politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s “crutch” remains: The 2010 LD-LAB switchers are st
Comments
-
No problem - good luck with it all. Fantasy isn't my thing but I am told that the books are very good. I still think it might be worth your investigating whether you can knock something off your utilities bills, at the least.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Fett, an understandable error but I just had a new OS installed on an old one.
I just need to sell more books (my expenses, as it were, are very low). I'm hoping 1-4 short stories I'll have out in the next year or so will help to function as advertisements to attract people to my full-size books. There's also a small chance the second Sir Edric comedy will be bundled with the first as a traditionally published book, which would be splendid.
Edited extra bit: incidentally, thanks for your advice and the sentiment behind it.0 -
On topic, we need a by-election in a decent seat.0
-
ICM will be next week.Millsy said:I wonder if we will get ICM and Ipsos-Mori today?
I'm hopeful we will see the Ipsos-Mori today or tomorrow.0 -
1) I'm calling the likes of Stuart Dickson and MalcG complacent. Intelligent Yes supporters such as Carnyx do not exhibit the same folly. I realise that the 'you' in my reply above made it unclear which 'you' I meant.BobaFett said:
You are the one calling our opponents complacent, not me.JosiasJessop said:
That goes for both sides.BobaFett said:
It's not wise to underestimate your opponent.JackW said:
I think you are misplacing "determined" for noisy and blustering.BobaFett said:
If you think the Nats are complacent you are hopelessly, scarily wrong. They are the most determined electoral fighting force on these islands.JosiasJessop said:
No, you're too utterly complacent to panic.Stuart_Dickson said:
Ho ho. We all know who is panicking, and it ain't Yes Scotland.TGOHF said:SNP cave in on trident as currency panic sets in
http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-snp-trident-for-pound-plan-1-3369902
Either way this mornings poll indicates that again the majority of Scots are not swayed. NO will win come 18th September.
And to paraphrase .... it's suddenly gone quiet over there ....
2) You are assuming that I am a No'er. Whilst I think it's a shame if Scotland leaves, I also think it would be a shame for Scotland to be kept in if they want to go. My main wish is for us all to remain friends afterwards. And that's why I get annoyed by the attitude of some on here.
0 -
"Barely register" is not the same as "not register". The debates coincide with a movement to UKIP in the EU Parliament polling, and a marked boost in Mr Farage's personal numbers (YouGov).antifrank said:
No further comment required. I won't even highlight the bit about the Clegg-Farage debate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2014_(United_Kingdom)#2014
0 -
Basing Indy on oil looks like good fun.TheScreamingEagles said:Survation @Survation 35m
Using an unrounded comparison month over month, NO is essentially unchanged, YES slips 2 points, undecided makes up the difference +3
Sheikh Ahmed-Zaki Yamani, the veteran Saudi oil minister, saw the writing on the wall long ago. "Thirty years from now there will be a huge amount of oil - and no buyers. Oil will be left in the ground. The Stone Age came to an end, not because we had a lack of stones, and the oil age will come to an end not because we have a lack of oil," he told The Telegraph in 2000. Wise old owl.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/10755598/Global-solar-dominance-in-sight-as-science-trumps-fossil-fuels.html0 -
Your staff live away from your estate ?!? .... Shocking .... little wonder they traverse over to Morrison's !!Icarus said:
BTW do your old "winning here placards" come with the house or are they counted as integral antique fixtures and fittings and part of the grade II listing ?
0 -
Hmm. Weird log-in mini-issue of late, whereby the main article appears twice. Not a problem really (reloading or clicking to the main site then the specific article resolves it).
Mr. Fett, might I suggest giving the Sir Edric's Temple sample a look? It's fantasy but (hopefully) the sort of thing even those not usually into it might enjoy (one of my beta readers really isn't in fantasy).0 -
I think the great untold story is the Americanisation of our education system. Everyone goes to university, teaching in modules, devalued A-levels, and so on. It does not help that the implementation was cocked up. Nor that innumerate politicians thought the graduate earnings premium would be unaffected by increasing the number of graduates.JosiasJessop said:
Labour wanted 50% of teenagers to go to higher education or further education. Not only did they fail to meet that target, but they had no basis of why that target - and not 40%, or 60% - was the magic number.BobaFett said:
Agree to an extent but fees are now too high - they will act as a disincentive to poorer children so need to come down.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
It also leads to the utterly fallacious idea that in order to get on, you need a degree. Whilst that is true for some occupations (e.g. law, medicine, architecture), for others it is not. I, for instance, am a pleb who ain't got no degree, yet ah'm doing very well, yes siree.
Fees is just one problem caused by increasing the number of students so massively.0 -
NP,
I can see why you do spend time - the DNVs from last time are a sizable chunk and obviously regarded as fertile territory. But if they can't be bothered and they're in a safe seat, that's understandable. If they're can't be bothered and in a marginal, they're genuinely not bothered and probably won't do next time.
I'm in a safe Labour seat and I've never been canvassed but always vote even though it's pointless. I never vote Tory, I'd feel dirty somehow (even though I now many Tory people and they are fine), I can't vote Labour with Ed (son of Brown) in charge and my last vote, LDs are splintered. It will probably be LD or Ukip (if they keep getting insulted for being non-mainstream - I can be perverse at times).
So do you convince many DNVs? Or do they merely indulge in that British tactic of being polite to your face?0 -
It is indeed a fact that Great Britain was Greatest when only the sons of the rich attended university (and there were only two or three of them in England and a handful in Scotland and none in Wales or Ireland). It is at least arguable that allowing university education to the sons of the poor and daughters of anyone led to national decline. Perhaps UKIP could address this.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
0 -
Hard to argue with any of that.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
0 -
I may donate them to Lutterworth museum - to sit along side pictures of the first British Jet engine.JackW said:
Your staff live away from your estate ?!? .... Shocking .... little wonder they traverse over to Morrison's !!
BTW do your old "winning here placards" come with the house or are they counted as integral antique fixtures and fittings and part of the grade II listing ?
0 -
The global financial crisis did not occur independently of government economic policy and fiscal management.DecrepitJohnL said:
Once more you have accidentally forgotten the role of the global financial crisis in your rush to blame Labour, and nor have you gone back to the indebtedness of the previous Conservative administration, though what any of this has to do with student loans is unclear.AveryLP said:
...Monksfield said:Student loans: what a ticking bomb this is. The majority of ordinary middle and working class graduates are going to be enslaved by debt for most of their working lives. God knows how they will be able to afford to have families etc.
From boom to bust in under a decade under Gordon and Labour.
Now who do you think should be blamed for condemning our children and grandchildren to a lifetime of 'debt enslavery'?
Between 1998 and 2002, Gordon Brown as Chancellor allowed household debt to rise at an average of 10% per annum. From 2000 to 2006, he allowed the net financing requirement of central government to rise from a surplus of -£14.3 bn to £52.3 billion. And this was both before the global crisis, part cause of it and a major contributor to the severity with which it hit the UK relative to other countries.
And who was responsible for regulation of the financial sector? Who introduced the tripartite regulation by Treasury, FSA and Bank of England, which like the three slips in the Ancient Mariner's cricket team "stoppeth one in three"?
I am not saying that Gordon Brown was alone in mis-managing public and household finances but he was not blameless.
And as to the connection between public finances and student loans, there is a limited supply of credit in any economy. If government maxes out on its credit card then it no longer has the market confidence to enable it to finance all its programmes. The inevitable consequence is that discretionary funding requirements, like university education, have to be shifted away from government to user. The fact that students have to take out loans is a direct consequence of there being "no [government] money (or credit lines) left".0 -
For those of who were kids in the 80s.
By the Power of Greyskull
They are making a new He-Man: Masters of the Universe film.
http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/masters-of-the-universe/30061/kick-ass-2-director-to-make-new-masters-of-the-universe-film0 -
The country went downhill when we gave up India and the Empire in general.Innocent_Abroad said:
It is indeed a fact that Great Britain was Greatest when only the sons of the rich attended university (and there were only two or three of them in England and a handful in Scotland and none in Wales or Ireland). It is at least arguable that allowing university education to the sons of the poor and daughters of anyone led to national decline. Perhaps UKIP could address this.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
We should restore the British Empire, for a safe and secure society which I assure you will last for ten thousand years.
I put myself forward as the next Viceroy of India.0 -
Indeed: Higher Education needs paying for, it's going to come from 'us' collective one way or the other, and it makes sense that those which directly benefit from it pay their fair share for it.SimonStClare said:
Hard to argue with any of that.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
0 -
Very public spirited of you.Icarus said:
I may donate them to Lutterworth museum - to sit along side pictures of the first British Jet engine.JackW said:
Your staff live away from your estate ?!? .... Shocking .... little wonder they traverse over to Morrison's !!
