Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

The Tory irrelevance continues – politicalbetting.com

12467

Comments

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,327

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    Russia invaded Ukraine. Peace through the defeat of Russia seems the best, and most ethical, result
    Anything short of Russia achieving its original objectives counts as a defeat. Unless you think that Ukraine and the West's war aim should be unconditional surrender then you have to accept a deal with Russia at some point.
    Russia can end the war immediately by withdrawing to the 1991 border, a border it recognised that year.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,355
    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Worth quoting the middle passage you have missed out:

    Everyone is afraid that Trump will sell Ukraine out, but I don’t think it will happen.

    Neither Russia nor Ukraine will like the conditions of peace, but Ukraine will be able to move on and develop 9/

    Ukraine is in a much better condition than Finland after the Soviets imposed reparations on it, political conditions, and took its territory. And Finland is a winner in that war because people in Finland today leave much better than in Russia 10/

    So, this assumption that Trump will be able to secure conditions for Ukraine that will allow it to develop and stay independent is why I believe Trump is a better deal than Biden 11/

    If this assumption is wrong, then, of course course, my analysis is wrong.

    But what is true that there is no alternative to Trump now.
    There is no world in which Trump can be convinced, by words, to act differently.


    I agree with that last point.

    But his assumption is a nonsense. Trump doesn't care about Ukraine and he admires Putin as he admires Russia. All of his actions have either been designed to further Putin's agenda or so wilfully stupid even British Gas would fire him for incompetence.

    The whole analysis is therefore, on his own admission, wrong. It's wishful thinking and smoke and mirrors. No wonder he's an economist.
    Just delusional stuff if he thinks it unlikely Trump would sell out Ukraine.

    And there's a clear alternative to Trump: Europe getting its act together.

    Did you read his first five points?

    1. The alternative - Biden’s strategy - has been more damaging for Ukraine

    It focused on escalation management and failed. No path to victory, no path to peace. No talks with Putin. No timely sufficient weapons for a real counteroffensive

    2.U.S. willingness to support Ukraine has been steadily declining

    Even in 2024, under Biden, it was nearly impossible to pass the supplemental aid package. The drop in support is real—regardless of how unpopular that fact may be

    3. The Ukraine mobilization problem is real

    The casualty rates while significantly lower than in Russia are substantive. Ukraine is unwilling to sacrifice its people the way Russia can. It is exactly why it is different from Russia - Ukraine values life

    4. The Ukraine immigration problem is real

    Families split apart, in Ukraine and abroad. Some high human capital left. It is still possible for people to return, but another two-three years of war will force Ukrainian refugees integrate in Europe and elsewhere for good

    5. The chances of post war economic recovery

    As the war takes a bigger tall, it becomes more difficult to maintain the economy. The critical economic capabilities become eroded, making it more difficult and lengthier for Ukraine economy to rebuild after war
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,355

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    Russia invaded Ukraine. Peace through the defeat of Russia seems the best, and most ethical, result
    Anything short of Russia achieving its original objectives counts as a defeat. Unless you think that Ukraine and the West's war aim should be unconditional surrender then you have to accept a deal with Russia at some point.
    Russia can end the war immediately by withdrawing to the 1991 border, a border it recognised that year.
    No it can't. If Russia unilaterally pulled back to the 1991 borders, would all Western sanctions be lifted? Would demands for reparations end? There is no unilateral resolution to this.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,723
    edited March 23

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?
    It seems odd to phrase this in terms of a “corrupt public sector”, but we should look at who was in charge of education and immigration over that period. Oh. It was the Conservative Party. Let’s pull some of the relevant ministers up for questioning by the media and by Parliament, for starters.
    Do you really think that ministers knew this was going on and didn’t stop it?

    Or are you just trying to deflect attention from your public sector colleagues?
    Actually, the blame for this higher education loans and grants scandal/corruption lies squarely with the 'universities' who grant the places to the franchises, rather than with government or ministers. The universities are wholly responsible for the quality assurance (attendance, teaching quality, assessment practices etc.) of the franchises, and they have been failing to carry out proper quality checks, choosing just to rake in the money instead. Civil servants may not have had sufficient oversight, but frankly they should not be expected to know what is going on at Oxford Business College - it's the lead institution's responsibility.
    I strongly suspect it goes way beyond universities as well - similar issues can be found in further education franchises, and in language schools.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,461

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    Russia invaded Ukraine. Peace through the defeat of Russia seems the best, and most ethical, result
    Anything short of Russia achieving its original objectives counts as a defeat. Unless you think that Ukraine and the West's war aim should be unconditional surrender then you have to accept a deal with Russia at some point.
    Russia can end the war immediately by withdrawing to the 1991 border, a border it recognised that year.
    No it can't. If Russia unilaterally pulled back to the 1991 borders, would all Western sanctions be lifted? Would demands for reparations end? There is no unilateral resolution to this.
    You make Russia sound like Hamas.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,327

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    Russia invaded Ukraine. Peace through the defeat of Russia seems the best, and most ethical, result
    Anything short of Russia achieving its original objectives counts as a defeat. Unless you think that Ukraine and the West's war aim should be unconditional surrender then you have to accept a deal with Russia at some point.
    Russia can end the war immediately by withdrawing to the 1991 border, a border it recognised that year.
    No it can't. If Russia unilaterally pulled back to the 1991 borders, would all Western sanctions be lifted? Would demands for reparations end? There is no unilateral resolution to this.
    Yes, they would. You are just making excuses for the maniac Putin.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,997

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Worth quoting the middle passage you have missed out:

    Everyone is afraid that Trump will sell Ukraine out, but I don’t think it will happen.

    Neither Russia nor Ukraine will like the conditions of peace, but Ukraine will be able to move on and develop 9/

    Ukraine is in a much better condition than Finland after the Soviets imposed reparations on it, political conditions, and took its territory. And Finland is a winner in that war because people in Finland today leave much better than in Russia 10/

    So, this assumption that Trump will be able to secure conditions for Ukraine that will allow it to develop and stay independent is why I believe Trump is a better deal than Biden 11/

    If this assumption is wrong, then, of course course, my analysis is wrong.

    But what is true that there is no alternative to Trump now.
    There is no world in which Trump can be convinced, by words, to act differently.


    I agree with that last point.

    But his assumption is a nonsense. Trump doesn't care about Ukraine and he admires Putin as he admires Russia. All of his actions have either been designed to further Putin's agenda or so wilfully stupid even British Gas would fire him for incompetence.

    The whole analysis is therefore, on his own admission, wrong. It's wishful thinking and smoke and mirrors. No wonder he's an economist.
    Just delusional stuff if he thinks it unlikely Trump would sell out Ukraine.

    And there's a clear alternative to Trump: Europe getting its act together.

    Did you read his first five points?

    1. The alternative - Biden’s strategy - has been more damaging for Ukraine

    It focused on escalation management and failed. No path to victory, no path to peace. No talks with Putin. No timely sufficient weapons for a real counteroffensive

    2.U.S. willingness to support Ukraine has been steadily declining

    Even in 2024, under Biden, it was nearly impossible to pass the supplemental aid package. The drop in support is real—regardless of how unpopular that fact may be

    This is one of the ways his analysis is deeply flawed. Yes, there was a drop in support for Ukraine under Biden. Why? Because the Republican controlled House of Representatives kept blocking aid packages on Trump's orders.

