politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New polling finds that leaving the EU with the deal is the lea
Comments
-
Corbyn has now said No Deal must be ruled out and will consider EUref2 if he cannot get through his plans for a general election or permanent Customs Unionydoethur said:
That's a bit harsh, Alistair. I would have said Grieve was fairly solidly anchored in reality. Corbyn, of course, is a different matter but we all know he'll vote for No Deal anyway.AlastairMeeks said:Unicorn hunting remains as popular an activity as ever on pb. If only the EU will drop one of its constant demands since the outset on the offchance that a deal might just about be sellable to a bunch of wingnuts who are only lightly tethered to reality, it'll all be done and dusted.
0 -
It needs the exact same question as May asking for an extension: what is the extension going to be for? Depending on what other things parliament or the government move forward, it could be supportable. Difficult to tell at this "early" stage.kle4 said:
Nope. What a load of twaddle. Just because May did the wrong thing doesn't make a similar wrong thing by MPs ok. In fact, she seems to be saying May was right to delay the vote because we are not ready, in which case i hope she is not on record criticising the delay.williamglenn said:
Has she explained at all why MPs cannot sort it out by the deadline (not pass subsequent legislation, that is a separate issue)? And if it is about 'a bit of extra time' why are there arguments about how much time that is, with the initial suggestion until December?
It's almost as though it is not about getting a bit more time, but just delaying things as long as possible, and eventually remaining. Nice try, Yvette.0 -
Pity he didn't tell the many labour mps in leave areas who will vote against himHYUFD said:
Corbyn has now said No Deal must be ruled out and will consider EUref2 if he cannot get through his plans for a general election or permanent Customs Unionydoethur said:
That's a bit harsh, Alistair. I would have said Grieve was fairly solidly anchored in reality. Corbyn, of course, is a different matter but we all know he'll vote for No Deal anyway.AlastairMeeks said:Unicorn hunting remains as popular an activity as ever on pb. If only the EU will drop one of its constant demands since the outset on the offchance that a deal might just about be sellable to a bunch of wingnuts who are only lightly tethered to reality, it'll all be done and dusted.
0 -
I would favour a graduated bursary system.ydoethur said:
Not quite. The key difference is that at the moment universities get 100% of the upfront fees income. This would give them 100% of the recovered graduate premium. Which would be considerably less.FrancisUrquhart said:Bbc reporting Greening claimed she wanted to get rid of uni fees before being sacked...then you read the proposal...
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities. She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
That’s what they do at the moment...head, desk, thud...
Arguably, the best reason to get rid of tuition fees is they are a humongous Ponzi scheme which are piling up huge amounts of unrepayable debt that at some point the taxpayer will have to cough up for. They're like public sector pensions in some ways, except that when people die you lose money not gain it.
The second best reason to get rid of them is because it would actually be hilarious to watch all those muppets at the SLC, starting with the egregious Kevin O'Cockup, get the sack.
I would agree that saving graduates money isn't a good reason as I don't think it would.
It would depend on course and based on A level marks (or equivalent) so that with the top 25% of marks for that course get a govt bursary covering 75% of costs, graduated down so that those in the bottom 25% of marks applying for the course get 25% bursary, and have to self fund the rest. There may need to be a top up system of grants for the socially disadvantaged.
The exact level could vary by course, so that a higher percentage get a big bursary for Nursing, and a lower percentage for basketweaving. The aim would be to incentivise A level students to get good grades, and disincentivise low calibre applicants for low calibre courses. Others could still apply, but they would have to self fuund, and do so in the open market.0 -
We need greater unacceptability for No Deal and quickly. That 21% of Remainers who find it acceptable need a rapid talking to for a start.HYUFD said:
Interesting that a majority of Leavers and a plurality of Remainers find leaving with May's Deal acceptable.Tissue_Price said:Also (FPT): Here's the data split by 2016 vote. The deal is acceptable to an absolute majority of Leavers, and also a majority of Remainers (once you remove DKs). The No Deal / No Brexit options are predictably polarising.
To be fair, acceptability is not quite the same as approval, but the Deal looks like the only option for moving on.
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/1088097071863947264
Yet 65% of Remainers find leaving with No Deal unacceptable and 78% of Leavers find Remaining in the EU unacceptable.
The Deal is not perfect but it is still the best way to avoid a near Civil War between People's Vote Remainers pushing EUref2 and Leave means Leavers pushing No Deal0 -
Corbyn also said he didn't know Paul Eisen, didn't have a seat on a train, had a fully costed manifesto and condemned violence by all sides in Venezuela and Iran.HYUFD said:
Corbyn has now said No Deal must be ruled out and will consider EUref2 if he cannot get through his plans for a general election or permanent Customs Unionydoethur said:
That's a bit harsh, Alistair. I would have said Grieve was fairly solidly anchored in reality. Corbyn, of course, is a different matter but we all know he'll vote for No Deal anyway.AlastairMeeks said:Unicorn hunting remains as popular an activity as ever on pb. If only the EU will drop one of its constant demands since the outset on the offchance that a deal might just about be sellable to a bunch of wingnuts who are only lightly tethered to reality, it'll all be done and dusted.
I judge him by his deeds, not his words. I still say he is aiming for no deal.0 -
It's a good system, and no politician will implement it due to cost.Foxy said:
I would favour a graduated bursary system.ydoethur said:
Not quite. The key difference is that at the moment universities get 100% of the upfront fees income. This would give them 100% of the recovered graduate premium. Which would be considerably less.FrancisUrquhart said:Bbc reporting Greening claimed she wanted to get rid of uni fees before being sacked...then you read the proposal...
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities. She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
That’s what they do at the moment...head, desk, thud...
Arguably, the best reason to get rid of tuition fees is they are a humongous Ponzi scheme which are piling up huge amounts of unrepayable debt that at some point the taxpayer will have to cough up for. They're like public sector pensions in some ways, except that when people die you lose money not gain it.
The second best reason to get rid of them is because it would actually be hilarious to watch all those muppets at the SLC, starting with the egregious Kevin O'Cockup, get the sack.
I would agree that saving graduates money isn't a good reason as I don't think it would.
It would depend on course and based on A level marks (or equivalent) so that with the top 25% of marks for that course get a govt bursary covering 75% of costs, graduated down so that those in the bottom 25% of marks applying for the course get 25% bursary, and have to self fund the rest. There may need to be a top up system of grants for the socially disadvantaged.
The exact level could vary by course, so that a higher percentage get a big bursary for Nursing, and a lower percentage for basketweaving. The aim would be to incentivise A level students to get good grades, and disincentivise low calibre applicants for low calibre courses. Others could still apply, but they would have to self fuund, and do so in the open market.0 -
On the contrary, we need both poles to increasingly understand that the opposite pole is acceptable if that is what Parliament decides. There lies the path to civil peace. Personally, while clearly preferring that the Brexit mistake is reversed, am quite OK with No Deal. I just will not be very sympathetic to those crying over dead unicorns.Pro_Rata said:
We need greater unacceptability for No Deal and quickly. That 21% of Remainers who find it acceptable need a rapid talking to for a start.HYUFD said:
Interesting that a majority of Leavers and a plurality of Remainers find leaving with May's Deal acceptable.Tissue_Price said:Also (FPT): Here's the data split by 2016 vote. The deal is acceptable to an absolute majority of Leavers, and also a majority of Remainers (once you remove DKs). The No Deal / No Brexit options are predictably polarising.
To be fair, acceptability is not quite the same as approval, but the Deal looks like the only option for moving on.
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/1088097071863947264
Yet 65% of Remainers find leaving with No Deal unacceptable and 78% of Leavers find Remaining in the EU unacceptable.