BTW do your old "winning here placards" come with the house or are they counted as integral antique fixtures and fittings and part of the grade II listing ?
However should we now take it that your next estate is unlikely to be fertile "winning here" territory or is it that you are to boost the economy by investing in new devious diamond demonstrations of yellow peril triumphalism ?!?
0 -
What is prudent for a household and what is prudent for a government are not necessarily the same thing. Still, I do like the way you pick and choose your statistics. If OGH ran the site better you and you alone would be permitted to do this...AveryLP said:
The global financial crisis did not occur independently of government economic policy and fiscal management.DecrepitJohnL said:
Once more you have accidentally forgotten the role of the global financial crisis in your rush to blame Labour, and nor have you gone back to the indebtedness of the previous Conservative administration, though what any of this has to do with student loans is unclear.AveryLP said:
...Monksfield said:Student loans: what a ticking bomb this is. The majority of ordinary middle and working class graduates are going to be enslaved by debt for most of their working lives. God knows how they will be able to afford to have families etc.
From boom to bust in under a decade under Gordon and Labour.
Now who do you think should be blamed for condemning our children and grandchildren to a lifetime of 'debt enslavery'?
Between 1998 and 2002, Gordon Brown as Chancellor allowed household debt to rise at an average of 10% per annum. From 2000 to 2006, he allowed the net financing requirement of central government to rise from a surplus of -£14.3 bn to £52.3 billion. And this was both before the global crisis, part cause of it and a major contributor to the severity with which it hit the UK relative to other countries.
And who was responsible for regulation of the financial sector? Who introduced the tripartite regulation by Treasury, FSA and Bank of England, which like the three slips in the Ancient Mariner's cricket team "stoppeth one in three"?
I am not saying that Gordon Brown was alone in mis-managing public and household finances but he was not blameless.
And as to the connection between public finances and student loans, there is a limited supply of credit in any economy. If government maxes out on its credit card then it no longer has the market confidence to enable it to finance all its programmes. The inevitable consequence is that discretionary funding requirements, like university education, have to be shifted away from government to user. The fact that students have to take out loans is a direct consequence of there being "no [government] money (or credit lines) left".
0 -
@Simon
It is in fact very easy to argue with that because, as a very rich childless man, Antifrank has a gigantic blind spot when it comes to family policy and family subsidies. Basically, he thinks families should be raised at the market rate with no subsidies - so families are only for the rich.
I fundamentally disagree - good parents are important to the economy as they raise the children who will pay the taxes in the next age. I understand that Antifrank doesn't need these people - he will have a gold-plated pension and/or a mortgage free inner London house to cash in. But he is a rare fish with his own private pond - most of us swim in the stream.0 -
What proportion of students came from C2DE parentage before fees came in and what now?Slackbladder said:
Indeed: Higher Education needs paying for, it's going to come from 'us' collective one way or the other, and it makes sense that those which directly benefit from it pay their fair share for it.SimonStClare said:
Hard to argue with any of that.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
0 -
There are numerous other items of discretionary spend that could be adjusted before we touch uni fees. Overseas aid, quangos, HOC champagne bills ....AveryLP said:
The global financial crisis did not occur independently of government economic policy and fiscal management.DecrepitJohnL said:
Once more you have accidentally forgotten the role of the global financial crisis in your rush to blame Labour, and nor have you gone back to the indebtedness of the previous Conservative administration, though what any of this has to do with student loans is unclear.AveryLP said:
...Monksfield said:Student loans: what a ticking bomb this is. The majority of ordinary middle and working class graduates are going to be enslaved by debt for most of their working lives. God knows how they will be able to afford to have families etc.
From boom to bust in under a decade under Gordon and Labour.
Now who do you think should be blamed for condemning our children and grandchildren to a lifetime of 'debt enslavery'?
Between 1998 and 2002, Gordon Brown as Chancellor allowed household debt to rise at an average of 10% per annum. From 2000 to 2006, he allowed the net financing requirement of central government to rise from a surplus of -£14.3 bn to £52.3 billion. And this was both before the global crisis and part cause of it.
And who was responsible for regulation of the financial sector? Who introduced the tripartite regulation by Treasury, FSA and Bank of England, which like the three slips in the Ancient Mariner's cricket team "stoppeth one in three"?
I am not saying that Gordon Brown was alone in mis-managing public and household finances but he was not blameless.
And as to the connection between public finances and student loans, there is a limited supply of credit in any economy. If government maxes out on its credit card then it no longer has the market confidence to enable it to finance all its programmes. The inevitable consequence is that discretionary funding requirements, like university education, have to be shifted away from government to user. The fact that students have to take out loans is a direct consequence of there being "no money (or credit lines) left".
It's usually a Conservative principle to protect and encourage future generations. This government is soulless.
0 -
Sorry old chap but I've pencilled in the soon to be Viscount Hersham for that role, not least because of his deep and current knowledge of the railways and its clear historical and present day importance to the Indian sub continent.TheScreamingEagles said:
The country went downhill when we gave up India and the Empire in general.Innocent_Abroad said:
It is indeed a fact that Great Britain was Greatest when only the sons of the rich attended university (and there were only two or three of them in England and a handful in Scotland and none in Wales or Ireland). It is at least arguable that allowing university education to the sons of the poor and daughters of anyone led to national decline. Perhaps UKIP could address this.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
We should restore the British Empire, for a safe and secure society which I assure you will last for ten thousand years.
I put myself forward as the next Viceroy of India.
0 -
There are at least two types of DNV. Regular Labour voters who abstained last time because they thought we were worn out (which had at least a grain of truth in it) but couldn't bear to vote Tory, and people who just don't care about politics and think we all suck. The former are back in large numbers and visiting them does encourage them. The latter still don't care and i spend zero seconds trying to persuade them.CD13 said:NP,
I can see why you do spend time - the DNVs from last time are a sizable chunk and obviously regarded as fertile territory. But if they can't be bothered and they're in a safe seat, that's understandable. If they're can't be bothered and in a marginal, they're genuinely not bothered and probably won't do next time.
So do you convince many DNVs? Or do they merely indulge in that British tactic of being polite to your face?
But mainly we canvass to identify potential support and waverers, to concentrate on them on polling day. The Tories don't have the manpower so rely on direct mail - but that depends on ancient canvass data and Experian-type demography to guess what sort of people they're writing to. It's hit and miss (our CP chair got a nice letter from Cameron thanking her for her presumed support, as did our chief CLP fund-raiser), and talking to people is a lot more effective if you have the people to do it.
0 -
JohnO is never going to live that journey down is he?JackW said:
Sorry old chap but I've pencilled in the soon to be Viscount Hersham for that role, not least because of his deep and current knowledge of the railways and its clear historical and present day importance to the Indian sub continent.TheScreamingEagles said:
The country went downhill when we gave up India and the Empire in general.Innocent_Abroad said:
It is indeed a fact that Great Britain was Greatest when only the sons of the rich attended university (and there were only two or three of them in England and a handful in Scotland and none in Wales or Ireland). It is at least arguable that allowing university education to the sons of the poor and daughters of anyone led to national decline. Perhaps UKIP could address this.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
We should restore the British Empire, for a safe and secure society which I assure you will last for ten thousand years.
I put myself forward as the next Viceroy of India.
I blame the naughty Neil who kept on encouraging JohnO to stay for one more drink, when he wanted to leave at 10pm, he left closer to midnight.0 -
Alanbrooke [9.36am] Whilst my heart agrees with your last word, my head notices that all politicians are facing an electorate with a higher proportion of childless voters - at least amongst white people - than ever. My generation (I'm an OAP on Sunday) dislikes its grandchildren more than any previous one. It's all disguised racism, alas.0
-
If Labour were worn out in 2010, what do you tell them to convince them that Labour is somehow revitalised, fresh and new?NickPalmer said:
There are at least two types of DNV. Regular Labour voters who abstained last time because they thought we were worn out (which had at least a grain of truth in it) but couldn't bear to vote Tory, and people who just don't care about politics and think we all suck. The former are back in large numbers and visiting them does encourage them. The latter still don't care and i spend zero seconds trying to persuade them.CD13 said:NP,
I can see why you do spend time - the DNVs from last time are a sizable chunk and obviously regarded as fertile territory. But if they can't be bothered and they're in a safe seat, that's understandable. If they're can't be bothered and in a marginal, they're genuinely not bothered and probably won't do next time.
So do you convince many DNVs? Or do they merely indulge in that British tactic of being polite to your face?