    He has already, therefore, sold Ukraine out *even in Mylovanov's own analysis.*
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,997

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    Russia invaded Ukraine. Peace through the defeat of Russia seems the best, and most ethical, result
    Anything short of Russia achieving its original objectives counts as a defeat. Unless you think that Ukraine and the West's war aim should be unconditional surrender then you have to accept a deal with Russia at some point.
    Russia can end the war immediately by withdrawing to the 1991 border, a border it recognised that year.
    No it can't. If Russia unilaterally pulled back to the 1991 borders, would all Western sanctions be lifted? Would demands for reparations end? There is no unilateral resolution to this.
    Yes, they would. You are just making excuses for the maniac Putin.
    I don't think demands for reparations would end. But yes, I would be very surprised if sanctions were not lifted. Goodness knows it was difficult and controversial enough to impose them given how few people were willing to take Putin seriously.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,355
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Worth quoting the middle passage you have missed out:

    Everyone is afraid that Trump will sell Ukraine out, but I don’t think it will happen.

    Neither Russia nor Ukraine will like the conditions of peace, but Ukraine will be able to move on and develop 9/

    Ukraine is in a much better condition than Finland after the Soviets imposed reparations on it, political conditions, and took its territory. And Finland is a winner in that war because people in Finland today leave much better than in Russia 10/

    So, this assumption that Trump will be able to secure conditions for Ukraine that will allow it to develop and stay independent is why I believe Trump is a better deal than Biden 11/

    If this assumption is wrong, then, of course course, my analysis is wrong.

    But what is true that there is no alternative to Trump now.
    There is no world in which Trump can be convinced, by words, to act differently.


    I agree with that last point.

    But his assumption is a nonsense. Trump doesn't care about Ukraine and he admires Putin as he admires Russia. All of his actions have either been designed to further Putin's agenda or so wilfully stupid even British Gas would fire him for incompetence.

    The whole analysis is therefore, on his own admission, wrong. It's wishful thinking and smoke and mirrors. No wonder he's an economist.
    Just delusional stuff if he thinks it unlikely Trump would sell out Ukraine.

    And there's a clear alternative to Trump: Europe getting its act together.

    Did you read his first five points?

    1. The alternative - Biden’s strategy - has been more damaging for Ukraine

    It focused on escalation management and failed. No path to victory, no path to peace. No talks with Putin. No timely sufficient weapons for a real counteroffensive

    2.U.S. willingness to support Ukraine has been steadily declining

    Even in 2024, under Biden, it was nearly impossible to pass the supplemental aid package. The drop in support is real—regardless of how unpopular that fact may be

    This is one of the ways his analysis is deeply flawed. Yes, there was a drop in support for Ukraine under Biden. Why? Because the Republican controlled House of Representatives kept blocking aid packages on Trump's orders.

    He has already, therefore, sold Ukraine out *even in Mylovanov's own analysis.*
    As he pointed out, even the maximalist variant of US/Western support wasn't based on a strategy to defeat Russia militarily but prioritised escalation management.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,066

    Andy_JS said:

    Growth and one term latest:



    ‪John Morgan‬ ‪@johnmorgan3.bsky.social‬

    The Alan Turing Institute, the UK's national institute for data science and AI, is shutting down around a quarter of its research projects.

    Via
    @annamckie.bsky.social
    . www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-r...

    What's the reason? I can't read the article.
    Me neither.
    General funding cuts I suppose.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,243
    edited March 23
    First Conservative leaflet through the door for the upcoming locals today. Our division is LibDem-held but was Tory as recently as 2017.

    In recent years the Tories have fielded credible candidates. One time it was the local chair of the CPRE, the next a popular local firefighter, both of whom lived in the town.

    This year all they can find is an anti-HS2 activist who lives 20 miles away... for the sort of seat they desperately need if they're going to make any inroads back into local government. "Irrelevance" is about right.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,038

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Worth quoting the middle passage you have missed out:

    Everyone is afraid that Trump will sell Ukraine out, but I don’t think it will happen.

    Neither Russia nor Ukraine will like the conditions of peace, but Ukraine will be able to move on and develop 9/

    Ukraine is in a much better condition than Finland after the Soviets imposed reparations on it, political conditions, and took its territory. And Finland is a winner in that war because people in Finland today leave much better than in Russia 10/

    So, this assumption that Trump will be able to secure conditions for Ukraine that will allow it to develop and stay independent is why I believe Trump is a better deal than Biden 11/

    If this assumption is wrong, then, of course course, my analysis is wrong.

    But what is true that there is no alternative to Trump now.
    There is no world in which Trump can be convinced, by words, to act differently.


    I agree with that last point.

    But his assumption is a nonsense. Trump doesn't care about Ukraine and he admires Putin as he admires Russia. All of his actions have either been designed to further Putin's agenda or so wilfully stupid even British Gas would fire him for incompetence.

    The whole analysis is therefore, on his own admission, wrong. It's wishful thinking and smoke and mirrors. No wonder he's an economist.
    Just delusional stuff if he thinks it unlikely Trump would sell out Ukraine.

    And there's a clear alternative to Trump: Europe getting its act together.

    Did you read his first five points?

    1. The alternative - Biden’s strategy - has been more damaging for Ukraine

    It focused on escalation management and failed. No path to victory, no path to peace. No talks with Putin. No timely sufficient weapons for a real counteroffensive

    2.U.S. willingness to support Ukraine has been steadily declining

    Even in 2024, under Biden, it was nearly impossible to pass the supplemental aid package. The drop in support is real—regardless of how unpopular that fact may be

    3. The Ukraine mobilization problem is real

    The casualty rates while significantly lower than in Russia are substantive. Ukraine is unwilling to sacrifice its people the way Russia can. It is exactly why it is different from Russia - Ukraine values life

    4. The Ukraine immigration problem is real

    Families split apart, in Ukraine and abroad. Some high human capital left. It is still possible for people to return, but another two-three years of war will force Ukrainian refugees integrate in Europe and elsewhere for good

    5. The chances of post war economic recovery

    As the war takes a bigger tall, it becomes more difficult to maintain the economy. The critical economic capabilities become eroded, making it more difficult and lengthier for Ukraine economy to rebuild after war
    It's odd how these appeasers all look at Ukraine, and they don't apply the same harsh thinking to Russia's situation.

    Addressing his points directly:
    1) More damaging than what? Handing Putin a victory?
    2) It is declining because of stupid Americans who have suddenly decided they quite like Putin and fascism.
    3) Yes, but so is Russia's.
    4) Yes, but so is Russia's.
    5) Which is a reason to continue support for Ukraine, not Russia.

    If you think "Biden's policy was a failure," then the answer is to support Ukraine more, and not support Russia.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,997
    edited March 23

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Worth quoting the middle passage you have missed out:

    Everyone is afraid that Trump will sell Ukraine out, but I don’t think it will happen.

    Neither Russia nor Ukraine will like the conditions of peace, but Ukraine will be able to move on and develop 9/

    Ukraine is in a much better condition than Finland after the Soviets imposed reparations on it, political conditions, and took its territory. And Finland is a winner in that war because people in Finland today leave much better than in Russia 10/

    So, this assumption that Trump will be able to secure conditions for Ukraine that will allow it to develop and stay independent is why I believe Trump is a better deal than Biden 11/

    If this assumption is wrong, then, of course course, my analysis is wrong.

    But what is true that there is no alternative to Trump now.
    There is no world in which Trump can be convinced, by words, to act differently.


    I agree with that last point.

    But his assumption is a nonsense. Trump doesn't care about Ukraine and he admires Putin as he admires Russia. All of his actions have either been designed to further Putin's agenda or so wilfully stupid even British Gas would fire him for incompetence.

    The whole analysis is therefore, on his own admission, wrong. It's wishful thinking and smoke and mirrors. No wonder he's an economist.
    Just delusional stuff if he thinks it unlikely Trump would sell out Ukraine.