The Deal is not perfect but it is still the best way to avoid a near Civil War between People's Vote Remainers pushing EUref2 and Leave means Leavers pushing No Deal0 -
Perhaps in token of admitting your wisdom, they will give you the horn.Foxy said:
On the contrary, we need both poles to increasingly understand that the opposite pole is acceptable if that is what Parliament decides. There lies the path to civil peace. Personally, while clearly preferring that the Brexit mistake is reversed, am quite OK with No Deal. I just will not be very sympathetic to those crying over dead unicorns.Pro_Rata said:
We need greater unacceptability for No Deal and quickly. That 21% of Remainers who find it acceptable need a rapid talking to for a start.HYUFD said:
Interesting that a majority of Leavers and a plurality of Remainers find leaving with May's Deal acceptable.Tissue_Price said:Also (FPT): Here's the data split by 2016 vote. The deal is acceptable to an absolute majority of Leavers, and also a majority of Remainers (once you remove DKs). The No Deal / No Brexit options are predictably polarising.
To be fair, acceptability is not quite the same as approval, but the Deal looks like the only option for moving on.
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/1088097071863947264
Yet 65% of Remainers find leaving with No Deal unacceptable and 78% of Leavers find Remaining in the EU unacceptable.
The Deal is not perfect but it is still the best way to avoid a near Civil War between People's Vote Remainers pushing EUref2 and Leave means Leavers pushing No Deal
Ah, my coat...
Have a good evening.0 -
The boy was right, even though he shouldn't have pissed about.Philip_Thompson said:
Project apocalypse (fear just isn't a strong enough word) is the boy who cried wolf.asjohnstone said:
Not really, the project doom stuff isn't really cutting through, the deal is dead and people are starting to see it as logical step. I'd expect this number to track upwards from here.AndyJS said:45% finding No Deal acceptable is about 10 points higher than I would have expected.
The polling suggests that "remain" would lose another referendum0 -
I think the first sentence is just saying "we're out of time and here's why". She's not trying to draw a parallel to May's delaying tactics because she's not viewing her amendment as a delay. And to be fair, it's not.kle4 said:
Nope. What a load of twaddle. Just because May did the wrong thing doesn't make a similar wrong thing by MPs ok. In fact, she seems to be saying May was right to delay the vote because we are not ready, in which case i hope she is not on record criticising the delay.williamglenn said:
Has she explained at all why MPs cannot sort it out by the deadline (not pass subsequent legislation, that is a separate issue)? And if it is about 'a bit of extra time' why are there arguments about how much time that is, with the initial suggestion until December?
It's almost as though it is not about getting a bit more time, but just delaying things as long as possible, and eventually remaining. Nice try, Yvette.0 -
They would have to, wouldn`t they? Unless they wanted to fix the results.Chris said:
0 -
Even as a Leaver, I would find staying in the EU more preferable to leaving on May’s deal if the backstop is still in it. Without any kind of trade deal, I don’t believe May’s deal has any merits. It just kicks the can down the road.
The only thing you can be certain of is that the country will continue to be split right down the middle on Brexit. It’s pretty certain there will be a constitutional risks in the near future too given the lengths some Remain supporting MPs are going to in order to stop Brexit happening.0 -
That depends if it came to No Deal or EUref2 I expect even most Labour MPs would vote for EUref2 though they might switch to the Deal before bothBig_G_NorthWales said:
Pity he didn't tell the many labour mps in leave areas who will vote against himHYUFD said:
Corbyn has now said No Deal must be ruled out and will consider EUref2 if he cannot get through his plans for a general election or permanent Customs Unionydoethur said:
That's a bit harsh, Alistair. I would have said Grieve was fairly solidly anchored in reality. Corbyn, of course, is a different matter but we all know he'll vote for No Deal anyway.AlastairMeeks said:Unicorn hunting remains as popular an activity as ever on pb. If only the EU will drop one of its constant demands since the outset on the offchance that a deal might just about be sellable to a bunch of wingnuts who are only lightly tethered to reality, it'll all be done and dusted.
0 -
Whereas those who judge him a Commie Spy a Putin Puppet a terrorist sympathiser and an Anti Semite judge him neither on his words or deeds. They just hope their pathetic smears work better than at GE 2017.ydoethur said:
Corbyn also said he didn't know Paul Eisen, didn't have a seat on a train, had a fully costed manifesto and condemned violence by all sides in Venezuela and Iran.HYUFD said:
Corbyn has now said No Deal must be ruled out and will consider EUref2 if he cannot get through his plans for a general election or permanent Customs Unionydoethur said:
That's a bit harsh, Alistair. I would have said Grieve was fairly solidly anchored in reality. Corbyn, of course, is a different matter but we all know he'll vote for No Deal anyway.AlastairMeeks said:Unicorn hunting remains as popular an activity as ever on pb. If only the EU will drop one of its constant demands since the outset on the offchance that a deal might just about be sellable to a bunch of wingnuts who are only lightly tethered to reality, it'll all be done and dusted.
I judge him by his deeds, not his words. I still say he is aiming for no deal.
IMO they would be better off developing some actual policies.
Except perhaps they are Intellectually Bankrupt and dont have an answer to Corbyns.
https://twitter.com/the_awakend/status/1029685536951345152
0 -
The figures do suggest Leavers are more motivated to stop the reversal of Brexit than Remainers are motivated to stop No DealPro_Rata said:
We need greater unacceptability for No Deal and quickly. That 21% of Remainers who find it acceptable need a rapid talking to for a start.HYUFD said:
Interesting that a majority of Leavers and a plurality of Remainers find leaving with May's Deal acceptable.Tissue_Price said:Also (FPT): Here's the data split by 2016 vote. The deal is acceptable to an absolute majority of Leavers, and also a majority of Remainers (once you remove DKs). The No Deal / No Brexit options are predictably polarising.
To be fair, acceptability is not quite the same as approval, but the Deal looks like the only option for moving on.
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/1088097071863947264
Yet 65% of Remainers find leaving with No Deal unacceptable and 78% of Leavers find Remaining in the EU unacceptable.
The Deal is not perfect but it is still the best way to avoid a near Civil War between People's Vote Remainers pushing EUref2 and Leave means Leavers pushing No Deal0 -
He isn't because he does not want to end up PM having to govern a No Deal Britain, he wants a Deal of some form.ydoethur said:
Corbyn also said he didn't know Paul Eisen, didn't have a seat on a train, had a fully costed manifesto and condemned violence by all sides in Venezuela and Iran.HYUFD said:
Corbyn has now said No Deal must be ruled out and will consider EUref2 if he cannot get through his plans for a general election or permanent Customs Unionydoethur said:
That's a bit harsh, Alistair. I would have said Grieve was fairly solidly anchored in reality. Corbyn, of course, is a different matter but we all know he'll vote for No Deal anyway.AlastairMeeks said:Unicorn hunting remains as popular an activity as ever on pb. If only the EU will drop one of its constant demands since the outset on the offchance that a deal might just about be sellable to a bunch of wingnuts who are only lightly tethered to reality, it'll all be done and dusted.
I judge him by his deeds, not his words. I still say he is aiming for no deal.
No Deal is like bomb you need it to explode in your opponents face not your own0 -
Really, why?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Many on here say the deal is dead but I would suggest it may surprise you by the end of Marchasjohnstone said:
Not really, the project doom stuff isn't really cutting through, the deal is dead and people are starting to see it as logical step. I'd expect this number to track upwards from here.AndyJS said:45% finding No Deal acceptable is about 10 points higher than I would have expected.