But mainly we canvass to identify potential support and waverers, to concentrate on them on polling day. The Tories don't have the manpower so rely on direct mail - but that depends on ancient canvass data and Experian-type demography to guess what sort of people they're writing to. It's hit and miss (our CP chair got a nice letter from Cameron thanking her for her presumed support, as did our chief CLP fund-raiser), and talking to people is a lot more effective if you have the people to do it.0 -
You could ask the same question of the time before Labour shut down Grammar Schools - family background and wealth is not really relevant unless the family discourage/prevent a youngster from studying and achieving their ambitions.BobaFett said:
What proportion of students came from C2DE parentage before fees came in and what now?Slackbladder said:
Indeed: Higher Education needs paying for, it's going to come from 'us' collective one way or the other, and it makes sense that those which directly benefit from it pay their fair share for it.SimonStClare said:
Hard to argue with any of that.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
The OECD report, on continuously failing Welsh Education under Labour, shows how years of lack of ambition, false exam grades and poor teaching standards, and even inverse snobbery at home and at school work against the ambitious child from an under -educated family.0 -
I'm resigned to the fact that posters on here decide that my personal circumstances are in some way relevant to any political topic they choose to raise. But I'd prefer that you didn't put words in my mouth, especially words that I completely disagree with.BobaFett said:@Simon
It is in fact very easy to argue with that because, as a very rich childless man, Antifrank has a gigantic blind spot when it comes to family policy and family subsidies. Basically, he thinks families should be raised at the market rate with no subsidies - so families are only for the rich.
I fundamentally disagree - good parents are important to the economy as they raise the children who will pay the taxes in the next age. I understand that Antifrank doesn't need these people - he will have a gold-plated pension and/or a mortgage free inner London house to cash in. But he is a rare fish with his own private po most of us swim in the stream.
I certainly don't think that families should be raised at the market rate with no subsidies. I don't even think that those going through higher education should get no subsidies. Even at current tuition fee rates, students are substantially subsidised.
What I do take issue with is disguised subsidies to the middle classes which are essentially at the expense of those that really need them. The middle classes are shameless in squawking on the rare occasions that their interests are scrutinised. That doesn't mean that they should remain featherbedded.
If we really wanted to help young people from lower income backgrounds, we would make it easier for those in deprived areas to move to areas with more jobs (and provide incentives for them to do so), and offer employers greater subsidies to help address youth unemployment - getting young people into the habit of working is the single best way of breaking the cycle of worklessness.0 -
Define middle class.antifrank said:
I'm resigned to the fact that posters on here decide that my personal circumstances are in some way relevant to any political topic they choose to raise. But I'd prefer that you didn't put words in my mouth, especially words that I completely disagree with.BobaFett said:@Simon
It is in fact very easy to argue with that because, as a very rich childless man, Antifrank has a gigantic blind spot when it comes to family policy and family subsidies. Basically, he thinks families should be raised at the market rate with no subsidies - so families are only for the rich.
I fundamentally disagree - good parents are important to the economy as they raise the children who will pay the taxes in the next age. I understand that Antifrank doesn't need these people - he will have a gold-plated pension and/or a mortgage free inner London house to cash in. But he is a rare fish with his own private po most of us swim in the stream.
I certainly don't think that families should be raised at the market rate with no subsidies. I don't even think that those going through higher education should get no subsidies. Even at current tuition fee rates, students are substantially subsidised.
What I do take issue with is disguised subsidies to the middle classes which are essentially at the expense of those that really need them. The middle classes are shameless in squawking on the rare occasions that their interests are scrutinised. That doesn't mean that they should remain featherbedded.
If we really wanted to help young people from lower income backgrounds, we would make it easier for those in deprived areas to move to areas with more jobs (and provide incentives for them to do so), and offer employers greater subsidies to help address youth unemployment - getting young people into the habit of working is the single best way of breaking the cycle of worklessness.0 -
Yet governments need to plan for the future shape of the economy, not how it worked for people of your generation. The reality is that global competition is a lot stronger than it was 20 years ago. And one of the main things that multinationals look at when they're placing a new site is the talent level of the local labour force. This was a huge part of Ireland's success during the original Celtic Tiger period. There is still a huge income premium associated with getting a degree from a good university. And the competition is going to get even greater as we compete not just with the labour pools of other country, but also against machines, with automation expected to replace more than 50% of jobs. The bulk of the ones that survive will be the ones which require creative thinking and problem solving that computers can't do, and generally this is the sort of stuff that universities teach better than anyone else.JosiasJessop said:Labour wanted 50% of teenagers to go to higher education or further education. Not only did they fail to meet that target, but they had no basis of why that target - and not 40%, or 60% - was the magic number.
It also leads to the utterly fallacious idea that in order to get on, you need a degree. Whilst that is true for some occupations (e.g. law, medicine, architecture), for others it is not. I, for instance, am a pleb who ain't got no degree, yet ah'm doing very well, yes siree.
Fees is just one problem caused by increasing the number of students so massively.
The 50% is not a magic number, it's just an ambitious target to drive up higher education. The problem has come in in that, to meet this number, we have expanded university education via adding courses of lower quality than previously existed. This is what needs to now be focused on: making sure universities teach the precise skills and knowledge needed for the business world of 2050.
The other main argument against high levels of higher education is the elitist one that the majority of British people aren't capable of studying at that level. While this might be true, that's just an indictment of pre-university child development, particularly for those on lower incomes. If you go to wealthy towns in the home counties the vast majority of kids go on to decent university places, so there's no reason while the potential isn't there for the rest of the country. It's just that, elsewhere, both schools and parenting tend to be extremely variable.
0 -
Live it down ???TheScreamingEagles said:
JohnO is never going to live that journey down is he?JackW said:
Sorry old chap but I've pencilled in the soon to be Viscount Hersham for that role, not least because of his deep and current knowledge of the railways and its clear historical and present day importance to the Indian sub continent.TheScreamingEagles said:
The country went downhill when we gave up India and the Empire in general.Innocent_Abroad said:
It is indeed a fact that Great Britain was Greatest when only the sons of the rich attended university (and there were only two or three of them in England and a handful in Scotland and none in Wales or Ireland). It is at least arguable that allowing university education to the sons of the poor and daughters of anyone led to national decline. Perhaps UKIP could address this.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
We should restore the British Empire, for a safe and secure society which I assure you will last for ten thousand years.
I put myself forward as the next Viceroy of India.
I blame the naughty Neil who kept on encouraging JohnO to stay for one more drink, when he wanted to leave at 10pm, he left closer to midnight.
I think JohnO should have a TV series devoted to "Unexpected Railway Journeys" - somewhat like Michael Portillo's show but with gravitas, humour and serendipity.
0 -
I note no-one has answered my question. I wonder why...Financier said:
You could ask the same question of the time before Labour shut down Grammar Schools - family background and wealth is not really relevant unless the family discourage/prevent a youngster from studying and achieving their ambitions.BobaFett said:
What proportion of students came from C2DE parentage before fees came in and what now?Slackbladder said:
Indeed: Higher Education needs paying for, it's going to come from 'us' collective one way or the other, and it makes sense that those which directly benefit from it pay their fair share for it.SimonStClare said:
Hard to argue with any of that.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
The OECD report, on continuously failing Welsh Education under Labour, shows how years of lack of ambition, false exam grades and poor teaching standards, and even inverse snobbery at home and at school work against the ambitious child from an under -educated family.0 -
Largely because you could do the research for yourself. If, once you have done so, you have a point to make, make it. Preferably without gratuitously traducing other posters.BobaFett said:
I note no-one has answered my question. I wonder why...Financier said:
You could ask the same question of the time before Labour shut down Grammar Schools - family background and wealth is not really relevant unless the family discourage/prevent a youngster from studying and achieving their ambitions.BobaFett said:
What proportion of students came from C2DE parentage before fees came in and what now?Slackbladder said:
Indeed: Higher Education needs paying for, it's going to come from 'us' collective one way or the other, and it makes sense that those which directly benefit from it pay their fair share for it.SimonStClare said:
Hard to argue with any of that.antifrank said:Someone has to pay for higher education. At a time when fewer than half the population goes into higher education, it seems appropriate that the cost should be borne at least in part by those that benefit most from that higher education: the students. If they don't in fact benefit particularly from their higher education, perhaps they and we should rethink whether they should be doing it at all in the first place.