    And there's a clear alternative to Trump: Europe getting its act together.

    Did you read his first five points?

    1. The alternative - Biden’s strategy - has been more damaging for Ukraine

    It focused on escalation management and failed. No path to victory, no path to peace. No talks with Putin. No timely sufficient weapons for a real counteroffensive

    2.U.S. willingness to support Ukraine has been steadily declining

    Even in 2024, under Biden, it was nearly impossible to pass the supplemental aid package. The drop in support is real—regardless of how unpopular that fact may be

    This is one of the ways his analysis is deeply flawed. Yes, there was a drop in support for Ukraine under Biden. Why? Because the Republican controlled House of Representatives kept blocking aid packages on Trump's orders.

    He has already, therefore, sold Ukraine out *even in Mylovanov's own analysis.*
    As he pointed out, even the maximalist variant of US/Western support wasn't based on a strategy to defeat Russia militarily but prioritised escalation management.
    So what? Because that isn't the hypothesis.

    The hypothesis is that Trump can bring a bearable peace to Ukraine. For this he puts forward a number of statements, several of which as I have demonstrated are wrong.

    His hypothesis therefore is on his own admission wrong. It is clearly wishful thinking. And while I have every sympathy for his wishful thinking, the fact is that it's still wishful thinking.

    It is simply not plausible to suggest Trump will bring any sort of lasting or tenable peace to Ukraine based on his actions so far. The only real hope of that is if Putin unexpectedly does something to upset him (e.g. publicly saying he has a small dick) and that causes him to do a 180 degree turn.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,355

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Worth quoting the middle passage you have missed out:

    Everyone is afraid that Trump will sell Ukraine out, but I don’t think it will happen.

    Neither Russia nor Ukraine will like the conditions of peace, but Ukraine will be able to move on and develop 9/

    Ukraine is in a much better condition than Finland after the Soviets imposed reparations on it, political conditions, and took its territory. And Finland is a winner in that war because people in Finland today leave much better than in Russia 10/

    So, this assumption that Trump will be able to secure conditions for Ukraine that will allow it to develop and stay independent is why I believe Trump is a better deal than Biden 11/

    If this assumption is wrong, then, of course course, my analysis is wrong.

    But what is true that there is no alternative to Trump now.
    There is no world in which Trump can be convinced, by words, to act differently.


    I agree with that last point.

    But his assumption is a nonsense. Trump doesn't care about Ukraine and he admires Putin as he admires Russia. All of his actions have either been designed to further Putin's agenda or so wilfully stupid even British Gas would fire him for incompetence.

    The whole analysis is therefore, on his own admission, wrong. It's wishful thinking and smoke and mirrors. No wonder he's an economist.
    Just delusional stuff if he thinks it unlikely Trump would sell out Ukraine.

    And there's a clear alternative to Trump: Europe getting its act together.

    Did you read his first five points?

    1. The alternative - Biden’s strategy - has been more damaging for Ukraine

    It focused on escalation management and failed. No path to victory, no path to peace. No talks with Putin. No timely sufficient weapons for a real counteroffensive

    2.U.S. willingness to support Ukraine has been steadily declining

    Even in 2024, under Biden, it was nearly impossible to pass the supplemental aid package. The drop in support is real—regardless of how unpopular that fact may be

    3. The Ukraine mobilization problem is real

    The casualty rates while significantly lower than in Russia are substantive. Ukraine is unwilling to sacrifice its people the way Russia can. It is exactly why it is different from Russia - Ukraine values life

    4. The Ukraine immigration problem is real

    Families split apart, in Ukraine and abroad. Some high human capital left. It is still possible for people to return, but another two-three years of war will force Ukrainian refugees integrate in Europe and elsewhere for good

    5. The chances of post war economic recovery

    As the war takes a bigger tall, it becomes more difficult to maintain the economy. The critical economic capabilities become eroded, making it more difficult and lengthier for Ukraine economy to rebuild after war
    It's odd how these appeasers all look at Ukraine, and they don't apply the same harsh thinking to Russia's situation.

    Addressing his points directly:
    1) More damaging than what? Handing Putin a victory?
    2) It is declining because of stupid Americans who have suddenly decided they quite like Putin and fascism.
    3) Yes, but so is Russia's.
    4) Yes, but so is Russia's.
    5) Which is a reason to continue support for Ukraine, not Russia.

    If you think "Biden's policy was a failure," then the answer is to support Ukraine more, and not support Russia.
    Because he cares about Ukraine, not Russia. You have the luxury of not being directly affected by the outcome either way so can afford to virtue signal.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,491
    edited March 23

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    The problem is the dynamics. Trump needs a deal but the only way Putin also needs a deal is if Trump applies military pressure which Putin knows he won't. So what you've got is someone not bothered about a deal negotiating with somebody who simply has to have one. This leads to one of two things. No deal at all or a deal that's very very good for the person who wasn't that fussed. Therefore everybody who supports Ukraine should be hoping there is no deal.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,038

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    It doesn't matter to you, obviously.
    Using them as a proxy doesn't matter to me. Correct.
    Don't lie. You don't care about Ukraine and Ukrainians *at all*. It's f-all to do with them being a 'proxy' or not (and there would have been less chance of that if the GOP had actually been vocally pro-Ukraine, rather than anti it).

    You want to sell Ukraine and Ukrainians out to an imperialist, fascist state, because... well, I daresay you have your reasons. Bad ones.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,327
    stodge said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?
    The overall number of Romanian-born people in the UK looks based on the 2021 census which claimed 557,000 (approx). Apparently Romanian is now the UK's third language after English and Polish. Certainly in Newham there are a lot of Romanians who have established a community here.
    At the 2021 Census in England: 590,983 Polish-speakers (1.08%), 465,933 Romanian-speakers (0.85%).
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,485

    Thread from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    this assumption that Trump will be able to secure conditions for Ukraine that will allow it to develop and stay independent is why I believe Trump is a better deal than Biden. If this assumption is wrong, then, of course, my analysis is wrong.

    But what is true that there is no alternative to Trump now. There is no world in which Trump can be convinced, by words, to act differently.


    That’s the strongest support you can find for your side? Pathetic!
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,038
    It would be interesting to think how @williamglenn would have reacted in 1938 and 1939, if he was American.

    One thing is clear: he would not have supported Britain.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,327

    It would be interesting to think how @williamglenn would have reacted in 1938 and 1939, if he was American.

    One thing is clear: he would not have supported Britain.

    Or would he make a "deal" with Putin if the latter invaded Alaska?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,038

    Nigelb said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Worth quoting the middle passage you have missed out:

    Everyone is afraid that Trump will sell Ukraine out, but I don’t think it will happen.

    Neither Russia nor Ukraine will like the conditions of peace, but Ukraine will be able to move on and develop 9/

    Ukraine is in a much better condition than Finland after the Soviets imposed reparations on it, political conditions, and took its territory. And Finland is a winner in that war because people in Finland today leave much better than in Russia 10/

    So, this assumption that Trump will be able to secure conditions for Ukraine that will allow it to develop and stay independent is why I believe Trump is a better deal than Biden 11/

    If this assumption is wrong, then, of course course, my analysis is wrong.

    But what is true that there is no alternative to Trump now.
    There is no world in which Trump can be convinced, by words, to act differently.


    I agree with that last point.

    But his assumption is a nonsense. Trump doesn't care about Ukraine and he admires Putin as he admires Russia. All of his actions have either been designed to further Putin's agenda or so wilfully stupid even British Gas would fire him for incompetence.