The polling suggests that "remain" would lose another referendum
0 -
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:0 -
Please talk to @rcs1000 about the viability of a trade deal with India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:0 -
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:0 -
I would aim to make it financially neutral, though this would require a realisation that much of the current student loans is effectively written down in the balance sheet.ydoethur said:
It's a good system, and no politician will implement it due to cost.Foxy said:
I would favour a graduated bursary system.ydoethur said:
Not quite. The key difference is that at the moment universities get 100% of the upfront fees income. This would give them 100% of the recovered graduate premium. Which would be considerably less.FrancisUrquhart said:Bbc reporting Greening claimed she wanted to get rid of uni fees before being sacked...then you read the proposal...
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities. She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
That’s what they do at the moment...head, desk, thud...
Arguably, the best reason to get rid of tuition fees is they are a humongous Ponzi scheme which are piling up huge amounts of unrepayable debt that at some point the taxpayer will have to cough up for. They're like public sector pensions in some ways, except that when people die you lose money not gain it.
The second best reason to get rid of them is because it would actually be hilarious to watch all those muppets at the SLC, starting with the egregious Kevin O'Cockup, get the sack.
I would agree that saving graduates money isn't a good reason as I don't think it would.
It would depend on course and based on A level marks (or equivalent) so that with the top 25% of marks for that course get a govt bursary covering 75% of costs, graduated down so that those in the bottom 25% of marks applying for the course get 25% bursary, and have to self fund the rest. There may need to be a top up system of grants for the socially disadvantaged.
The exact level could vary by course, so that a higher percentage get a big bursary for Nursing, and a lower percentage for basketweaving. The aim would be to incentivise A level students to get good grades, and disincentivise low calibre applicants for low calibre courses. Others could still apply, but they would have to self fuund, and do so in the open market.
Bursaries would be liable for repayment if the holder does not pay UK income tax for 5 years in the decade post graduation.0 -
The boy was wrong far more times than he was right.kle4 said:
The boy was right, even though he shouldn't have pissed about.Philip_Thompson said:
Project apocalypse (fear just isn't a strong enough word) is the boy who cried wolf.asjohnstone said:
Not really, the project doom stuff isn't really cutting through, the deal is dead and people are starting to see it as logical step. I'd expect this number to track upwards from here.AndyJS said:45% finding No Deal acceptable is about 10 points higher than I would have expected.
The polling suggests that "remain" would lose another referendum0 -
If the choice ends up a Remain v Deal referendum/permanent Customs Union+SM or the Deal No Dealers will shift behind the Deal, if the choice ends up the Deal or No Deal Remainers will move behind the Deal.Jonathan said:
Really, why?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Many on here say the deal is dead but I would suggest it may surprise you by the end of Marchasjohnstone said:
Not really, the project doom stuff isn't really cutting through, the deal is dead and people are starting to see it as logical step. I'd expect this number to track upwards from here.AndyJS said:45% finding No Deal acceptable is about 10 points higher than I would have expected.
The polling suggests that "remain" would lose another referendum0 -
Hannan is a proven charlatan with no real interest in trade policy whatsoever.Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:0 -
But it was in the end that mattered, so you're essentially saying that project fear will be proved right in the end, but not for a bit, which I don't think was what you intended.Philip_Thompson said:
The boy was wrong far more times than he was right.kle4 said:
The boy was right, even though he shouldn't have pissed about.Philip_Thompson said:
Project apocalypse (fear just isn't a strong enough word) is the boy who cried wolf.asjohnstone said:
Not really, the project doom stuff isn't really cutting through, the deal is dead and people are starting to see it as logical step. I'd expect this number to track upwards from here.AndyJS said:45% finding No Deal acceptable is about 10 points higher than I would have expected.
The polling suggests that "remain" would lose another referendum0 -
However in a 3-option AV referendum Deal could be knocked out on first preferences.HYUFD said:
If the choice ends up a Remain v Deal referendum/permanent Customs Union+SM or the Deal No Dealers will shift behind the Deal, if the choice ends up the Deal or No Deal Remainers will move behind the Deal.Jonathan said:
Really, why?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Many on here say the deal is dead but I would suggest it may surprise you by the end of Marchasjohnstone said:
Not really, the project doom stuff isn't really cutting through, the deal is dead and people are starting to see it as logical step. I'd expect this number to track upwards from here.AndyJS said:45% finding No Deal acceptable is about 10 points higher than I would have expected.
The polling suggests that "remain" would lose another referendum
Then Remain wins even though a majority voted for one of the Leave options with their first pref.
That would be less than democratic.0 -
Not all of them in either case. A number of Remainers may well favour No Deal for second choice, and a number of Leavers favour Remain. Indeed your beloved Boris has expressed this in the past.HYUFD said:
If the choice ends up a Remain v Deal referendum/permanent Customs Union+SM or the Deal No Dealers will shift behind the Deal, if the choice ends up the Deal or No Deal Remainers will move behind the Deal.Jonathan said:
Really, why?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Many on here say the deal is dead but I would suggest it may surprise you by the end of Marchasjohnstone said:
Not really, the project doom stuff isn't really cutting through, the deal is dead and people are starting to see it as logical step. I'd expect this number to track upwards from here.AndyJS said:45% finding No Deal acceptable is about 10 points higher than I would have expected.
The polling suggests that "remain" would lose another referendum0 -
I have not come to view No Deal as acceptable - more sort of inevitable. The only plus I can see for it is that it will sort out the Brexit issue one way or another.Pro_Rata said:
We need greater unacceptability for No Deal and quickly. That 21% of Remainers who find it acceptable need a rapid talking to for a start.HYUFD said:
Interesting that a majority of Leavers and a plurality of Remainers find leaving with May's Deal acceptable.Tissue_Price said:Also (FPT): Here's the data split by 2016 vote. The deal is acceptable to an absolute majority of Leavers, and also a majority of Remainers (once you remove DKs). The No Deal / No Brexit options are predictably polarising.
To be fair, acceptability is not quite the same as approval, but the Deal looks like the only option for moving on.
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/1088097071863947264
Yet 65% of Remainers find leaving with No Deal unacceptable and 78% of Leavers find Remaining in the EU unacceptable.
The Deal is not perfect but it is still the best way to avoid a near Civil War between People's Vote Remainers pushing EUref2 and Leave means Leavers pushing No Deal
It is a destructive test, but it will produce a result.0 -
I wil lnot hear a word said against the wisdom of AVSandyRentool said:
However in a 3-option AV referendum Deal could be knocked out on first preferences.HYUFD said:
If the choice ends up a Remain v Deal referendum/permanent Customs Union+SM or the Deal No Dealers will shift behind the Deal, if the choice ends up the Deal or No Deal Remainers will move behind the Deal.Jonathan said:
Really, why?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Many on here say the deal is dead but I would suggest it may surprise you by the end of Marchasjohnstone said:
Not really, the project doom stuff isn't really cutting through, the deal is dead and people are starting to see it as logical step. I'd expect this number to track upwards from here.AndyJS said:45% finding No Deal acceptable is about 10 points higher than I would have expected.
The polling suggests that "remain" would lose another referendum
Then Remain wins even though a majority voted for one of the Leave options with their first pref.
That would be less than democratic.
0 -
That would result in most poorly ranked unis closing / massively reducing the number of courses they offer.Foxy said:
I would favour a graduated bursary system.ydoethur said:
Not quite. The key difference is that at the moment universities get 100% of the upfront fees income. This would give them 100% of the recovered graduate premium. Which would be considerably less.FrancisUrquhart said:Bbc reporting Greening claimed she wanted to get rid of uni fees before being sacked...then you read the proposal...