The OECD report, on continuously failing Welsh Education under Labour, shows how years of lack of ambition, false exam grades and poor teaching standards, and even inverse snobbery at home and at school work against the ambitious child from an under -educated family.0 -
The former upper class who have just endured a period of Labour economic policy.BobaFett said:
Define middle class.antifrank said:
I'm resigned to the fact that posters on here decide that my personal circumstances are in some way relevant to any political topic they choose to raise. But I'd prefer that you didn't put words in my mouth, especially words that I completely disagree with.BobaFett said:@Simon
It is in fact very easy to argue with that because, as a very rich childless man, Antifrank has a gigantic blind spot when it comes to family policy and family subsidies. Basically, he thinks families should be raised at the market rate with no subsidies - so families are only for the rich.
I fundamentally disagree - good parents are important to the economy as they raise the children who will pay the taxes in the next age. I understand that Antifrank doesn't need these people - he will have a gold-plated pension and/or a mortgage free inner London house to cash in. But he is a rare fish with his own private po most of us swim in the stream.
I certainly don't think that families should be raised at the market rate with no subsidies. I don't even think that those going through higher education should get no subsidies. Even at current tuition fee rates, students are substantially subsidised.
What I do take issue with is disguised subsidies to the middle classes which are essentially at the expense of those that really need them. The middle classes are shameless in squawking on the rare occasions that their interests are scrutinised. That doesn't mean that they should remain featherbedded.
If we really wanted to help young people from lower income backgrounds, we would make it easier for those in deprived areas to move to areas with more jobs (and provide incentives for them to do so), and offer employers greater subsidies to help address youth unemployment - getting young people into the habit of working is the single best way of breaking the cycle of worklessness.
0 -
Surely 'cheating' in diplomacy is a contradiction in terms?foxinsoxuk said:Off topic,
I seem to be restored to Diplomacy, no cheating, just caused some confusion when my son set up an account and joined another game. This gave the impression of multiple identities, but not in the PB games.
0 -
Enslaved by debt which only has to be paid if you're on a good salary, where payments are capped at a certain share of your income, and get written off if you haven't paid them back at a certain point? The cost of a degree is also less than the wage premium you get for getting one, so I'm struggling to see your point.Monksfield said:Student loans: what a ticking bomb this is. The majority of ordinary middle and working class graduates are going to be enslaved by debt for most of their working lives. God knows how they will be able to afford to have families etc.
The main problem for the new system is that the write-offs are perhaps too generous, and could be a cost for the government.0 -
Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"0 -
I have seen some terrible graduates In my industry (software engineering) over the last twenty years. In fact, the best software engineer IME are people who've graduated in subjects like physics and maths, with a second string of biology and, strangely, geography. Software engineering graduates are some way down the list.DecrepitJohnL said:
I think the great untold story is the Americanisation of our education system. Everyone goes to university, teaching in modules, devalued A-levels, and so on. It does not help that the implementation was cocked up. Nor that innumerate politicians thought the graduate earnings premium would be unaffected by increasing the number of graduates.
Some examples:
*) People not being able to describe their final-year projects, completed a matter of months before. One did not even know what his project had been.
*) A guy who could not explain what a compiler was, even at a high level.
*) *Two* guys (well, a guy and a girl) who could not create a simple linked-list, even conceptually on a white board.
*) Someone who could not describe even basic software development methodology (e.g. waterfall)
*) A guy who could not add up in binary. And no, it was not nerves.
And so on.
Their CV's all had the right buzz words, and they had done the 'right' sort of modules. None of these people had been served well by their degree course.
One of the hardest things I ever had to do was try to pick which graduates to interview from CVs. Which is something to tell all our kids: when it comes to being more noticeable than your competitors at graduate level, work experience matters.
I'm glad I'm no longer doing that sort of thing.0 -
(Look away now Antifrank)
O/T - I've taken advantage of Bet365's relegation treble of Cardiff, Sunderland and Norwich at 10/3
Other bookies are offering less than 2/1
I think after their Fulham game, Norwich are doomed, they played Liverpool, Man United, Chelsea and Arsenal.
Luis Suarez has alone scored something like 279 goals in 5 matches against Norwich (Okay, it's something like 11 in 5 matches, including 2 hat-tricks and one 4 goal match)
http://www.oddschecker.com/football/english/premier-league/relegation-treble0 -
In what way am I compacent? I think that there is a good chance that NO could win this. I and my colleagues will be fighting every inch of the road to 10 pm on the 18th of September. We will not relax until the polling stations close.JosiasJessop said:
1) I'm calling the likes of Stuart Dickson and MalcG complacent. Intelligent Yes supporters such as Carnyx do not exhibit the same folly. I realise that the 'you' in my reply above made it unclear which 'you' I meant.BobaFett said:
You are the one calling our opponents complacent, not me.JosiasJessop said:
That goes for both sides.BobaFett said:
It's not wise to underestimate your opponent.JackW said:
I think you are misplacing "determined" for noisy and blustering.BobaFett said:
If you think the Nats are complacent you are hopelessly, scarily wrong. They are the most determined electoral fighting force on these islands.JosiasJessop said:
No, you're too utterly complacent to panic.Stuart_Dickson said:
Ho ho. We all know who is panicking, and it ain't Yes Scotland.TGOHF said:SNP cave in on trident as currency panic sets in
http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-snp-trident-for-pound-plan-1-3369902
Either way this mornings poll indicates that again the majority of Scots are not swayed. NO will win come 18th September.
And to paraphrase .... it's suddenly gone quiet over there ....
2) You are assuming that I am a No'er. Whilst I think it's a shame if Scotland leaves, I also think it would be a shame for Scotland to be kept in if they want to go. My main wish is for us all to remain friends afterwards. And that's why I get annoyed by the attitude of some on here.0 -
Only 28.5 % of Scottish women support Yes;
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-blow-alex-salmond-record-33943870 -
Antifrank [9.46am] All of us are the same boat, old bean. And, for example, in a discussion about housing our personal circumstances do have a degree of relevance. More generally, those who feel abused can always leave the site.
But what is fair? Was it fair of me to go through university on an industrial scholarship which didn't increase my income but certainly did my father's? Was it fair of him to complain that I had it too easy - he'd had to get his degree at night school? Was it fair of his mother to complain of him adopting me (and my sister) because she knew that such babies were the spawn of the devil? (It did at least get him to buy her a house before he bought one for his own family?)
This is a political website and activists and partisans behave like my granny - they care far more for effectiveness than they do for fairness. For example, the subtext of Nick Palmer's recent post is: "the Tories waste their own money - why trust them with yours?"0 -
Might I implore OGH to send out a search party forthwith to determine the location of YES PBers who have inexplicably gone AWOL after the publication of the latest Survation poll.
Whilst a period of justified quiet from them is welcome, indeed necessary from time to time, surely we must be cognisant that these delicate flowers require the company of other deluded plants to maintain the illusion that the YES campaign is week by week sailing seamlessly on to victory.0 -
IndyRef - best prices
Yes 3/1 (various)
No 2/7 (various)
Ladbrokes - YES percentage
44%+ 10/11
44%- 10/11
Turnout - BetVictor
65%+ 4/11
60-64% 7/1
59%- 11/40 -
Yeah, the Budgies/Fulham match Saturday is the effective decider for third spotTheScreamingEagles said:(Look away now Antifrank)
O/T - I've taken advantage of Bet365's relegation treble of Cardiff, Sunderland and Norwich at 10/3
Other bookies are offering less than 2/1
I think after their Fulham game, Norwich are doomed, they played Liverpool, Man United, Chelsea and Arsenal.
Luis Suarez has alone scored something like 279 goals in 5 matches against Norwich (Okay, it's something like 11 in 5 matches, including 2 hat-tricks and one 4 goal match)
http://www.oddschecker.com/football/english/premier-league/relegation-treble
0 -
Indeed. But the problem with this is that kids from poorer backgrounds can't afford to offer themselves for free to employers during their summer holidays, as they often have to work in more basic jobs that actually pay a wage to get themselves through university. In addition, they don't have the family connections to get places at the best companies. This is why Nick Clegg was absolutely right to complain about work experience practices and why David Cameron, once again, was completely oblivious to the real world, preferring to live in a "of course I help my mates" mentality.JosiasJessop said:
One of the hardest things I ever had to do was try to pick which graduates to interview from CVs. Which is something to tell all our kids: when it comes to being more noticeable than your competitors at graduate level, work experience matters.
I'm glad I'm no longer doing that sort of thing.