    The whole analysis is therefore, on his own admission, wrong. It's wishful thinking and smoke and mirrors. No wonder he's an economist.
    Just delusional stuff if he thinks it unlikely Trump would sell out Ukraine.

    And there's a clear alternative to Trump: Europe getting its act together.

    Did you read his first five points?

    1. The alternative - Biden’s strategy - has been more damaging for Ukraine

    It focused on escalation management and failed. No path to victory, no path to peace. No talks with Putin. No timely sufficient weapons for a real counteroffensive

    2.U.S. willingness to support Ukraine has been steadily declining

    Even in 2024, under Biden, it was nearly impossible to pass the supplemental aid package. The drop in support is real—regardless of how unpopular that fact may be

    3. The Ukraine mobilization problem is real

    The casualty rates while significantly lower than in Russia are substantive. Ukraine is unwilling to sacrifice its people the way Russia can. It is exactly why it is different from Russia - Ukraine values life

    4. The Ukraine immigration problem is real

    Families split apart, in Ukraine and abroad. Some high human capital left. It is still possible for people to return, but another two-three years of war will force Ukrainian refugees integrate in Europe and elsewhere for good

    5. The chances of post war economic recovery

    As the war takes a bigger tall, it becomes more difficult to maintain the economy. The critical economic capabilities become eroded, making it more difficult and lengthier for Ukraine economy to rebuild after war
    It's odd how these appeasers all look at Ukraine, and they don't apply the same harsh thinking to Russia's situation.

    Addressing his points directly:
    1) More damaging than what? Handing Putin a victory?
    2) It is declining because of stupid Americans who have suddenly decided they quite like Putin and fascism.
    3) Yes, but so is Russia's.
    4) Yes, but so is Russia's.
    5) Which is a reason to continue support for Ukraine, not Russia.

    If you think "Biden's policy was a failure," then the answer is to support Ukraine more, and not support Russia.
    Because he cares about Ukraine, not Russia. You have the luxury of not being directly affected by the outcome either way so can afford to virtue signal.
    "Virtue signal"

    I am not virtue signalling. I am trying to look for the best, most positive way forward for Ukraine, Europe, the US, and the wider world in the short, medium and long term. Heck, even Russia. In fact, just about everyone except Putin and his inner circle.

    Have you considered how you appear because of your stated views? What 'virtues' do you think you are signalling?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,781
    Former BBC Radio 1 DJ and presenter Andy Peebles dies aged 76
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq5zx32163po

    It was Andy Peebles who interviewed John Lennon in New York and was greeted back at Heathrow by reporters wanting his reaction to the news Lennon had just been murdered.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,485

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,355

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    It doesn't matter to you, obviously.
    Using them as a proxy doesn't matter to me. Correct.
    Don't lie. You don't care about Ukraine and Ukrainians *at all*. It's f-all to do with them being a 'proxy' or not (and there would have been less chance of that if the GOP had actually been vocally pro-Ukraine, rather than anti it).

    You want to sell Ukraine and Ukrainians out to an imperialist, fascist state, because... well, I daresay you have your reasons. Bad ones.
    Insult me all you like but you are the one making an explicit argument in favour of more Ukrainians dying for the greater good.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 614
    edited March 23

    Growth and one term latest:
    ‪John Morgan‬ ‪@johnmorgan3.bsky.social‬

    The Alan Turing Institute, the UK's national institute for data science and AI, is shutting down around a quarter of its research projects.

    Via
    @annamckie.bsky.social
    . www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-uk-r...

    "AI leads to job losses" headline.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,485
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…
    I don't recall any left wing outcry about dodgy colleges.

    Could you substantiate your claim with some sources that the left/media went "full
    bore".
    I certainly remember criticism on here and in the media about the government targeting these universities. But you can travel through Google just as easily as I can.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,038

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    It doesn't matter to you, obviously.
    Using them as a proxy doesn't matter to me. Correct.
    Don't lie. You don't care about Ukraine and Ukrainians *at all*. It's f-all to do with them being a 'proxy' or not (and there would have been less chance of that if the GOP had actually been vocally pro-Ukraine, rather than anti it).

    You want to sell Ukraine and Ukrainians out to an imperialist, fascist state, because... well, I daresay you have your reasons. Bad ones.
    Insult me all you like but you are the one making an explicit argument in favour of more Ukrainians dying for the greater good.
    Would you have said that in 1939 when we declared war on Germany? would you have said: "You are the one making an explicit argument in favour of more British dying for the greater good."

    Besides, that is up to the Ukrainians. If they want to fight, we should support them as much as we could. You wish to betray them.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,781

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,485

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?
    It seems odd to phrase this in terms of a “corrupt public sector”, but we should look at who was in charge of education and immigration over that period. Oh. It was the Conservative Party. Let’s pull some of the relevant ministers up for questioning by the media and by Parliament, for starters.
    Do you really think that ministers knew this was going on and didn’t stop it?

    Or are you just trying to deflect attention from your public sector colleagues?
    Actually, the blame for this higher education loans and grants scandal/corruption lies squarely with the 'universities' who grant the places to the franchises, rather than with government or ministers. The universities are wholly responsible for the quality assurance (attendance, teaching quality, assessment practices etc.) of the franchises, and they have been failing to carry out proper quality checks, choosing just to rake in the money instead. Civil servants may not have had sufficient oversight, but frankly they should not be expected to know what is going on at Oxford Business College - it's the lead
    institution's responsibility.
    I strongly suspect it goes way beyond universities as well - similar issues can be found in further education franchises, and in language schools.
    I fully agree with your assessment

    Ministers (and civil servants) shouldn’t be micromanaging and can’t be expected to know what corrupt organisations are up to
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,355
    edited March 23

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    It doesn't matter to you, obviously.
    Using them as a proxy doesn't matter to me. Correct.
    Don't lie. You don't care about Ukraine and Ukrainians *at all*. It's f-all to do with them being a 'proxy' or not (and there would have been less chance of that if the GOP had actually been vocally pro-Ukraine, rather than anti it).

    You want to sell Ukraine and Ukrainians out to an imperialist, fascist state, because... well, I daresay you have your reasons. Bad ones.
    Insult me all you like but you are the one making an explicit argument in favour of more Ukrainians dying for the greater good.
    Would you have said that in 1939 when we declared war on Germany? would you have said: "You are the one making an explicit argument in favour of more British dying for the greater good."

    Besides, that is up to the Ukrainians. If they want to fight, we should support them as much as we could. You wish to betray them.
    If you transpose your current position to 1939 then you would have been in favour of the US sending weapons to Britain but placing conditions on how we could use them and refusing to send any troops.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,485

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,327

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    It doesn't matter to you, obviously.
    Using them as a proxy doesn't matter to me. Correct.
    Don't lie. You don't care about Ukraine and Ukrainians *at all*. It's f-all to do with them being a 'proxy' or not (and there would have been less chance of that if the GOP had actually been vocally pro-Ukraine, rather than anti it).

    You want to sell Ukraine and Ukrainians out to an imperialist, fascist state, because... well, I daresay you have your reasons. Bad ones.
    Insult me all you like but you are the one making an explicit argument in favour of more Ukrainians dying for the greater good.
    Putin can pull back to the 1991 border, recognise Ukraine's right to full sovereignty, and no more Ukrainians OR Russians have to die.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,946

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
    Would you really include Robinson College, Cambridge as a real educational establishment?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,355
    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
    Would you really include Robinson College, Cambridge as a real educational establishment?
    The dodgiest is surely King's.
  • I have a potential thread header on the subject of 'a new public funding model' if TSE or OGH is interested.
    This is topical given the Spring Statement is due this week
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,342

    It would be interesting to think how @williamglenn would have reacted in 1938 and 1939, if he was American.