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities. She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
That’s what they do at the moment...head, desk, thud...
Arguably, the best reason to get rid of tuition fees is they are a humongous Ponzi scheme which are piling up huge amounts of unrepayable debt that at some point the taxpayer will have to cough up for. They're like public sector pensions in some ways, except that when people die you lose money not gain it.
The second best reason to get rid of them is because it would actually be hilarious to watch all those muppets at the SLC, starting with the egregious Kevin O'Cockup, get the sack.
I would agree that saving graduates money isn't a good reason as I don't think it would.
It would depend on course and based on A level marks (or equivalent) so that with the top 25% of marks for that course get a govt bursary covering 75% of costs, graduated down so that those in the bottom 25% of marks applying for the course get 25% bursary, and have to self fund the rest. There may need to be a top up system of grants for the socially disadvantaged.
The exact level could vary by course, so that a higher percentage get a big bursary for Nursing, and a lower percentage for basketweaving. The aim would be to incentivise A level students to get good grades, and disincentivise low calibre applicants for low calibre courses. Others could still apply, but they would have to self fuund, and do so in the open market.0 -
Yes. Absolutely agreed.Richard_Nabavi said:It's the least divisive, it doesn't trash the economy, it doesn't ignore the referendum result, and it's available.
MPs should stop playing silly games, and ratify the damned thing.0 -
Yes, or getting better, or providing more appropriate courses that do attract either bursaries or self funding students.FrancisUrquhart said:
That would result in most poorly ranked unis closing / massively reducing the number of courses they offer.Foxy said:
I would favour a graduated bursary system.ydoethur said:
Not quite. The key difference is that at the moment universities get 100% of the upfront fees income. This would give them 100% of the recovered graduate premium. Which would be considerably less.FrancisUrquhart said:Bbc reporting Greening claimed she wanted to get rid of uni fees before being sacked...then you read the proposal...
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities. She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
That’s what they do at the moment...head, desk, thud...
Arguably, the best reason to get rid of tuition fees is they are a humongous Ponzi scheme which are piling up huge amounts of unrepayable debt that at some point the taxpayer will have to cough up for. They're like public sector pensions in some ways, except that when people die you lose money not gain it.
The second best reason to get rid of them is because it would actually be hilarious to watch all those muppets at the SLC, starting with the egregious Kevin O'Cockup, get the sack.
I would agree that saving graduates money isn't a good reason as I don't think it would.
It would depend on course and based on A level marks (or equivalent) so that with the top 25% of marks for that course get a govt bursary covering 75% of costs, graduated down so that those in the bottom 25% of marks applying for the course get 25% bursary, and have to self fund the rest. There may need to be a top up system of grants for the socially disadvantaged.
The exact level could vary by course, so that a higher percentage get a big bursary for Nursing, and a lower percentage for basketweaving. The aim would be to incentivise A level students to get good grades, and disincentivise low calibre applicants for low calibre courses. Others could still apply, but they would have to self fuund, and do so in the open market.
Indeed that is largely the point!0 -
Totally disagree, crap deal and should be consigned to the bin. If she cannot beat that revoke A50 or resign.MaxPB said:
Yes. Absolutely agreed.Richard_Nabavi said:It's the least divisive, it doesn't trash the economy, it doesn't ignore the referendum result, and it's available.
MPs should stop playing silly games, and ratify the damned thing.0 -
All the weaknesses that led the deal to the biggest parliamentary defeat in history are still there.0
-
While I think there are far too many full time uni places, your policy would result in lots of closures which wouldn’t fly, result in lots of socially disadvantaged groups not getting chance to go to uni and after all the billions pumped into the system lots of white elephant campus. See Manchester met at Crewe as a mini example.Foxy said:
Yes, or getting better, or providing more appropriate courses that do attract either bursaries or self funding students.FrancisUrquhart said:
That would result in most poorly ranked unis closing / massively reducing the number of courses they offer.Foxy said:
I would favour a graduated bursary system.ydoethur said:
Not quite. The key difference is that at the moment universities get 100% of the upfront fees income. This would give them 100% of the recovered graduate premium. Which would be considerably less.FrancisUrquhart said:Bbc reporting Greening claimed she wanted to get rid of uni fees before being sacked...then you read the proposal...
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities. She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
That’s what they do at the moment...head, desk, thud...
Arguably, the best reason to get rid of tuition fees is they are a humongous Ponzi scheme which are piling up huge amounts of unrepayable debt that at some point the taxpayer will have to cough up for. They're like public sector pensions in some ways, except that when people die you lose money not gain it.
The second best reason to get rid of them is because it would actually be hilarious to watch all those muppets at the SLC, starting with the egregious Kevin O'Cockup, get the sack.
I would agree that saving graduates money isn't a good reason as I don't think it would.
It would depend on course and based on A level marks (or equivalent) so that with the top 25% of marks for that course get a govt bursary covering 75% of costs, graduated down so that those in the bottom 25% of marks applying for the course get 25% bursary, and have to self fund the rest. There may need to be a top up system of grants for the socially disadvantaged.
The exact level could vary by course, so that a higher percentage get a big bursary for Nursing, and a lower percentage for basketweaving. The aim would be to incentivise A level students to get good grades, and disincentivise low calibre applicants for low calibre courses. Others could still apply, but they would have to self fuund, and do so in the open market.
Indeed that is largely the point!0 -
+1 The best deal is to remain in the EU on current terms. Mays deal means affiliation with no representation! A worse deal than we have in place at the moment. No Deal is for Lemmings.malcolmg said:
Totally disagree, crap deal and should be consigned to the bin. If she cannot beat that revoke A50 or resign.MaxPB said:
Yes. Absolutely agreed.Richard_Nabavi said:It's the least divisive, it doesn't trash the economy, it doesn't ignore the referendum result, and it's available.
MPs should stop playing silly games, and ratify the damned thing.0 -
Given tonight's poll Remain could lose to No Deal, in any case civil servants are only preparing for Remain v Deal or Leave v Remain then if Leave Deal or No Deal options according to the Sunday Times a few weeks ago. Parliament will not allow No Deal to go head to head with RemainSandyRentool said:
However in a 3-option AV referendum Deal could be knocked out on first preferences.HYUFD said:
If the choice ends up a Remain v Deal referendum/permanent Customs Union+SM or the Deal No Dealers will shift behind the Deal, if the choice ends up the Deal or No Deal Remainers will move behind the Deal.Jonathan said:
Really, why?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Many on here say the deal is dead but I would suggest it may surprise you by the end of Marchasjohnstone said:
Not really, the project doom stuff isn't really cutting through, the deal is dead and people are starting to see it as logical step. I'd expect this number to track upwards from here.AndyJS said:45% finding No Deal acceptable is about 10 points higher than I would have expected.
The polling suggests that "remain" would lose another referendum
Then Remain wins even though a majority voted for one of the Leave options with their first pref.
That would be less than democratic.0 -
Michel Barnier has warned that the move led by Labour MP Yvette Cooper to block the prime minister from delivering a no-deal Brexit is doomed to fail unless a majority for an alternative agreement is found.
The EU’s chief negotiator, in a speech in Brussels, said the “default” for the UK was still crashing out if MPs could not coalesce around a new vision of its future outside the bloc.0 -
So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.0 -
Even Mogg and Dorries have now said they prefer the Deal to Remain. Boris would abstain at most.Foxy said:
Not all of them in either case. A number of Remainers may well favour No Deal for second choice, and a number of Leavers favour Remain. Indeed your beloved Boris has expressed this in the past.HYUFD said:
If the choice ends up a Remain v Deal referendum/permanent Customs Union+SM or the Deal No Dealers will shift behind the Deal, if the choice ends up the Deal or No Deal Remainers will move behind the Deal.Jonathan said:
Really, why?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Many on here say the deal is dead but I would suggest it may surprise you by the end of Marchasjohnstone said:
Not really, the project doom stuff isn't really cutting through, the deal is dead and people are starting to see it as logical step. I'd expect this number to track upwards from here.AndyJS said:45% finding No Deal acceptable is about 10 points higher than I would have expected.