I also agree with your points about courses like software engineering. It's important to recognise, however, that it's because these courses are generally new, and thus of lower quality compared to more established courses. There's nothing inherently wrong with doing software engineering over physics - in fact, if you could make them of similar quality, it would probably be better to have more people doing the former.0 -
Very good points. The number of 'good' universities is well below the number of universities; a useless degree from a useless university or college does no-one any good (you can have useless degree from good unis, and good degrees from otherwise useless unis).Socrates said:
Yet governments need to plan for the future shape of the economy, not how it worked for people of your generation. The reality is that global competition is a lot stronger than it was 20 years ago. And one of the main things that multinationals look at when they're placing a new site is the talent level of the local labour force. This was a huge part of Ireland's success during the original Celtic Tiger period. There is still a huge income premium associated with getting a degree from a good university. And the competition is going to get even greater as we compete not just with the labour pools of other country, but also against machines, with automation expected to replace more than 50% of jobs. The bulk of the ones that survive will be the ones which require creative thinking and problem solving that computers can't do, and generally this is the sort of stuff that universities teach better than anyone else.
The 50% is not a magic number, it's just an ambitious target to drive up higher education. The problem has come in in that, to meet this number, we have expanded university education via adding courses of lower quality than previously existed. This is what needs to now be focused on: making sure universities teach the precise skills and knowledge needed for the business world of 2050.
(sadly snipped for length)
I'm also unsure that universities on the whole teach creative thinking and problem solving. Then again, it's not my industry.
Where I really agree is that we need a skilled workforce; however, that means technical colleges as well as universities. But the problem is that qualifications from institutions other than universities are seen as being distinctly second class.
Take my nephew, who is 16. He is doing A-levels, but his talents lie more in the practical than the rigorously academic. When he is 18 he will probably go to a technical college and come out very skilled - he is already. Yet he will always be looked down on by those who have 'degrees'.
Also, not everyone is suited for FE. We need to ensure schools give these people the skills they need, and not forget about them. But that's probably so obvious it doesn't need saying.0 -
MoE stuff Jack. Yes -2 and No -1.JackW said:Might I implore OGH to send out a search party forthwith to determine the location of YES PBers who have inexplicably gone AWOL after the publication of the latest Survation poll.
Whilst a period of justified quiet from them is welcome, indeed necessary from time to time, surely we must be cognisant that these delicate flowers require the company of other deluded plants to maintain the illusion that the YES campaign is week by week sailing seamlessly on to victory.
- "It would leave a referendum result of 56 per cent No to 44 per cent Yes if the undecideds were stripped out."
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-blow-alex-salmond-record-33943870 -
There hasn’t been much movement between CON & LAB
Since the principal contest at the 2015GE will be between Labour and Conservative candidates one needs to double the proportion of Labour voters who were formerly Conservative voters to properly compare their impact to that of the 2010 Lib Dems.
This is because these swing voters count twice in the electoral arithmetic, being a vote lost fro the Conservatives and a vote gained by Labour at the same time.
Thus, with your figures from Populus, one should not compare 18.1 with 4.9 (about 3.7 times as large), but 18.1 with 9.8 (about 1.85 times as large). I'd argue that the direct switchers from the Conservatives make up an important part of Miliband's electoral coalition at present.
As I have shown previously with figures from ICM, there have been times in this Parliament when the swing voters between the Conservatives and Labour have been more important for creating the Labour lead than the Lib Dem to Labour swing voters - it's just that Miliband has currently lost some of these back to the Tories.
Thus you are completely wrong to say that there hasn't been much movement between Con & Lab - it's still where most of the electoral action is.0 -
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
0 -
Whether places are called "universities" or "technical colleges" is ultimately a matter of semantics. I certainly agree that we need a lot more vocational elements to our further education. But where I would worry is when we get this mentality that we need to be happy with people just training in the basic vocational jobs we think of that worked a few decades ago. Take being a car mechanic, for instance. That worked fine in the past, but in the future cars will likely be driven by computers and run on a variety of power trains with complicated battery technology. Thus the mechanics of the future will have to know a lot about electronic engineering and chemical engineering, which will almost certainly take high quality classroom experience.JosiasJessop said:
Where I really agree is that we need a skilled workforce; however, that means technical colleges as well as universities. But the problem is that qualifications from institutions other than universities are seen as being distinctly second class.
Take my nephew, who is 16. He is doing A-levels, but his talents lie more in the practical than the rigorously academic. When he is 18 he will probably go to a technical college and come out very skilled - he is already. Yet he will always be looked down on by those who have 'degrees'.
Also, not everyone is suited for FE. We need to ensure schools give these people the skills they need, and not forget about them. But that's probably so obvious it doesn't need saying.0 -
William Hill now publish Basingstoke prices too. Will Maria Miller even be the CON candidate next year?
Best prices:
Con 1/10 (Lad, WH)
UKIP 20/1 (PP)
Lab 25/1 (PP)
LD 66/1 (PP)
The fact that the Lib Dems, who came in 2nd place in 2010, are priced as long as 66/1 indicates how they are likely to perform in seats they do not already hold. I can imagine that their list of 2nd places will be much, much shorter in 2015.0 -
England cricket selectors have thought so for quite some time.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.0 -
Whilst some of the value has gone from the Indy turnout market my McARSE is determinedly forthright in the higher echelons turnout model - presently projected at 79%, where there is still to be made a very decent return for under a six month tie up.0
-
"...making sure universities teach the precise skills and knowledge needed for the business world of 2050. "
Might I respectfully suggest that universities which teach skills required by businesses are not in fact doing the job of a university, a polytechnics or a further education college possibly, but not a university.
Secondly, universities seldom have the staff with the knowledge or experience to understand what specific skills are required by businesses and in any case in some areas those skills change so frequently it will be impossible for a uni course to keep up (Mr. Jessop's field of software engineering is a classic example of changing requirements and methodologies).0 -
English,Scots,Welsh and Irish. Same people.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/science/05cnd-brits.html?pagewanted=all&_r=00 -
Indeed so. As I noted earlier "swingstill".Stuart_Dickson said:
MoE stuff Jack. Yes -2 and No -1.JackW said:Might I implore OGH to send out a search party forthwith to determine the location of YES PBers who have inexplicably gone AWOL after the publication of the latest Survation poll.
Whilst a period of justified quiet from them is welcome, indeed necessary from time to time, surely we must be cognisant that these delicate flowers require the company of other deluded plants to maintain the illusion that the YES campaign is week by week sailing seamlessly on to victory.
- "It would leave a referendum result of 56 per cent No to 44 per cent Yes if the undecideds were stripped out."
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-blow-alex-salmond-record-3394387
But of course that is not a viable option for YES.
0 -
The internationalist outlook of English cricket selectors is a heartwarming thing.TheScreamingEagles said:
England cricket selectors have thought so for quite some time.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
0 -
Indeed.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
It is always fascinating to see what Unionists think is a good angle. They invariably go for things that appeal to their core voters. They haven't got a clue what kind of things appeal to the vast numbers of undecided and wavering voters who will decide the outcome of this referendum. In fact, they don't even seem to know who this key group of voters are. The Scottish electorate and its voting behaviour is a total mystery to them.
0 -
I would welcome the ROI back into the fold anytime.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
0 -
It should be a source of great national pride for Scots everywhere, that the England captain that annoyed the Aussies the most, was a Scotsman*Theuniondivvie said:
The internationalist outlook of English cricket selectors is a heartwarming thing.TheScreamingEagles said:
England cricket selectors have thought so for quite some time.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
*Well a Scotsman born in Bombay.0 -
To my knowledge, no firm I have ever worked for has offered unpaid work experience (aside from the day-long get-to-see-the-industry ones). Whether year-long or just summer, they get good rates. One firm even paid accommodation expenses on top. (*)Socrates said:(snippety snip)
I also agree with your points about courses like software engineering. It's important to recognise, however, that it's because these courses are generally new, and thus of lower quality compared to more established courses. There's nothing inherently wrong with doing software engineering over physics - in fact, if you could make them of similar quality, it would probably be better to have more people doing the former.
One problem was that such places sometimes went to children of staff members. Leaving that aside, we sometimes had problems finding people wanting placements even on those terms. They were small (50-500) people companies, in a non-sexy part of the industry - consumer electronics. If we'd been a games company we'd have been overrun.
I think the problem with software engineering is that it is a vast subject, and even the fundamentals are very widespread. How deep down do you go into data algorithms? Do you teach low-level coding, or high level? Do you concentrate just on programming, or the larger software development process? Which languages? Java? C? Modula 2? Assembler? How about web design?
Skimming over any of these can leave fundamental gaps in their knowledge, yet covering everything is rather unlikely for all but the brightest students.
A firm I know has done a deal with a Eastern European university, and that uni has tailored its degree course towards that firm's requirement. The firm has also started a spin-off company in that country to employ those graduates. The firm tried to do this in the UK, and the universities either refused, or wanted a vast payment.