    One thing is clear: he would not have supported Britain.

    Well he would have been in the majority then.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,327

    It would be interesting to think how @williamglenn would have reacted in 1938 and 1939, if he was American.

    One thing is clear: he would not have supported Britain.

    Well he would have been in the majority then.
    Do you think he would have made a "deal" with Japan after Pearl Harbor?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,485
    edited March 23

    I have a potential thread header on the subject of 'a new public funding model' if TSE or OGH is interested.
    This is topical given the Spring Statement is due this week

    @TheScreamingEagles
    @rcs1000
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,038

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    It doesn't matter to you, obviously.
    Using them as a proxy doesn't matter to me. Correct.
    Don't lie. You don't care about Ukraine and Ukrainians *at all*. It's f-all to do with them being a 'proxy' or not (and there would have been less chance of that if the GOP had actually been vocally pro-Ukraine, rather than anti it).

    You want to sell Ukraine and Ukrainians out to an imperialist, fascist state, because... well, I daresay you have your reasons. Bad ones.
    Insult me all you like but you are the one making an explicit argument in favour of more Ukrainians dying for the greater good.
    Would you have said that in 1939 when we declared war on Germany? would you have said: "You are the one making an explicit argument in favour of more British dying for the greater good."

    Besides, that is up to the Ukrainians. If they want to fight, we should support them as much as we could. You wish to betray them.
    If you transpose your current position to 1939 then you would have been in favour of the US sending weapons to Britain but placing conditions on how we could use them and refusing to send any troops.
    I want the Americans to do more than they are, and more than Biden did. But you cannot escape the fact that the GOP prevented Biden from doing more.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,485
    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge

    Would you really include Robinson College,
    Cambridge as a real educational
    establishment?
    It’s as real as Catz

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,038

    It would be interesting to think how @williamglenn would have reacted in 1938 and 1939, if he was American.

    One thing is clear: he would not have supported Britain.

    Well he would have been in the majority then.
    We all know where it ended up, don't we? A much wider war that America was dragged in to.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 62,073
    On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,743

    It would be interesting to think how @williamglenn would have reacted in 1938 and 1939, if he was American.

    One thing is clear: he would not have supported Britain.

    Or would he make a "deal" with Putin if the latter invaded Alaska?
    Imagine how empty our jails could be if only we would simply "make deals" with all those rapists and murders that languish there. I mean, look at the Yorkshire Ripper; he wasn't a "bad man", surely some sort of deal could have been done to enable him to get what he wanted?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,743

    On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.

    I think that is very likely if Reform were to find someone much less toxic than Farage as leader.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,678
    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
    Would you really include Robinson College, Cambridge as a real educational establishment?
    I have a nephew there. Looks like he must be in on the scam.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,770

    On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.

    Yes. In this particular era thoughtful people are not terribly interested in what Tories are against, and what detailed criticisms they have of this or that. Punters can do that for themselves.

    They want to know in a platitude free way the broad principles of what Tories are in favour of, how it differs from the Labour present and the Tory past, and whether they have the pool of top talent to think it through and achieve it.

    No use so far.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,657
    AI's most likely way to cause imminent disaster, p(doom), is likely a catastrophic zero-day cyberattack discovered by a model.

    This DeepMind paper is a must read on the various types of AI threats emerging today.

    https://x.com/deedydas/status/1903277664011686139
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,861

    On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.

    Good afternoon

    I listened to both Sky and BBC political programmes this morning and it is apparent that no political party has any answers for the woes of our country

    Trump is upsetting the apple cart, but even without his appearance on the world stage we have taxed, borrowed, and spent far beyond our means and the remedies are so unpalatable that no political party could expect to win a GE if they took the decisions to address the crisis

    Reeves has made things much worse, and the hospitality industry looks like it will be shredded post 1st April tax changes and as I posted *yesterday the price increases in rates, energy, mobile and entertainment contracts, water, stamp duty and others will dwarf pay rises including the triple lock

    Over the next few years the state pension with its triple lock has to change as well as a substantial rise in pension age and likely some form of means testing

    I remain a conservative and will vote conservative but I am under no illusion that they have a long road back even though last night's Opinium showed them regaining the lead on the economy

    Nobody can have a clue where we will be by the next election but I think the 2026 Holyrood and Senedd elections will be very interesting

    *yesterday's report below

    https://news.sky.com/story/heres-every-household-bill-rising-in-april-and-how-you-can-beat-the-hikes-13040934
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 5,489

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge

    Would you really include Robinson College,
    Cambridge as a real educational
    establishment?
    It’s as real as Catz

    They're both Red Brick.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,128

    On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.

    It's where Badenoch's "talk right, govern left" thing is almost onto something important, but then veers off into a pile of wrong.

    There was a huge gap between what the Conservatives promised and what they delivered. But it wasn't so much about ideological purity as administrative competence. (Wasn't there some US general who logistics beats strategy beats tactics? By the end, Team Sunak weren't only all about tactics, they were crap tactics.)

    Worse than that, escalating right wing talk became a placebo for any useful action, and the more useless the government got, the shriller the talk. The most dismal example of that being the Rwanda fiasco. Which just created more space for the Faragists.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,352

    On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.

    It's where Badenoch's "talk right, govern left" thing is almost onto something important, but then veers off into a pile of wrong.

    There was a huge gap between what the Conservatives promised and what they delivered. But it wasn't so much about ideological purity as administrative competence. (Wasn't there some US general who logistics beats strategy beats tactics? By the end, Team Sunak weren't only all about tactics, they were crap tactics.)

    Worse than that, escalating right wing talk became a placebo for any useful action, and the more useless the government got, the shriller the talk. The most dismal example of that being the Rwanda fiasco. Which just created more space for the Faragists.
    Not just a failure of administrative but also of personal responsibility.

    I said that the Conservatives needed to learn three things:

    1) Politicians who pass laws must follow them.

    2) Economic activity is not the same as wealth creation.

    3) Proper planning and attention to detail is necessary for competent action.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,714

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?
    It seems odd to phrase this in terms of a “corrupt public sector”, but we should look at who was in charge of education and immigration over that period. Oh. It was the Conservative Party. Let’s pull some of the relevant ministers up for questioning by the media and by Parliament, for starters.
    Do you really think that ministers knew this was going on and didn’t stop it?

    Or are you just trying to deflect attention from your public sector colleagues?
    Oxford and Cambridge were bitterly upset with the last governments crack down on bullshit courses.

    Because both rented their nice, prestigious buildings, for a lot of money, for such courses

    It turns out that you can buy quite a lot of morality and academic principles for a 6 figure cheque.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,781

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
    Well you should have been.

    Cambridge University sparks row over claims Stephen Hawking 'benefited from slavery'
    https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/uk/cambridge-university-row-claims-stephen-hawking-benefited-slavery/
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,946
    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
    Would you really include Robinson College, Cambridge as a real educational establishment?
    I have a nephew there. Looks like he must be in on the scam.
    It was a Nick Clegg gag.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,595
    carnforth said:

    MattW said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Taz said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3w10816en3o

    UKTV industry apparently in crisis, although from the article it is the Beeb and itv.

    The solution to this non problem is, of course, more money from taxpayers rather than finding new streams of income, nice timing too given the current debate on future funding of the BBC.

    The BBC seems to favour a sliding scale with wealthier homes paying more than less well off homes.

    It’s time to get rid of the license fee, fund the network from general taxation, and let the BBC seek its funding in the open market.