The polling suggests that "remain" would lose another referendum
Very few Remain MPs would even consider No Deal given the apocalyptic terms in which they talk of it0 -
100 to 150 of those voting against the Deal were No Dealers, add most of those to the 202 who voted for the Deal and maybe a few Labour MPs from Leave seats and it has a majority if the alternative becomes permanent Customs Union or Remain v Deal EUref2Jonathan said:All the weaknesses that led the deal to the biggest parliamentary defeat in history are still there.
0 -
Well, that'll put some people in a bind on if to believe him in this instance.FrancisUrquhart said:Michel Barnier has warned that the move led by Labour MP Yvette Cooper to block the prime minister from delivering a no-deal Brexit is doomed to fail unless a majority for an alternative agreement is found.
The EU’s chief negotiator, in a speech in Brussels, said the “default” for the UK was still crashing out if MPs could not coalesce around a new vision of its future outside the bloc.0 -
May is perpetually disappointing. Rather than trying to find a compromise she has spent the week spinning against others trying to undermine them to force her deal.HYUFD said:
Or No Dealers to ransom with threats of remainJonathan said:So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.
0 -
LOLkle4 said:
But it was in the end that mattered, so you're essentially saying that project fear will be proved right in the end, but not for a bit, which I don't think was what you intended.Philip_Thompson said:
The boy was wrong far more times than he was right.kle4 said:
The boy was right, even though he shouldn't have pissed about.Philip_Thompson said:
Project apocalypse (fear just isn't a strong enough word) is the boy who cried wolf.asjohnstone said:
Not really, the project doom stuff isn't really cutting through, the deal is dead and people are starting to see it as logical step. I'd expect this number to track upwards from here.AndyJS said:45% finding No Deal acceptable is about 10 points higher than I would have expected.
The polling suggests that "remain" would lose another referendum
Maybe it was!0 -
Rubbish. Hannan is nothing of the kind. Trade is about the only thing Hannan is genuinely passionate about and he rightly sees the EU as increasingly protectionist.williamglenn said:
Hannan is a proven charlatan with no real interest in trade policy whatsoever.Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:0 -
It would involve telling the stupid that they are stupid. In a world of entitlement I don’t see that being a runner.FrancisUrquhart said:
That would result in most poorly ranked unis closing / massively reducing the number of courses they offer.Foxy said:
I would favour a graduated bursary system.ydoethur said:
Not quite. The key difference is that at the moment universities get 100% of the upfront fees income. This would give them 100% of the recovered graduate premium. Which would be considerably less.FrancisUrquhart said:Bbc reporting Greening claimed she wanted to get rid of uni fees before being sacked...then you read the proposal...
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities. She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
That’s what they do at the moment...head, desk, thud...
Arguably, the best reason to get rid of tuition fees is they are a humongous Ponzi scheme which are piling up huge amounts of unrepayable debt that at some point the taxpayer will have to cough up for. They're like public sector pensions in some ways, except that when people die you lose money not gain it.
The second best reason to get rid of them is because it would actually be hilarious to watch all those muppets at the SLC, starting with the egregious Kevin O'Cockup, get the sack.
I would agree that saving graduates money isn't a good reason as I don't think it would.
It would depend on course and based on A level marks (or equivalent) so that with the top 25% of marks for that course get a govt bursary covering 75% of costs, graduated down so that those in the bottom 25% of marks applying for the course get 25% bursary, and have to self fund the rest. There may need to be a top up system of grants for the socially disadvantaged.
The exact level could vary by course, so that a higher percentage get a big bursary for Nursing, and a lower percentage for basketweaving. The aim would be to incentivise A level students to get good grades, and disincentivise low calibre applicants for low calibre courses. Others could still apply, but they would have to self fuund, and do so in the open market.0 -
Also it would be paid by all I presume, not just those who need the loans.Richard_Nabavi said:
It is, but it's perhaps true that packaging it like that instead of calling it a 'loan' might have been more palatable.FrancisUrquhart said:Bbc reporting Greening claimed she wanted to get rid of uni fees before being sacked...then you read the proposal...
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities. She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
That’s what they do at the moment...head, desk, thud...0 -
The shareholders must have money to burn. You can hardly blame Davis although it does little to enhance any remnant of a reputation he had left.Scott_P said:0 -
Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:
Quite right too - but India is a tough market to break into0 -
That will be the cost of his photo-op .Scott_P said:0 -
May has got the only compromise the EU will give and which keeps enough Brexiteers on board, it is People's Vote diehard Remainers and 'Leave means Leave' diehard Leavers refusing to compromiseJonathan said:
May is perpetually disappointing. Rather than trying to find a compromise she has spent the week spinning against others trying to undermine them to force her deal.HYUFD said:
Or No Dealers to ransom with threats of remainJonathan said:So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.0 -
So how many tens of thousands of work visas are you prepared to offer India to get this deal?Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:0 -
The deleted tweet claims we pay a 32% tariff on wine from Chile. Hannan has no passion for trade; it’s purely a prop for his 19th century revivalist act.AmpfieldAndy said:
Rubbish. Hannan is nothing of the kind. Trade is about the only thing Hannan is genuinely passionate about and he rightly sees the EU as increasingly protectionist.williamglenn said:
Hannan is a proven charlatan with no real interest in trade policy whatsoever.Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:
https://twitter.com/albertonardelli/status/785601063294476292?s=210 -
Are you arguing that the result in parliament was close enough for there to be another vote?HYUFD said:
May has got the only compromise the EU will give and which keeps enough Brexiteers on board, it is People's Vote diehard Remainers and 'Leave means Leave' diehard Leavers refusing to compromiseJonathan said:
May is perpetually disappointing. Rather than trying to find a compromise she has spent the week spinning against others trying to undermine them to force her deal.HYUFD said:
Or No Dealers to ransom with threats of remainJonathan said:So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.0 -
Hardly conclusive or definitive.williamglenn said:
The deleted tweet claims we pay a 32% tariff on wine from Chile. Hannan has no passion for trade; it’s purely a prop for his 19th century revivalist act.AmpfieldAndy said:
Rubbish. Hannan is nothing of the kind. Trade is about the only thing Hannan is genuinely passionate about and he rightly sees the EU as increasingly protectionist.williamglenn said:
Hannan is a proven charlatan with no real interest in trade policy whatsoever.Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:
https://twitter.com/albertonardelli/status/785601063294476292?s=210 -
I bet JCB think that is cheap marketing to have a JCB digger and a big JCB logo on prime time TV.No_Offence_Alan said:
That will be the cost of his photo-op .Scott_P said:0 -
Pure whataboutery.HYUFD said:
100 to 150 of those voting against the Deal were No Dealers, add most of those to the 202 who voted for the Deal and maybe a few Labour MPs from Leave seats and it has a majority if the alternative becomes permanent Customs Union or Remain v Deal EUref2Jonathan said:All the weaknesses that led the deal to the biggest parliamentary defeat in history are still there.