From the uni's point of view, by tying themselves up with a company in the industry, they are teaching their students exactly what the industry needs. The firm gets students with the right skills, which UK unis are not churning out.
(*) There was a funny story where, near the end of a summer placement, a student was found sleeping under his desk two days before he was due to leave. He'd mucked up the dates with the bedsit he'd been renting and, instead of telling anyone, had moved into the office. He was found on the first night by the security guard. Oh, how we laughed ...0 -
Agreed. And that should terrify Unionists.JackW said:Whilst some of the value has gone from the Indy turnout market my McARSE is determinedly forthright in the higher echelons turnout model - presently projected at 79%, where there is still to be made a very decent return for under a six month tie up.
0 -
A genetic as well as an ethnic nationalist?MonikerDiCanio said:
English,Scots,Welsh and Irish. Same people.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/science/05cnd-brits.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Strangely we're just getting into the season where groups of Union flag waving folk march through the streets labouring under the delusion that some of their countrymen are different (and inferior) people.
0 -
A strong performance in the 3Rs and a culture of hard work and grit at school will be all that is needed for further education and the workplace.HurstLlama said:"...making sure universities teach the precise skills and knowledge needed for the business world of 2050. "
Might I respectfully suggest that universities which teach skills required by businesses are not in fact doing the job of a university, a polytechnics or a further education college possibly, but not a university.
Secondly, universities seldom have the staff with the knowledge or experience to understand what specific skills are required by businesses and in any case in some areas those skills change so frequently it will be impossible for a uni course to keep up (Mr. Jessop's field of software engineering is a classic example of changing requirements and methodologies).
0 -
My messages aren't devoid of subtexts, but I hadn't thought of that one! TBF I think it's an inherent problem of direct mail, especially with dated voter ID - I'm sure I've sent stuff to people in the past who chucked it in the bin with a merry laugh. Given their local shortage of able-bodied volunteers and plentiful supply of cash, the Tory strategy is the best available to them, but it's just not very good. Phone canvassing also works up to a point for cash-rich parties, but the shift to frequently-changing mobiles is making that harder than it used to be.Innocent_Abroad said:Antifrank [9.46am]
This is a political website and activists and partisans behave like my granny - they care far more for effectiveness than they do for fairness. For example, the subtext of Nick Palmer's recent post is: "the Tories waste their own money - why trust them with yours?"0 -
I partly agree, but the mechanics example is a poor one. They will not need to know electronic or chemical engineering, because the car's systems will be massively complex, and the risks of doing so large. They will need to be able to connect diagnostic computers and swap out black boxes, along with the traditional oil changes are the like. They will also need to use car-tuning software and the like. But I very much doubt they'll be getting out their chemistry set.Socrates said:
Whether places are called "universities" or "technical colleges" is ultimately a matter of semantics. I certainly agree that we need a lot more vocational elements to our further education. But where I would worry is when we get this mentality that we need to be happy with people just training in the basic vocational jobs we think of that worked a few decades ago. Take being a car mechanic, for instance. That worked fine in the past, but in the future cars will likely be driven by computers and run on a variety of power trains with complicated battery technology. Thus the mechanics of the future will have to know a lot about electronic engineering and chemical engineering, which will almost certainly take high quality classroom experience.JosiasJessop said:
Where I really agree is that we need a skilled workforce; however, that means technical colleges as well as universities. But the problem is that qualifications from institutions other than universities are seen as being distinctly second class.
Take my nephew, who is 16. He is doing A-levels, but his talents lie more in the practical than the rigorously academic. When he is 18 he will probably go to a technical college and come out very skilled - he is already. Yet he will always be looked down on by those who have 'degrees'.
Also, not everyone is suited for FE. We need to ensure schools give these people the skills they need, and not forget about them. But that's probably so obvious it doesn't need saying.
This is probably why HurstLlama had such trouble getting the problems with the car he was borrowing fixed, as he mentioned the other day.0 -
Oh I don't care particularly about that kind of ad hominem. It's a bit pointless really - I'm just an anonymous bloke off the internet, so it's hardly as if checking my privilege is going to transform the argument about who should pay tuitiion fees.Innocent_Abroad said:Antifrank [9.46am] All of us are the same boat, old bean. And, for example, in a discussion about housing our personal circumstances do have a degree of relevance. More generally, those who feel abused can always leave the site.
But what is fair? Was it fair of me to go through university on an industrial scholarship which didn't increase my income but certainly did my father's? Was it fair of him to complain that I had it too easy - he'd had to get his degree at night school? Was it fair of his mother to complain of him adopting me (and my sister) because she knew that such babies were the spawn of the devil? (It did at least get him to buy her a house before he bought one for his own family?)
This is a political website and activists and partisans behave like my granny - they care far more for effectiveness than they do for fairness. For example, the subtext of Nick Palmer's recent post is: "the Tories waste their own money - why trust them with yours?"
I got more irritated when Nick Palmer likened me to a BNP supporter for no better reason than the fact that he doesn't like my argument. The more so because when I justified my views, he had no further response to make.0 -
The ROI football team - have been more than happy to field English and Scots - they paved the way for the England cricket team.TheScreamingEagles said:
It should be a source of great national pride for Scots everywhere, that the England captain that annoyed the Aussies the most, was a Scotsman*Theuniondivvie said:
The internationalist outlook of English cricket selectors is a heartwarming thing.TheScreamingEagles said:
England cricket selectors have thought so for quite some time.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
*Well a Scotsman born in Bombay.
0 -
It's strange that you denigrate flag wavers since you worship the most prominent vulgariser and political exploiter of the St Andrew's cross.Theuniondivvie said:
A genetic as well as an ethnic nationalist?MonikerDiCanio said:
English,Scots,Welsh and Irish. Same people.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/science/05cnd-brits.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Strangely we're just getting into the season where groups of Union flag waving folk march through the streets labouring under the delusion that some of their countrymen are different (and inferior) people.
0 -
What is it census time ?Theuniondivvie said:
A genetic as well as an ethnic nationalist?MonikerDiCanio said:
English,Scots,Welsh and Irish. Same people.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/science/05cnd-brits.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Strangely we're just getting into the season where groups of flag waving folk march through the streets labouring under the delusion that some of their countrymen are different (and inferior) people.
http://www.theirishvoice.com/uploads/1/0/4/4/10442324/oct_2013.pdf
"Following efforts to encourage more people to
‘tick the Irish box,’ supported by a number of Irish
groups in Scotland, an increase of nearly 5000
people with Irish ethnicity was recorded in 2011
compared with the 2001 figure. Today, 54,090
people, or 1 per cent of the population of Scotland,
identify as having Irish ethnic identity"0 -
JJ, the problem is that most (if not all) fresher Software Eng/Comp Sci students have very little idea what part of the industry they want to work in and only really get a view of work at the actual code-face (as opposed to the academic world) when they take their first job.JosiasJessop said:
(snip ..)Socrates said:(snippety snip)
I also agree with your points about courses like software engineering. It's important to recognise, however, that it's because these courses are generally new, and thus of lower quality compared to more established courses. There's nothing inherently wrong with doing software engineering over physics - in fact, if you could make them of similar quality, it would probably be better to have more people doing the former.
I think the problem with software engineering is that it is a vast subject, and even the fundamentals are very widespread. How deep down do you go into data algorithms? Do you teach low-level coding, or high level? Do you concentrate just on programming, or the larger software development process? Which languages? Java? C? Modula 2? Assembler? How about web design?
Skimming over any of these can leave fundamental gaps in their knowledge, yet covering everything is rather unlikely for all but the brightest students.
A firm I know has done a deal with a Eastern European university, and that uni has tailored its degree course towards that firm's requirement. The firm has also started a spin-off company in that country to employ those graduates. The firm tried to do this in the UK, and the universities either refused, or wanted a vast payment.
From the uni's point of view, by tying themselves up with a company in the industry, they are teaching their students exactly what the industry needs. The firm gets students with the right skills, which UK unis are not churning out.
(snip...) ...
Almost by necessity (the company/uni tie in an exception), SoftEng/CompSci courses need to be a broad brush. This isn't really a problem so long as companies who take on graduates have good graduate programmes/mentoring.
I look back at how I was when I graduated to the sort of work I'm now doing almost 20 years later and blush.
That said, personally I would ensure all courses teach C/C++ and drill home the importance of good memory management. Kids are too lazy these days and expect garbage collection!
Mummy, what does Null Pointer mean?0 -
Quite the reverse IMHO.Stuart_Dickson said:
Agreed. And that should terrify Unionists.JackW said:Whilst some of the value has gone from the Indy turnout market my McARSE is determinedly forthright in the higher echelons turnout model - presently projected at 79%, where there is still to be made a very decent return for under a six month tie up.