    That would be really short sighted. The BBC is one of the best institutions in this country and has been responsible for nurturing some extraorinary talent. The media is one area where the UK punches well above it's weight and much of this is down to the BBC. Holywood is full of talent originally nurtured by the BBC The Scott brothers to name but two but if you add those lower down the scale the British expertise and influence thanks to the BBC is everywhere
    I agree with that to an extent; but the media market has changed so much in the last couple of decades, keeping the licence fee is a bit like a government mandating horse-drawn ploughs.

    I like the BBC, but it just isn't a mainstay of people's viewing habits in the way it was. There are too many very rich competitors.
    The BBC was the Oxford and Cambridge of those wanting a career in media. Everyone's first application out of education was to one of the BBCs training schemes. I know so many people who are now in the business thanks to the BBC. Ad agencies are full of them as are film studios post production houses Costume designers editors cameramen model makers writers continuity art directors grips gaffers actors producers. It is a huge industry though obviously under the radar to most on here. It will not simply leave a hole that will be easily filled by GB News and Netflix

    I can see that, and sympathise with it. But it does nothing to change the underlying problem: the market has fundamentally changed, and is unlikely to turn back.

    I want the BBC to continue, and am happy I get my money's worth from the licence fee. But I am going to be amongst a decreasing number of people, especially amongst the young. And as that happens, the licence fee as it currently stands becomes increasingly difficult to defend.
    My son currently works for the BBC as a assistant producer/runner on a popular show. He earns a living wage hourly rate.

    Laura Kuennsberg, Chris Mason and about X x100 other presenters are all on £350,000 a year. They are not indispensible, sack 'em all and pay the living hourly rate. The quality will be no worse.
    That doesn't seem to add up.

    On the published "star salary" list for 23-24 there are only 30 above 250k, rather than "hundreds" on 350k.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0w4xqlwr1ro
    I don't earn anything like that, but 250k is "only" £10000 per month after tax. It's hardly yacht money.
    Christ really this is what is wrong with people here....its only 10k a month after tax....to most people in the country thats almost six months wages
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,403
    Pagan2 said:

    carnforth said:

    MattW said:

    Roger said:

    Roger said:

    Taz said:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3w10816en3o

    UKTV industry apparently in crisis, although from the article it is the Beeb and itv.

    The solution to this non problem is, of course, more money from taxpayers rather than finding new streams of income, nice timing too given the current debate on future funding of the BBC.

    The BBC seems to favour a sliding scale with wealthier homes paying more than less well off homes.

    It’s time to get rid of the license fee, fund the network from general taxation, and let the BBC seek its funding in the open market.

    That would be really short sighted. The BBC is one of the best institutions in this country and has been responsible for nurturing some extraorinary talent. The media is one area where the UK punches well above it's weight and much of this is down to the BBC. Holywood is full of talent originally nurtured by the BBC The Scott brothers to name but two but if you add those lower down the scale the British expertise and influence thanks to the BBC is everywhere
    I agree with that to an extent; but the media market has changed so much in the last couple of decades, keeping the licence fee is a bit like a government mandating horse-drawn ploughs.

    I like the BBC, but it just isn't a mainstay of people's viewing habits in the way it was. There are too many very rich competitors.
    The BBC was the Oxford and Cambridge of those wanting a career in media. Everyone's first application out of education was to one of the BBCs training schemes. I know so many people who are now in the business thanks to the BBC. Ad agencies are full of them as are film studios post production houses Costume designers editors cameramen model makers writers continuity art directors grips gaffers actors producers. It is a huge industry though obviously under the radar to most on here. It will not simply leave a hole that will be easily filled by GB News and Netflix

    I can see that, and sympathise with it. But it does nothing to change the underlying problem: the market has fundamentally changed, and is unlikely to turn back.

    I want the BBC to continue, and am happy I get my money's worth from the licence fee. But I am going to be amongst a decreasing number of people, especially amongst the young. And as that happens, the licence fee as it currently stands becomes increasingly difficult to defend.
    My son currently works for the BBC as a assistant producer/runner on a popular show. He earns a living wage hourly rate.

    Laura Kuennsberg, Chris Mason and about X x100 other presenters are all on £350,000 a year. They are not indispensible, sack 'em all and pay the living hourly rate. The quality will be no worse.
    That doesn't seem to add up.

    On the published "star salary" list for 23-24 there are only 30 above 250k, rather than "hundreds" on 350k.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0w4xqlwr1ro
    I don't earn anything like that, but 250k is "only" £10000 per month after tax. It's hardly yacht money.
    Christ really this is what is wrong with people here....its only 10k a month after tax....to most people in the country thats almost six months wages
    I totally agree. Surely if you have enough to pay the bills plus money for treats, then all's fine, but 10k a month is ridiculous.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,336
    Canada election called for 28th April
  • On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.

    I think that is very likely if Reform were to find someone much less toxic than Farage as leader.
    Slight problem in that logic, why would anyone who isn't toxic be attracted to Reform in the first place?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,066
    RIP Andy Peebles. Great DJ.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,507

    ydoethur said:

    These from the president of the Kyiv school of economics:

    https://x.com/mylovanov/status/1903794404520812694

    Most people I know—Ukrainians, Americans, and my social media crowd—dislike or even hate Trump. They’re afraid he’ll cut a deal with Putin and sell out Ukraine.

    I disagree. Trump could offer Ukraine a real chance to end the war.


    The two are hardly mutually exclusive.
    To conclude, there is of course an alternative - continue to put pressure on Russia and hope it will collapse. I think this is what Reagan did. But I don’t see any appetite for that between the US and Europe, although Europe is willing to go some on that direction.

    But that might not be enough. If Russia collapses, it is due to its internal processes and political forces, but this is a risky strategy. And I don’t want to bet Ukraine’s future on that.
    Russia's experience in Afghanistan puts a lie to that. It is perfectly possible for a 'superpower' (and Russia is hardly one of those any more) to be beaten in countries far poorer than Ukraine. Also witness the American experience in Afghanistan, Vietnam and Iraq.

    Sadly, the sort of shite being spoken in the quotes above just gives Putin and Russia hope that their political shenanigans are working, where their military is failing.
    Securing the best outcome for Ukraine doesn't seem to matter in this analysis. They are simply a proxy to inflict damage on Russia.
    Russia invaded Ukraine. Peace through the defeat of Russia seems the best, and most ethical, result
    Anything short of Russia achieving its original objectives counts as a defeat. Unless you think that Ukraine and the West's war aim should be unconditional surrender then you have to accept a deal with Russia at some point.
    The defeated Russian army running back to the border, and/or encircled divisions laying down their arms and marching into captivity, are a long way short of the "unconditional surrender" of Russia. But yes, we did a deal with the Flensburg government and that is maybe a good model. But the defeat of Russia that I would prefer is that it fails to make *any* of its war aims. Otherwise it has a partial victory
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,327
    Scott_xP said:

    Canada election called for 28th April

    I'll need to update my Anglosphere election spreadsheet before long, then :)
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,906
    Given Mark Carney has only just come into politics I thought he was excellent on both his speech and answers .

    And why has Poilievre refused to apply for security clearance ? Talk about giving an open goal to the Libs.

  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,947

    On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.

    I think that is very likely if Reform were to find someone much less toxic than Farage as leader.
    No. Their vulnerability is their dependence on Farage. He's an expert showman and that matters in the modern media/celeb age. He's a mini-Trump in that respect. And, don't forget, he's taken many years to build up the level of profile he currently enjoys. He is literally irreplaceable. Dump Farage, with all his demerits, and you junk Reform.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,342
    edited March 23

    It would be interesting to think how @williamglenn would have reacted in 1938 and 1939, if he was American.