0 -
Parliament will almost certainly be voting over the next few weeks on permanent Customs Union, permanent Single Market, EUref2 etc. If all those fail too then the Deal becomes the default alternative to No Deal for Remainers or if Article 50 is extended and a Remain v Deal referendum looks likely the Deal avoids the risk of Remain for BrexiteersJonathan said:
Are you arguing that the result in parliament was close enough for there to be another vote?HYUFD said:
May has got the only compromise the EU will give and which keeps enough Brexiteers on board, it is People's Vote diehard Remainers and 'Leave means Leave' diehard Leavers refusing to compromiseJonathan said:
May is perpetually disappointing. Rather than trying to find a compromise she has spent the week spinning against others trying to undermine them to force her deal.HYUFD said:
Or No Dealers to ransom with threats of remainJonathan said:So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.0 -
I wouldn't go quite that far, but they would need to add value to their students education, perhaps via more vocational courses.matt said:
It would involve telling the stupid that they are stupid. In a world of entitlement I don’t see that being a runner.FrancisUrquhart said:
That would result in most poorly ranked unis closing / massively reducing the number of courses they offer.Foxy said:
I would favour a graduated bursary system.ydoethur said:
Not quite. The key difference is that at the moment universities get 100% of the upfront fees income. This would give them 100% of the recovered graduate premium. Which would be considerably less.FrancisUrquhart said:Bbc reporting Greening claimed she wanted to get rid of uni fees before being sacked...then you read the proposal...
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities. She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
That’s what they do at the moment...head, desk, thud...
Arguably, the best reason to get rid of tuition fees is they are a humongous Ponzi scheme which are piling up huge amounts of unrepayable debt that at some point the taxpayer will have to cough up for. They're like public sector pensions in some ways, except that when people die you lose money not gain it.
The second best reason to get rid of them is because it would actually be hilarious to watch all those muppets at the SLC, starting with the egregious Kevin O'Cockup, get the sack.
I would agree that saving graduates money isn't a good reason as I don't think it would.
It would depend on course and based on A level marks (or equivalent) so that with the top 25% of marks for that course get a govt bursary covering 75% of costs, graduated down so that those in the bottom 25% of marks applying for the course get 25% bursary, and have to self fund the rest. There may need to be a top up system of grants for the socially disadvantaged.
The exact level could vary by course, so that a higher percentage get a big bursary for Nursing, and a lower percentage for basketweaving. The aim would be to incentivise A level students to get good grades, and disincentivise low calibre applicants for low calibre courses. Others could still apply, but they would have to self fuund, and do so in the open market.
The current system means Russell group students get the same funding as students at bottom ranked unis, but perversely are much more likely to pay the money back via high earnings. The write off rate for loans at the worst places is going to be close to 100%.0 -
I thought it was a principle not to vote twice.HYUFD said:
Parliament will almost certainly be voting over the next few weeks on permanent Customs Union, permanent Single Market, EUref2 etc. If all those fail too then the Deal becomes the default alternative to No Deal for Remainers or if Article 50 is extended and a Remain v Deal referendum looks likely the Deal avoids the risk of Remain for BrexiteersJonathan said:
Are you arguing that the result in parliament was close enough for there to be another vote?HYUFD said:
May has got the only compromise the EU will give and which keeps enough Brexiteers on board, it is People's Vote diehard Remainers and 'Leave means Leave' diehard Leavers refusing to compromiseJonathan said:
May is perpetually disappointing. Rather than trying to find a compromise she has spent the week spinning against others trying to undermine them to force her deal.HYUFD said:
Or No Dealers to ransom with threats of remainJonathan said:So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.0 -
Somebody once told me it was bazaarly difficult.AmpfieldAndy said:Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:
Quite right too - but India is a tough market to break into0 -
It was just the first example that came to mind. Here’s another one: he falsely claims Canadian ice wine is prohibited in the EU.AmpfieldAndy said:
Hardly conclusive or definitive.williamglenn said:
The deleted tweet claims we pay a 32% tariff on wine from Chile. Hannan has no passion for trade; it’s purely a prop for his 19th century revivalist act.AmpfieldAndy said:
Rubbish. Hannan is nothing of the kind. Trade is about the only thing Hannan is genuinely passionate about and he rightly sees the EU as increasingly protectionist.williamglenn said:
Hannan is a proven charlatan with no real interest in trade policy whatsoever.Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:
https://twitter.com/albertonardelli/status/785601063294476292?s=210 -
Are you arguing there is a closer alternative proposal in Parliament?Jonathan said:
Are you arguing that the result in parliament was close enough for there to be another vote?HYUFD said:
May has got the only compromise the EU will give and which keeps enough Brexiteers on board, it is People's Vote diehard Remainers and 'Leave means Leave' diehard Leavers refusing to compromiseJonathan said:
May is perpetually disappointing. Rather than trying to find a compromise she has spent the week spinning against others trying to undermine them to force her deal.HYUFD said:
Or No Dealers to ransom with threats of remainJonathan said:So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.0 -
Haven't read all the university funding stuff from the beginning of this thread but just had a thought about it.. What if funding was reformed so that a substantial proportion of a university's income was made up from a tax on their former students? You'd have to have make sure that useful but less profitable research was also well funded, but it would concentrate the minds of university admissions officers to go for quality rather than quantity.0
-
Canadian ice wine is really rather interesting stuff.williamglenn said:
It was just the first example that came to mind. Here’s another one: he falsely claims Canadian ice wine is prohibited in the EU.AmpfieldAndy said:
Hardly conclusive or definitive.williamglenn said:
The deleted tweet claims we pay a 32% tariff on wine from Chile. Hannan has no passion for trade; it’s purely a prop for his 19th century revivalist act.AmpfieldAndy said:
Rubbish. Hannan is nothing of the kind. Trade is about the only thing Hannan is genuinely passionate about and he rightly sees the EU as increasingly protectionist.williamglenn said:
Hannan is a proven charlatan with no real interest in trade policy whatsoever.Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:
https://twitter.com/albertonardelli/status/785601063294476292?s=210 -
Well, if they can seriously ask us to vote twice on the same thing having given an answer they don't like and believe we were just venting our feelings when we have to do it for free;Jonathan said:
I thought it was a principle not to vote twice.HYUFD said:
Parliament will almost certainly be voting over the next few weeks on permanent Customs Union, permanent Single Market, EUref2 etc. If all those fail too then the Deal becomes the default alternative to No Deal for Remainers or if Article 50 is extended and a Remain v Deal referendum looks likely the Deal avoids the risk of Remain for BrexiteersJonathan said:
Are you arguing that the result in parliament was close enough for there to be another vote?HYUFD said:
May has got the only compromise the EU will give and which keeps enough Brexiteers on board, it is People's Vote diehard Remainers and 'Leave means Leave' diehard Leavers refusing to compromiseJonathan said:
May is perpetually disappointing. Rather than trying to find a compromise she has spent the week spinning against others trying to undermine them to force her deal.HYUFD said:
Or No Dealers to ransom with threats of remainJonathan said:So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.
I think the least we can do is ask the bastards to vote twice on the same thing when they give a cretinous and impossible answer to vent their feelings about us when we pay the bastards north of £77k a year to actually, y'know, take fecking decisions.0 -
How would you ever establish a new university? Bearing in mind that until less than 150 years ago there were only six universities in this country outside Scotland.TrèsDifficile said:Haven't read all the university funding stuff from the beginning of this thread but just had a thought about it.. What if funding was reformed so that a substantial proportion of a university's income was made up from a tax on their former students? You'd have to have make sure that useful but less profitable research was also well funded, but it would concentrate the minds of university admissions officers to go for quality rather than quantity.