The McARSE projection factors in a turnout model that over 75% favours a NO vote by 2:1 points
0 -
@JosiasJessop
Computer diagnostics are good at telling the "what", A proper mechanic can tell you the "why". ;-)0 -
You really are a treat. Keep up the good work!JackW said:
Quite the reverse IMHO.Stuart_Dickson said:
Agreed. And that should terrify Unionists.JackW said:Whilst some of the value has gone from the Indy turnout market my McARSE is determinedly forthright in the higher echelons turnout model - presently projected at 79%, where there is still to be made a very decent return for under a six month tie up.
The McARSE projection factors in a turnout model that over 75% favours a NO vote by 2:1 points
0 -
I can remember having a conversation with a mate in about 2003. It was when we were in what felt like a recession, in terms of the climate at work, and this prompted a conversation about house prices. My mate's hypothesis, which I tended to agree with intellectually, was that the effect of sending CSE candidates to university and hanging a loan round their neck would be bearish for house prices over the next 10 years. FTBs coming through would be so festooned with debt from degrees that did not augment their earning skint that they'd be unable to buy FT homeowners' homes off them.anotherDave said:
Repayments look very manageable:Monksfield said:Student loans: what a ticking bomb this is. The majority of ordinary middle and working class graduates are going to be enslaved by debt for most of their working lives. God knows how they will be able to afford to have families etc.
"You only make repayments when your income is over £21,000 a year. … Each month you pay back 9% of any income over £21,000."
https://www.gov.uk/student-finance/repayments
Observationally it would appear that he was right about the near extinction of the UK FTB. But of course he had not appreciated in 2003 what was going to be the true driver of London (hence roUK) house prices over the next 10 years.
The question is whether the ticking time bomb has gone off with a trivial phut or whether it is still ticking.0 -
At least you acknowledge the difference between ethnic and political exploitation, though I fear you'd excuse anything as long as it's draped in the Union flag e.g. a party akin, by your own description, to racists and fascists.MonikerDiCanio said:
It's strange that you denigrate flag wavers since you worship the most prominent vulgariser and political exploiter of the St Andrew's cross.Theuniondivvie said:
A genetic as well as an ethnic nationalist?MonikerDiCanio said:
English,Scots,Welsh and Irish. Same people.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/science/05cnd-brits.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Strangely we're just getting into the season where groups of Union flag waving folk march through the streets labouring under the delusion that some of their countrymen are different (and inferior) people.
0 -
Many of us have been dealing with similar smears on this website for years. Rather than deal with difficult arguments about sensitive topics, left-wingers like to just smear their opponents as racists and xenophobes. For example, when I say there has not been enough attention on non-violent extreme views among a large chunk of the Muslim community, I am called an Islamophobe, no matter how many times I make clear I think a moderate Islam is perfectly compatible with democracy, and that many Muslims are welcome additions to this country.antifrank said:
Oh I don't care particularly about that kind of ad hominem. It's a bit pointless really - I'm just an anonymous bloke off the internet, so it's hardly as if checking my privilege is going to transform the argument about who should pay tuitiion fees.Innocent_Abroad said:Antifrank [9.46am] All of us are the same boat, old bean. And, for example, in a discussion about housing our personal circumstances do have a degree of relevance. More generally, those who feel abused can always leave the site.
But what is fair? Was it fair of me to go through university on an industrial scholarship which didn't increase my income but certainly did my father's? Was it fair of him to complain that I had it too easy - he'd had to get his degree at night school? Was it fair of his mother to complain of him adopting me (and my sister) because she knew that such babies were the spawn of the devil? (It did at least get him to buy her a house before he bought one for his own family?)
This is a political website and activists and partisans behave like my granny - they care far more for effectiveness than they do for fairness. For example, the subtext of Nick Palmer's recent post is: "the Tories waste their own money - why trust them with yours?"
I got more irritated when Nick Palmer likened me to a BNP supporter for no better reason than the fact that he doesn't like my argument. The more so because when I justified my views, he had no further response to make.0 -
It's the start of the Masters today.
Forget your worries. Forget even your politics, for four days of, we hope, sublime golf at it's best.0 -
Thanks to the PB Golfing Brains Trust for their overnight steers in the direction of the US Masters.
I've opted for a decent nibble in favour of Ian Poulter each way, five places, and widely available @ 66/10 -
I actually suspect that, without significant improvement in knowledge of these things, the local garage might die out, as car repair shifts back to the manufacturers.JosiasJessop said:
I partly agree, but the mechanics example is a poor one. They will not need to know electronic or chemical engineering, because the car's systems will be massively complex, and the risks of doing so large. They will need to be able to connect diagnostic computers and swap out black boxes, along with the traditional oil changes are the like. They will also need to use car-tuning software and the like. But I very much doubt they'll be getting out their chemistry set.Socrates said:
Whether places are called "universities" or "technical colleges" is ultimately a matter of semantics. I certainly agree that we need a lot more vocational elements to our further education. But where I would worry is when we get this mentality that we need to be happy with people just training in the basic vocational jobs we think of that worked a few decades ago. Take being a car mechanic, for instance. That worked fine in the past, but in the future cars will likely be driven by computers and run on a variety of power trains with complicated battery technology. Thus the mechanics of the future will have to know a lot about electronic engineering and chemical engineering, which will almost certainly take high quality classroom experience.JosiasJessop said:
Where I really agree is that we need a skilled workforce; however, that means technical colleges as well as universities. But the problem is that qualifications from institutions other than universities are seen as being distinctly second class.
Take my nephew, who is 16. He is doing A-levels, but his talents lie more in the practical than the rigorously academic. When he is 18 he will probably go to a technical college and come out very skilled - he is already. Yet he will always be looked down on by those who have 'degrees'.
Also, not everyone is suited for FE. We need to ensure schools give these people the skills they need, and not forget about them. But that's probably so obvious it doesn't need saying.
This is probably why HurstLlama had such trouble getting the problems with the car he was borrowing fixed, as he mentioned the other day.0 -
I suggest you alter your flag waving avatar. That glorious flag doesn't belong to your political faction.Theuniondivvie said:
At least you acknowledge the difference between ethnic and political exploitation, though I fear you'd excuse anything as long as it's draped in the Union flag e.g. a party akin, by your own description, to racists and fascists.MonikerDiCanio said:
It's strange that you denigrate flag wavers since you worship the most prominent vulgariser and political exploiter of the St Andrew's cross.Theuniondivvie said:
A genetic as well as an ethnic nationalist?MonikerDiCanio said:
English,Scots,Welsh and Irish. Same people.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/science/05cnd-brits.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Strangely we're just getting into the season where groups of Union flag waving folk march through the streets labouring under the delusion that some of their countrymen are different (and inferior) people.
0 -
O/T
My masters e/w 4 - Rose (40), Dubisson (130). Stenson (40) and Oleson (180)0 -
The vulgarity of the British Nationalists knows no bounds. Mind you, the more they wrap themselves in the flag, the deeper they dig the hole they are in.Theuniondivvie said:
A genetic as well as an ethnic nationalist?MonikerDiCanio said:
English,Scots,Welsh and Irish. Same people.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/science/05cnd-brits.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Strangely we're just getting into the season where groups of Union flag waving folk march through the streets labouring under the delusion that some of their countrymen are different (and inferior) people.
The fact that the Orange Order, the BNP and the SDL are campaigning on the same side at the Labour Party has not gone unnoticed in parts of the country with high numbers of swing voters.0 -
Ian Poulter has sadly, been dressing down for months now, and is beginning to look almost like all the rest. Where is the old Poulter, who's slacks were so dazzling that one needed to wear sunglasses to get a proper peep at?JackW said:Thanks to the PB Golfing Brains Trust for their overnight steers in the direction of the US Masters.
I've opted for a decent nibble in favour of Ian Poulter each way, five places, and widely available @ 66/1
May come in the top ten.
0 -
@JosiasJessop
Yes, I agree with much of that. We need more business involvement in designing university courses, and we also need to do a much MUCH better job of communicating information about the structure of the business world to undergraduates. It's amazing how little they know, and career counsellors have usually not ever lived in the business world so can't help them.