    One thing is clear: he would not have supported Britain.

    Or would he make a "deal" with Putin if the latter invaded Alaska?
    Imagine how empty our jails could be if only we would simply "make deals" with all those rapists and murders that languish there. I mean, look at the Yorkshire Ripper; he wasn't a "bad man", surely some sort of deal could have been done to enable him to get what he wanted?
    We made deals with the murderers of the IRA. To the extent that when the prospect arose of adding a customs border to British sovereign territory, it was judged that it would plunge Northern Ireland into a new era of IRA blood-letting, so the idea was never considered seriously.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,678
    edited March 23
    Scott_xP said:

    Canada election called for 28th April

    338Canada is posting a narrow Liberal majority


  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,376

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
    Well you should have been.

    Cambridge University sparks row over claims Stephen Hawking 'benefited from slavery'
    https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/uk/cambridge-university-row-claims-stephen-hawking-benefited-slavery/
    It's the Fitzwilliam museum, but that makes it even more disappointing.
  • franklynfranklyn Posts: 326
    Football tonight at 10pm UK time, Canada v USA.

    Could be a spirited game
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,984
    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Canada election called for 28th April

    338Canada is posting a narrow Liberal majority


    Let's see how much money the broligarchs will pour into the contest and how effective they will be.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,336
    The bookies have them at the same price
  • PJHPJH Posts: 775

    On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.

    Serious question - and putting VAT on private schools to one side, if you can - as someone who seems to be a fairly traditinal but pragmatic Conservative, how do you view Labour in practice? It seems to me as a centrist liberal that they are doing a fairly good impression of a moderate conservative (small c) government, continuing many of the stated policies of the previous government but actually starting to execute some of them.

    From my POV they are even worse than I'd feared, but what about you?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,327
    franklyn said:

    Football tonight at 10pm UK time, Canada v USA.

    Could be a spirited game

    Football football, or American Rugby?
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 3,310
    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
    Would you really include Robinson College, Cambridge as a real educational establishment?
    I have a nephew there. Looks like he must be in on the scam.
    I also have a nephew there... Small world.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,376
    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
    Would you really include Robinson College, Cambridge as a real educational establishment?
    Choose your weapons. That's my College.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,793
    edited March 23
    Cicero said:

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
    Would you really include Robinson College, Cambridge as a real educational establishment?
    I have a nephew there. Looks like he must be in on the scam.
    I also have a nephew there... Small world.
    Is it the same nephew and you have both been posting on PB.com for years without realising you're brothers?
  • PJHPJH Posts: 775
    edited March 23
    nico67 said:

    PJH said:

    On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.

    Serious question - and putting VAT on private schools to one side, if you can - as someone who seems to be a fairly traditinal but pragmatic Conservative, how do you view Labour in practice? It seems to me as a centrist liberal that they are doing a fairly good impression of a moderate conservative (small c) government, continuing many of the stated policies of the previous government but actually starting to execute some of them.

    From my POV they are even worse than I'd feared, but what about you?
    I’m normally a Labour voter but voted Lib Dem as in Eastbourne that’s the way to remove the Tories . I’ve also voted Lib Dem in Surbiton . Labour have been awful and I don’t like this chasing of Reform votes and they refuse to acknowledge the elephant in the room . Without Brexit the black hole wouldn’t exist and they need to stop thinking it’s still 2016 . The public especially with what’s going on in the USA want closer links with the EU especially on trade .
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
  • oniscoidoniscoid Posts: 16
    edited March 23
    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 4,906
    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:

    On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.

    Serious question - and putting VAT on private schools to one side, if you can - as someone who seems to be a fairly traditinal but pragmatic Conservative, how do you view Labour in practice? It seems to me as a centrist liberal that they are doing a fairly good impression of a moderate conservative (small c) government, continuing many of the stated policies of the previous government but actually starting to execute some of them.

    From my POV they are even worse than I'd feared, but what about you?
    I’m normally a Labour voter but voted Lib Dem as in Eastbourne that’s the way to remove the Tories . I’ve also voted Lib Dem in Surbiton . Labour have been awful and I don’t like this chasing of Reform votes and they refuse to acknowledge the elephant in the room . Without Brexit the black hole wouldn’t exist and they need to stop thinking it’s still 2016 . The public especially with what’s going on in the USA want closer links with the EU especially on trade .
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    The more I see of the current Labour Party and Starmer the more I think Corbyn at least had some principles. People can disagree with them but exactly what principles does Starmer have . Balancing the books off the backs of the poorest and acting as Reform lite is not something Corbyn would have done.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,792
    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    Starmer "likes and respects" Alexander Johnson? I am shocked! I am not sure a Fixed Penalty Notice for eating birthday cake constitutes the label of a "convicted felon" either.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,376
    nico67 said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:

    On topic, I've essentially given up on the Conservatives.

    They are totally irrelevant in opposition - even if Reform do engage in bouts of fratricide - and Labour are finding it perfectly possible to enact policies they espoused in govt but never followed through upon because they were more interested in pissing contests.

    Right now, I expect the decline to continue and, if nothing changes, for them to go backwards even further at the next GE.

    Serious question - and putting VAT on private schools to one side, if you can - as someone who seems to be a fairly traditinal but pragmatic Conservative, how do you view Labour in practice? It seems to me as a centrist liberal that they are doing a fairly good impression of a moderate conservative (small c) government, continuing many of the stated policies of the previous government but actually starting to execute some of them.

    From my POV they are even worse than I'd feared, but what about you?
    I’m normally a Labour voter but voted Lib Dem as in Eastbourne that’s the way to remove the Tories . I’ve also voted Lib Dem in Surbiton . Labour have been awful and I don’t like this chasing of Reform votes and they refuse to acknowledge the elephant in the room . Without Brexit the black hole wouldn’t exist and they need to stop thinking it’s still 2016 . The public especially with what’s going on in the USA want closer links with the EU especially on trade .
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    The more I see of the current Labour Party and Starmer the more I think Corbyn at least had some principles. People can disagree with them but exactly what principles does Starmer have . Balancing the books off the backs of the poorest and acting as Reform lite is not something Corbyn would have done.

    Whilst I have a degree of respect for Corbyn and his principles it's pretty clear he didn't do 'sensible'. The man is a dangerous idiot.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,792
    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,781

    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
    This is why inviting Trump for a state visit was damn stupid. It is bound to backfire unless the police can hide the demonstrators like they did for President Xi ten years ago.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,792

    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
    This is why inviting Trump for a state visit was damn stupid. It is bound to backfire unless the police can hide the demonstrators like they did for President Xi ten years ago.
    On the day it was a good call, the following day it unravelled after Trump and Vance beasted Zelenskyy. So what does Starmer do next? No point recalling the invite until real leverage is required.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 3,547
    Omnium said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
    Well you should have been.

    Cambridge University sparks row over claims Stephen Hawking 'benefited from slavery'
    https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/uk/cambridge-university-row-claims-stephen-hawking-benefited-slavery/
    It's the Fitzwilliam museum, but that makes it even more disappointing.
    If a towering genius like Hawking benefited from slavery does that not add credence to the idea that it wasn't such a bad thing after all?
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,994
    Scott_xP said:

    The bookies have them at the same price

    I'm on the Liberals at 5/6 but Paddy Power have restricted my bet.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,376

    Omnium said:

    DavidL said:

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    Really shocking story in the ST today about Franchise colleges and the hundreds of millions that have been stolen for non existent students from Romania in the main signing on to get student loans and, of course, grants which are then shared between the colleges, the lead Universities and the providers of the students.