0 -
He obviously doesn't ever shop in Lidl. Bought some of this for Christmas and very delicious it was too.williamglenn said:
It was just the first example that came to mind. Here’s another one: he falsely claims Canadian ice wine is prohibited in the EU.AmpfieldAndy said:
Hardly conclusive or definitive.williamglenn said:
The deleted tweet claims we pay a 32% tariff on wine from Chile. Hannan has no passion for trade; it’s purely a prop for his 19th century revivalist act.AmpfieldAndy said:
Rubbish. Hannan is nothing of the kind. Trade is about the only thing Hannan is genuinely passionate about and he rightly sees the EU as increasingly protectionist.williamglenn said:
Hannan is a proven charlatan with no real interest in trade policy whatsoever.Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:
https://twitter.com/albertonardelli/status/785601063294476292?s=21
https://www.lidl.co.uk/en/Offers.htm?articleId=177710 -
Yes, that's a good way of putting it. No Deal will test the Leave thesis to destruction.Beverley_C said:
I have not come to view No Deal as acceptable - more sort of inevitable. The only plus I can see for it is that it will sort out the Brexit issue one way or another.Pro_Rata said:
We need greater unacceptability for No Deal and quickly. That 21% of Remainers who find it acceptable need a rapid talking to for a start.HYUFD said:
Interesting that a majority of Leavers and a plurality of Remainers find leaving with May's Deal acceptable.Tissue_Price said:Also (FPT): Here's the data split by 2016 vote. The deal is acceptable to an absolute majority of Leavers, and also a majority of Remainers (once you remove DKs). The No Deal / No Brexit options are predictably polarising.
To be fair, acceptability is not quite the same as approval, but the Deal looks like the only option for moving on.
https://twitter.com/NCPoliticsUK/status/1088097071863947264
Yet 65% of Remainers find leaving with No Deal unacceptable and 78% of Leavers find Remaining in the EU unacceptable.
The Deal is not perfect but it is still the best way to avoid a near Civil War between People's Vote Remainers pushing EUref2 and Leave means Leavers pushing No Deal
It is a destructive test, but it will produce a result.0 -
How would you adjust for the grade advantage that private education gives?Foxy said:
I would favour a graduated bursary system.ydoethur said:
Not quite. The key difference is that at the moment universities get 100% of the upfront fees income. This would give them 100% of the recovered graduate premium. Which would be considerably less.FrancisUrquhart said:Bbc reporting Greening claimed she wanted to get rid of uni fees before being sacked...then you read the proposal...
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities. She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
That’s what they do at the moment...head, desk, thud...
Arguably, the best reason to get rid of tuition fees is they are a humongous Ponzi scheme which are piling up huge amounts of unrepayable debt that at some point the taxpayer will have to cough up for. They're like public sector pensions in some ways, except that when people die you lose money not gain it.
The second best reason to get rid of them is because it would actually be hilarious to watch all those muppets at the SLC, starting with the egregious Kevin O'Cockup, get the sack.
I would agree that saving graduates money isn't a good reason as I don't think it would.
It would depend on course and based on A level marks (or equivalent) so that with the top 25% of marks for that course get a govt bursary covering 75% of costs, graduated down so that those in the bottom 25% of marks applying for the course get 25% bursary, and have to self fund the rest. There may need to be a top up system of grants for the socially disadvantaged.
The exact level could vary by course, so that a higher percentage get a big bursary for Nursing, and a lower percentage for basketweaving. The aim would be to incentivise A level students to get good grades, and disincentivise low calibre applicants for low calibre courses. Others could still apply, but they would have to self fuund, and do so in the open market.0 -
Fakir news!ydoethur said:
Somebody once told me it was bazaarly difficult.AmpfieldAndy said:Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:
Quite right too - but India is a tough market to break into0 -
Fears are growing internationally that a no-deal Brexit poses a threat to the stability of the global economy, the head of Britain’s leading business body has warned. Carolyn Fairbairn, director-general of the CBI, said the failure to sort out Britain’s departure from the European Union was damaging Britain’s brand abroad and had joined a list of systemic risks to the world economy.0
-
So then why would Labour support Coopers amendment to stop a no deal brexit?
I thought the common view was that Corbyn and his motley crew of Trots wanted chaos, so that they could ride to the rescue of the impoverished, in despair rich City dwellers.
Giving May a free pass to carry on seems to not fulfil the above objective.0 -
Just trying to spice things up.Foxy said:
Fakir news!ydoethur said:
Somebody once told me it was bazaarly difficult.AmpfieldAndy said:Philip_Thompson said:
Seems like evidence Hannan knows what he's talking about regarding potential trade opportunities and deals with nations like India.Mortimer said:
And you’re posting this to highlight that the EU have a weakness in this area? Because that’s what it shows.williamglenn said:
Quite right too - but India is a tough market to break into0 -
Closer than the biggest defeat in history? Yes.MarqueeMark said:
Are you arguing there is a closer alternative proposal in Parliament?Jonathan said:
Are you arguing that the result in parliament was close enough for there to be another vote?HYUFD said:
May has got the only compromise the EU will give and which keeps enough Brexiteers on board, it is People's Vote diehard Remainers and 'Leave means Leave' diehard Leavers refusing to compromiseJonathan said:
May is perpetually disappointing. Rather than trying to find a compromise she has spent the week spinning against others trying to undermine them to force her deal.HYUFD said:
Or No Dealers to ransom with threats of remainJonathan said:So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.0 -
£77k obviously not enough for Davis. How can it be right that he is picking up £3,000 per hour(!) advising JCB? There should be a limit on external earnings for our MPs.ydoethur said:
Well, if they can seriously ask us to vote twice on the same thing having given an answer they don't like and believe we were just venting our feelings when we have to do it for free;Jonathan said:
I thought it was a principle not to vote twice.HYUFD said:
Parliament will almost certainly be voting over the next few weeks on permanent Customs Union, permanent Single Market, EUref2 etc. If all those fail too then the Deal becomes the default alternative to No Deal for Remainers or if Article 50 is extended and a Remain v Deal referendum looks likely the Deal avoids the risk of Remain for BrexiteersJonathan said:
Are you arguing that the result in parliament was close enough for there to be another vote?HYUFD said:
May has got the only compromise the EU will give and which keeps enough Brexiteers on board, it is People's Vote diehard Remainers and 'Leave means Leave' diehard Leavers refusing to compromiseJonathan said:
May is perpetually disappointing. Rather than trying to find a compromise she has spent the week spinning against others trying to undermine them to force her deal.HYUFD said:
Or No Dealers to ransom with threats of remainJonathan said:So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.
I think the least we can do is ask the bastards to vote twice on the same thing when they give a cretinous and impossible answer to vent their feelings about us when we pay the bastards north of £77k a year to actually, y'know, take fecking decisions.0 -
Wasn't someone on here suggesting May would need to call a GE if she lost that Cooper amendment?ralphmalph said:So then why would Labour support Coopers amendment to stop a no deal brexit?
I thought the common view was that Corbyn and his motley crew of Trots wanted chaos, so that they could ride to the rescue of the impoverished, in despair rich City dwellers.
Giving May a free pass to carry on seems to not fulfil the above objective.
Not sure I can see why, but if Labour leadership think it's a possibility then they'll be keen to back Cooper.0 -
It's increasingly clear where the Brexit focus needs to be. Some people want to take "No Deal" off the table. Others want a 2nd referendum to be on the table. Yet others think May should listen to parliament and take her deal off the table. We need to find this table and get round it for some round table talks.