I also increasingly think we need to have a much better system for people to go back to uni in their late 20s once they've experienced the business work force a bit. Maybe you could have two years of generic coverage up front, with another year of specialisation about four years later.0 -
Agree that trying to draw conclusions from small poll movements on a daily basis is a waste of time. Too small a sampleantifrank said:Also from the Polling Observatory piece linked to below, some important observations about how public opinion moves:
"Those who make a habit of following political stories on newspaper front pages – or via highly charged political Twitter feeds easily forget that most voters are paying little to no attention to the events which are filling their days. Even major political set-pieces like the budget, Prime Minister’s Questions, or the Clegg-Farage debates barely register with many voters. Indeed, most of the population are at work during PMQs, unable to tune in to a television or a politics live blog, while the vast majority had much more interest in the latest goings on in Albert Square or Coronation Street than the duelling rhetoric of Nigel and Nick. Even economic news, which is of more immediate interest to many voters, tends to trickle down as a gradual process of diffusion, either in a general sense among the public that things are getting better or worse for the country or more directly as people feel better about the pounds in their pocket, and more eager to spend them. In practice, the fallout from political events is usually slow and sluggish, as it takes a long time for voters to notice and respond to things which are a long way from their everyday concerns.
No further comment required. I won't even highlight the bit about the Clegg-Farage debate.
But have to say, you called that debate wrong. It was 4th in the Populus end of week poll of News stories the public had noticed.0 -
I'd go further and teach assembler as well. Preferably ARM. ;-) Even if there are abstraction layers between the assembler and the work they'll be doing in industry, knowing the way those abstraction layers work can be vital. And to learn assembler, you need to learn the underlying system and how to use it efficiently and to best effect. At the very least, they should be able to write a simple device driver in a language such as C, or twiddle some GPIOs or an I2C bus.DaemonBarber said:
JJ, the problem is that most (if not all) fresher Software Eng/Comp Sci students have very little idea what part of the industry they want to work in and only really get a view of work at the actual code-face (as opposed to the academic world) when they take their first job.
Almost by necessity (the company/uni tie in an exception), SoftEng/CompSci courses need to be a broad brush. This isn't really a problem so long as companies who take on graduates have good graduate programmes/mentoring.
I look back at how I was when I graduated to the sort of work I'm now doing almost 20 years later and blush.
That said, personally I would ensure all courses teach C/C++ and drill home the importance of good memory management. Kids are too lazy these days and expect garbage collection!
Mummy, what does Null Pointer mean?
The Null pointer example you cite is very good, and Null pointers catch even experienced programmers out. Ahem.
But that would be of little use to someone who, after graduating, goes onto program a large international company's website and in the first six months just changes the colour of one button. Yes, this happened, and she sent me a link to show me the fruit of her endeavours ...
I did loads of graduate mentoring. The problem is that a small firm cannot afford to teach skills the university should be teaching, especially when there is an already steep learning curve to get to know the company's processes and technology. It'd be like a newspaper having to teach it's graduate journalists the difference between verbs and nouns.
Perhaps the solution is to split soft eng / comp sci into different, more focussed degrees. Then again, even today I get people thinking that I work in I.T. when I say I'm a software engineer...0 -
One aims to please.Stuart_Dickson said:
You really are a treat. Keep up the good work!JackW said:
Quite the reverse IMHO.Stuart_Dickson said:
Agreed. And that should terrify Unionists.JackW said:Whilst some of the value has gone from the Indy turnout market my McARSE is determinedly forthright in the higher echelons turnout model - presently projected at 79%, where there is still to be made a very decent return for under a six month tie up.
The McARSE projection factors in a turnout model that over 75% favours a NO vote by 2:1 points
I consider it my unbounded duty to ensure my fellow countrymen, however politically deluded they might be, are not short of a smile. Especially so those that are riding for a terrible and damaging fall.
0 -
So 1690 bad, 1314 good ? So difficult to keep up..Stuart_Dickson said:
The vulgarity of the British Nationalists knows no bounds. Mind you, the more they wrap themselves in the flag, the deeper they dig the hole they are in.Theuniondivvie said:
A genetic as well as an ethnic nationalist?MonikerDiCanio said:
English,Scots,Welsh and Irish. Same people.Theuniondivvie said:
Unionist cites piece by Unionist explaining why the Union is attractive to Unionists. Not that interesting.TGOHF said:Interesting read..
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9181991/the-british-clan/
"Scots and English are the same people, with different accents. Why pretend otherwise?
Why are unionists so scared to talk about what unites us?
5 CommentsChris Deerin 12 April 2014"
'Irish and English are the same people, with different accents.'
Discuss.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/05/science/05cnd-brits.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Strangely we're just getting into the season where groups of Union flag waving folk march through the streets labouring under the delusion that some of their countrymen are different (and inferior) people.
The fact that the Orange Order, the BNP and the SDL are campaigning on the same side at the Labour Party has not gone unnoticed in parts of the country with high numbers of swing voters.0 -
I'm not as vexillologically obsessed as you sunset imperialists, the flag belongs to anyone who wants to use it. Seems to be the 'I'm a proud Scot but' brigade that are keenest to wrap themselves in the saltire.MonikerDiCanio said:
I suggest you alter your flag waving avatar. That glorious flag doesn't belong to your political faction.
0 -
Strangely Bettertogether are pretending not to notice.Stuart_Dickson said:
The fact that the Orange Order, the BNP and the SDL are campaigning on the same side at the Labour Party has not gone unnoticed in parts of the country with high numbers of swing voters.
0 -
@Socrates
Take your car to a main dealer for a P0120 fault code and pay £160+ to have the MAF sensor "fixed".... Or take it to a mech. and have him sort out the wiring plug for a permanent repair for a few quid.
Dealerships employ techs not mechs.
(the code says the air temp sensor is faulty, but the problem is often due to the plug)0 -
The trend in this case is not your friend....Stuart_Dickson said:
MoE stuff Jack. Yes -2 and No -1.
Maybe the wave the SNP rode over London telling Scotland it wouldn't have a currency union has finally broken on the shore?
There's only so much outrage even Alex Salmond can body surf on in Scotland.....
0 -
Actually, I think the cost of equipment will kill local garages. You need hardware to plug into a car to interrogate its systems, and software to tell you what it says. Manufacturers generally do not give this out for free (I believe one hot hatch manufacturer at least has released some code to allow people to tune their cars).Socrates said:
I actually suspect that, without significant improvement in knowledge of these things, the local garage might die out, as car repair shifts back to the manufacturers.JosiasJessop said:
I partly agree, but the mechanics example is a poor one. They will not need to know electronic or chemical engineering, because the car's systems will be massively complex, and the risks of doing so large. They will need to be able to connect diagnostic computers and swap out black boxes, along with the traditional oil changes are the like. They will also need to use car-tuning software and the like. But I very much doubt they'll be getting out their chemistry set.
This is probably why HurstLlama had such trouble getting the problems with the car he was borrowing fixed, as he mentioned the other day.
Then you need to buy the replacement black boxes: when my dad's Jeep had problems a few years back, all they did to fix it was remove one electronics box and replace it with another. It was a half-hour job, including test.
As cars get more complex, it will become increasingly hard for non-aligned repair shops to deal with them. But perhaps I'm being too negative.0 -
Perhaps not every company can or should recruit graduates.JosiasJessop said:
(snip)DaemonBarber said:
JJ, the problem is that most (if not all) fresher Software Eng/Comp Sci students have very little idea what part of the industry they want to work in and only really get a view of work at the actual code-face (as opposed to the academic world) when they take their first job.
Almost by necessity (the company/uni tie in an exception), SoftEng/CompSci courses need to be a broad brush. This isn't really a problem so long as companies who take on graduates have good graduate programmes/mentoring.
I look back at how I was when I graduated to the sort of work I'm now doing almost 20 years later and blush.
That said, personally I would ensure all courses teach C/C++ and drill home the importance of good memory management. Kids are too lazy these days and expect garbage collection!
Mummy, what does Null Pointer mean?
I did loads of graduate mentoring. The problem is that a small firm cannot afford to teach skills the university should be teaching, especially when there is an already steep learning curve to get to know the company's processes and technology. It'd be like a newspaper having to teach it's graduate journalists the difference between verbs and nouns.
Perhaps the solution is to split soft eng / comp sci into different, more focussed degrees. Then again, even today I get people thinking that I work in I.T. when I say I'm a software engineer...
But overall I agree with the thrust that more actual coding skills need to be taught at uni.
But I think the rot sets in much earlier. For example, much of the 1st year on my course was spent teaching maths that should already have been expected (with the exception perhaps of discrete mathematics).
An aside, I was having a clear-out of some stuff yesterday and came across a report i'd submitted for a digital image processing assignment way back in my 2nd year. We'd been asked to take 2 images and by applying a series of transforms produce a new composite. All written in C. We had to submit a printout of the source code and the final binary on disk (which was still attached to the report). I got a good mark for that one too.
0
