members and the attitude ... But, as a pragmatist I am open-minded to well argued ideas.
The feature I would add to you suggestion is that in return for a free market in courses and fees I would insist that universities picked up some/most of the cost of means-tested maintenance grants and fees. I would also introduce a free market in student loans with the government as guarantor and collector rather than let the Student Loan Company have a monopoly with exorbitant interest rates.
Fine with multiple providers of student loans. No reason why government should actually advance the capital0 -
By the next GE there won't be such a thing as Remain. It will either be stay out or rejoin.Scott_P said:0 -
But appalling architecture!OldKingCole said:
Some very good names there. High reputations.HYUFD said:
The 60s was the first big period of university expansion, Warwick, York, Sussex, Essex, UEA, Kent etc all founded thenOldKingCole said:
Not really. Went to one established in the 60’s, with an excellent reputation.HYUFD said:
Helped no doubt by university expansionOldKingCole said:
One of my sons was one of those Essex boys in the late 80’s! Subsequently went to Uni, though.HYUFD said:
The old secondary moderns may not have needed full degrees no but grammar schools generally did as you say, the rise of comprehensive education largely coincided with the expansion of university education from the mid to late 1960s on.OldKingCole said:
Teaching required a two year diploma course. OK for most secondary and prinmary. Grammar schools needed degrees for lots of subjects, except I think PE.HYUFD said:
Unless you wanted to be a doctor or a lawyer or a teacher or academic or senior civil servant very few went to university as few jobs needed graduates.John_M said:
It's worth remembering that in my cohort (1978), less than 15% of us went to university. Compared to 1970, there are four times as many students today.Jonathan said:
Ah. The good old days. When education was seen as good thing and young people were incentivised to take it.SouthamObserver said:
It wasn’t all or nothing as far as I remember. You could also get partial grants. Only kids from the wealthiest families got no grant at all. It was pretty generous - and we could claim housing benefit and get the dole in the summer.
I suspect agreement on this subject is unlikely. One reform I would like to see is students treated more like independent adults. The more you bring parental wealth into the equation, the less independent you people are encouraged to be.
You could be an accountant or a stockbroker or a middle manager or a journalist with just A Levels, a police officer or nurse with just GCSEs or O Levels, now most of those who do those jobs have degrees.
Old school friend of mine, whom I met up with again about a year ago after 50+ years, said that he’d done very well in banking with O levels.
The City in the 1980s was certainly full of public schoolboys and Essex boys who never went to university0 -
Liam would actually be Theresa's best choice for CoE. He's unwaveringly loyal to her, won't be missed from his current post and will advocate whatever crude 'Willl of the People' Brexit Theresa thinks necessary to keep the ultras on side. How good he'd be at running the nation's finances is another matter, but that's only an academic consideration right now.0
-
To be fair, on 2) Marr is not really in a position to condemn a man for a bit of extra-marital ...felix said:"What The Actual Fuck! #Marr excuses Cox's behaviour because of what he went through"
Not seen the programme but if true it is odd because:
1. It really doesn't excuse the behaviour
&
2. The behaviour preceded his wife's murder.0 -
He will not lead the party - the next leader will be another femaleStark_Dawning said:Liam would actually be Theresa's best choice for CoE. He's unwaveringly loyal to her, won't be missed from his current post and will advocate whatever crude 'Willl of the People' Brexit Theresa thinks necessary to keep the ultras on side. How good he'd be at running the nation's finances is another matter, but that's only an academic consideration right now.
*Apologies - misread your post but he will not be COE either0 -
Ladbrokes just sent me to their "virtual sports" page. I assume this is fixed odds betting?0
-
The quote from the Mail site is that once 'It is claimed that Mr Cox drunkenly harassed a female employee at the charity in London, forcing her against a wall outside a bar, holding her by the throat and telling her: 'I want to f*** you.’Big_G_NorthWales said:
It is rarely I disagree with you Nick but he has been found out as a sex pest and labour should be focussing on his victims.NickPalmer said:
The point is that the sort of dubious office behaviour that he admits to wouldn't rate media coverage at all except for the fact that he's the husband of an MP who was murdered. Since anyone with any empathy at all feels that must have been rough, it's surely reasonable to cut him some slack and let him sort out his life in private. Surely being related to a victim shouldn't make you fair game for trial by media. Can any of us be absolutely sure we've never said anything that we'd be embarrassed by if we were catapulted into celebrity by the murder of a relative?felix said:"What The Actual Fuck! #Marr excuses Cox's behaviour because of what he went through"
Not seen the programme but if true it is odd because:
1. It really doesn't excuse the behaviour
&
2. The behaviour preceded his wife's murder.
The fact that be is an icon of the left does not excuse the collective way they have tried to mitigate the damage caused and his involvement with save the children
Now that is unquestionably an incredibly stupid thing to do and equally unquestionably a resigning matter, but his statement suggests that he’s ashamed of himself.0