That's what we need. Strong and Table government.0 -
The "As it stands" gives the game away that Esther knows the writing is on the wall.williamglenn said:0 -
I'm starting to think it would be worth a no deal crisis just to see these people get found out.Benpointer said:
The "As it stands" gives the game away that Esther knows the writing is on the wall.williamglenn said:0 -
The peerless wit of St John makes a welcome return. Nice to see you back, youngster.stjohn said:It's increasingly clear where the Brexit focus needs to be. Some people want to take "No Deal" off the table. Others want a 2nd referendum to be on the table. Yet others think May should listen to parliament and take her deal off the table. We need to find this table and get round it for some round table talks.
That's what we need. Strong and Table government.0 -
I object to the table being round. The triangle is a much stronger shape for the only true table.stjohn said:It's increasingly clear where the Brexit focus needs to be. Some people want to take "No Deal" off the table. Others want a 2nd referendum to be on the table. Yet others think May should listen to parliament and take her deal off the table. We need to find this table and get round it for some round table talks.
That's what we need. Strong and Table government.0 -
I presume you feel quite sanguine about this?ydoethur said:
Well, if they can seriously ask us to vote twice on the same thing having given an answer they don't like and believe we were just venting our feelings when we have to do it for free;Jonathan said:
I thought it was a principle not to vote twice.HYUFD said:
Parliament will almost certainly be voting over the next few weeks on permanent Customs Union, permanent Single Market, EUref2 etc. If all those fail too then the Deal becomes the default alternative to No Deal for Remainers or if Article 50 is extended and a Remain v Deal referendum looks likely the Deal avoids the risk of Remain for BrexiteersJonathan said:
Are you arguing that the result in parliament was close enough for there to be another vote?HYUFD said:
May has got the only compromise the EU will give and which keeps enough Brexiteers on board, it is People's Vote diehard Remainers and 'Leave means Leave' diehard Leavers refusing to compromiseJonathan said:
May is perpetually disappointing. Rather than trying to find a compromise she has spent the week spinning against others trying to undermine them to force her deal.HYUFD said:
Or No Dealers to ransom with threats of remainJonathan said:So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.
I think the least we can do is ask the bastards to vote twice on the same thing when they give a cretinous and impossible answer to vent their feelings about us when we pay the bastards north of £77k a year to actually, y'know, take fecking decisions.0 -
I've been there for two years.williamglenn said:
I'm starting to think it would be worth a no deal crisis just to see these people get found out.Benpointer said:
The "As it stands" gives the game away that Esther knows the writing is on the wall.williamglenn said:
Only my concern for my fellow Brits wants me to stop it happening.0 -
These charts, if in any way accurate, show just how unsure we are.
So here's a modest proposal:
We let Trump decide.
No, perhaps not. How about the Oracle of Delphi?
No, they're all dead.
Or maybe we could get a toga wearing specialist to interpret the entrils of a slaughtered sheep? That might be best, for we could then barbecue the rest of it.
0 -
No love for the Magic 8-Ball?Toms said:These charts, if in any way accurate, show just how unsure we are.
So here's a modest proposal:
We let Trump decide.
No, perhaps not. How about the Oracle of Delphi?
No, they're all dead.
Or maybe we could get a toga wearing specialist to interpret the entrils of a slaughtered sheep? That might be best, for we could then barbecue the rest of it.0 -
Your Fellow Brits voted for it. F*ck 'em.TheScreamingEagles said:
I've been there for two years.williamglenn said:
I'm starting to think it would be worth a no deal crisis just to see these people get found out.Benpointer said:
The "As it stands" gives the game away that Esther knows the writing is on the wall.williamglenn said:
Only my concern for my fellow Brits wants me to stop it happening.0 -
Eeek! I clicked on that and got a Norton Security (which i don't have installed) '5 Virus' warning. Site must be infected with malware. Best avoided.williamglenn said:0 -
And who exactly will that inconvenience?FrancisUrquhart said:
That would result in most poorly ranked unis closing / massively reducing the number of courses they offer.Foxy said:
I would favour a graduated bursary system.ydoethur said:
Not quite. The key difference is that at the moment universities get 100% of the upfront fees income. This would give them 100% of the recovered graduate premium. Which would be considerably less.FrancisUrquhart said:Bbc reporting Greening claimed she wanted to get rid of uni fees before being sacked...then you read the proposal...
The proposal was for a system without fees, loans, debts or interest rates.
Instead, graduates would pay back a proportion of earnings over a fixed number of years, with this graduate contribution funding universities. She likens it to a time-limited form of National Insurance deductions, but only for graduates.
That’s what they do at the moment...head, desk, thud...
Arguably, the best reason to get rid of tuition fees is they are a humongous Ponzi scheme which are piling up huge amounts of unrepayable debt that at some point the taxpayer will have to cough up for. They're like public sector pensions in some ways, except that when people die you lose money not gain it.
The second best reason to get rid of them is because it would actually be hilarious to watch all those muppets at the SLC, starting with the egregious Kevin O'Cockup, get the sack.
I would agree that saving graduates money isn't a good reason as I don't think it would.
It would depend on course and based on A level marks (or equivalent) so that with the top 25% of marks for that course get a govt bursary covering 75% of costs, graduated down so that those in the bottom 25% of marks applying for the course get 25% bursary, and have to self fund the rest. There may need to be a top up system of grants for the socially disadvantaged.
The exact level could vary by course, so that a higher percentage get a big bursary for Nursing, and a lower percentage for basketweaving. The aim would be to incentivise A level students to get good grades, and disincentivise low calibre applicants for low calibre courses. Others could still apply, but they would have to self fuund, and do so in the open market.
The reason university education costs the taxpayer so much is largely to do with people who should be doing apprenticeships or similar are instead doing degrees in such valuable subjects as "Spa Management".0 -
What will England do when jimmy Anderson’s body finally packs in?0
-
What was the most unacceptable???
Oh, that would be remain.
Now about that second referendum question....0 -
That's like asking what will happen when Her Majesty leaves us, you're not supposed to ask.FrancisUrquhart said:What will England do when jimmy Anderson’s body finally packs in?
0 -
You just can't tell us what it is.....Jonathan said:
Closer than the biggest defeat in history? Yes.MarqueeMark said:
Are you arguing there is a closer alternative proposal in Parliament?Jonathan said:
Are you arguing that the result in parliament was close enough for there to be another vote?HYUFD said:
May has got the only compromise the EU will give and which keeps enough Brexiteers on board, it is People's Vote diehard Remainers and 'Leave means Leave' diehard Leavers refusing to compromiseJonathan said:
May is perpetually disappointing. Rather than trying to find a compromise she has spent the week spinning against others trying to undermine them to force her deal.HYUFD said:
Or No Dealers to ransom with threats of remainJonathan said:So the government and its supporters are still holding the nation to ransom with threats of no deal.
Nothing
Has
Changed.0 -
Funny, we keep being told no one knew what they voted for.Peter_the_Punter said:
Your Fellow Brits voted for it. F*ck 'em.TheScreamingEagles said:
I've been there for two years.williamglenn said:
I'm starting to think it would be worth a no deal crisis just to see these people get found out.Benpointer said:
The "As it stands" gives the game away that Esther knows the writing is on the wall.williamglenn said:
Only my concern for my fellow Brits wants me to stop it happening.0 -
Nice try - nothing wrong with the link according to my softwareStark_Dawning said:
Eeek! I clicked on that and got a Norton Security (which i don't have installed) '5 Virus' warning. Site must be infected with malware. Best avoided.williamglenn said:0 -
However we might leave, it is becoming increasingly clear that we aren't ready and cannot be made ready by the end of March. Postponement is inevitable. The government must be hoping the rebel amendment carries so that they avoid shouldering the blame.Benpointer said:
The "As it stands" gives the game away that Esther knows the writing is on the wall.williamglenn said:0