    The scale of it is almost beyond belief. Those involved in both the franchise colleges and indeed in the Universities have surely acted illegally and dishonestly. Hundreds of them really need to go to jail and the franchise colleges involved need to be closed. What this does to a sector already struggling, god alone knows.

    I don't have an electronic account but for those that do: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v

    Full piece:
    https://archive.is/20250323103854/https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/revealed-colleges-student-loans-fraud-pd7wlgb3v
    This paragraph almost sums it up:

    "Leaked government figures show that the number of Romanian nationals living in the UK applying for a student loan increased from 5,000 in 2015-16 to 84,000 in 2023-24, suggesting 15 per cent of the Romanian population in Britain was paid a student loan last year."

    We are being taken for fools and a corrupt public sector is just looking the other way.

    BTW, that 15% suggests that there are currently 560k Romanians living in the UK. I mean, how?

    I recall that about 10 years ago the government of the day (I think Cameron) tried to crack down on these dodgy colleges and the left / media went full bore on evil Tories depriving kids of the chance to get a decent education…

    Other way round. It was the Tories who wanted increased competition.
    Why don’t you think and research before going in with a partisan attack?

    Here is a link from the Guardian in 2029

    https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/apr/08/seventy-five-bogus-universities-shut-down-in-past-four-years
    Those are bogus colleges. The huge expansion of real ones that almost no-one has heard of was encouraged by the Conservatives. Have a flick through the
    OFS list:-
    https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/for-providers/regulatory-resources/the-ofs-register/#/
    I guess you missed my reference to “dodgy colleges” then. And I wasn’t referring to Cambridge
    Well you should have been.

    Cambridge University sparks row over claims Stephen Hawking 'benefited from slavery'
    https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/uk/cambridge-university-row-claims-stephen-hawking-benefited-slavery/
    It's the Fitzwilliam museum, but that makes it even more disappointing.
    If a towering genius like Hawking benefited from slavery does that not add credence to the idea that it wasn't such a bad thing after all?
    Well Hawking didn't benefit from slavery, beyond the degree to which everyone might have done so.

    I think you have the wrong idea about Hawking if you call him a towering genius.

    I'm sure you have the wrong idea about slavery if you suggest it wasn't other than bad.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,994

    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
    Ed Davey isn't constrained in his criticism.
    Elon Musk recognised this and called him a "snivelling cretin"!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,997
    Barnesian said:

    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
    Ed Davey isn't constrained in his criticism.
    Elon Musk recognised this and called him a "snivelling cretin"!
    Indeed? I'm surprised Musk was so forthright, although I have to say I would have gone a lot fur...oh, sorry, is the 'he' in question Ed Davey?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,327

    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
    Why not? Trump dressed down Zelenskyy live on camera!
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,376
    ydoethur said:

    Barnesian said:

    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
    Ed Davey isn't constrained in his criticism.
    Elon Musk recognised this and called him a "snivelling cretin"!
    Indeed? I'm surprised Musk was so forthright, although I have to say I would have gone a lot fur...oh, sorry, is the 'he' in question Ed Davey?
    How can it be that there's such an empty chair in British Politics? The LDs haven't turned up for a very long time now.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,678
    Omnium said:

    ydoethur said:

    Barnesian said:

    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
    Ed Davey isn't constrained in his criticism.
    Elon Musk recognised this and called him a "snivelling cretin"!
    Indeed? I'm surprised Musk was so forthright, although I have to say I would have gone a lot fur...oh, sorry, is the 'he' in question Ed Davey?
    How can it be that there's such an empty chair in British Politics? The LDs haven't turned up for a very long time now.
    Having a good Spring conference today.

    It's not the LDs fault if the media don't cover it.

    It's on YouTube. Ed Daveys speech at 3:18

    https://youtu.be/vtytjYNCG28
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,595
    Omnium said:

    ydoethur said:

    Barnesian said:

    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
    Ed Davey isn't constrained in his criticism.
    Elon Musk recognised this and called him a "snivelling cretin"!
    Indeed? I'm surprised Musk was so forthright, although I have to say I would have gone a lot fur...oh, sorry, is the 'he' in question Ed Davey?
    How can it be that there's such an empty chair in British Politics? The LDs haven't turned up for a very long time now.
    Thankfully the lib dems have rarely been in government and long may it continue
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,584
    tlg86 said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/23/adolescence-reveals-a-terrifying-truth-smartphones-are-poison-for-boys-minds

    Every so often, a television drama comes along that has the power to change things. Last year, it was ITV’s Mr Bates vs The Post Office, in which the plight of subpostmasters was rendered with such success that it actually hastened in real-world legislation to compensate them.

    And now we have Netflix’s Adolescence, which looks at the online radicalisation of young boys by men’s rights activists (MRAs) such as Andrew Tate. Last week, Keir Starmer told the Commons he had been watching the series with his family and that it portrayed an “emerging and growing problem” that needed to be tackled. Now MPs are examining ideas to address the issue with greater urgency.


    If I were acting on behalf of Lucy Letby, I'd be tapping up every tv station and production company possible. Get one of those on side and she's as good as free.

    Why can't journalists do even basic research? Grrrr! What was fast-tracked was legislation overturning the subpostmasters' convictions. Not compensation. Many are still waiting - including the oldest one, aged 92, who got a meeting with the Minister and a lot of promises but still no compensation.

    Lee Castleton, a subpostmaster who was deliberately bankrupted by the Post Office on the basis of false evidence about Horizon, is now suing both the Post Office and Fujitsu. They would be well advised to settle. IMO.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,376
    Pagan2 said:

    Omnium said:

    ydoethur said:

    Barnesian said:

    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
    Ed Davey isn't constrained in his criticism.
    Elon Musk recognised this and called him a "snivelling cretin"!
    Indeed? I'm surprised Musk was so forthright, although I have to say I would have gone a lot fur...oh, sorry, is the 'he' in question Ed Davey?
    How can it be that there's such an empty chair in British Politics? The LDs haven't turned up for a very long time now.
    Thankfully the lib dems have rarely been in government and long may it continue
    I would have voted 'coalition' ahead of Tory if I'd had the chance in 2015.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,994
    Omnium said:

    ydoethur said:

    Barnesian said:

    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
    Ed Davey isn't constrained in his criticism.
    Elon Musk recognised this and called him a "snivelling cretin"!
    Indeed? I'm surprised Musk was so forthright, although I have to say I would have gone a lot fur...oh, sorry, is the 'he' in question Ed Davey?
    How can it be that there's such an empty chair in British Politics? The LDs haven't turned up for a very long time now.
    The LD MPs are all very active on various committees as well as in their constituencies. But the media ignore them. It's also hard to get on QT.

    The only way Ed Davey can get publicity is by bungee jumping or getting Elon Musk to insult him.

    That's why LDs deliver literally millions of leaflets and email newsletters which you probably don't see if you are not in an LD constituency or a target seat.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,355
    edited March 23
    Omnium said:

    ydoethur said:

    Barnesian said:

    nico67 said:

    oniscoid said:

    PJH said:

    nico67 said:

    PJH said:
    Thank you, interesting. I can't imagine most Labour voters are very happy with what they're seeing. I think Labour would haemorrhage votes to a left wing party, if one existed with a charismatic leader. A Reform of the left.
    interesting that the current Labour leader, a former public prosecutor, says he "likes and respects" a convicted felon who has no respect for the truth, the law or international conventions - role models today, eh?
    No sane person who has empathy and a shred of humanity can like or respect Trump . I wish Starmer would just STFU with his fawning .
    In Starmer's defence he can't really say out loud that the President of the United States is a c***. Back benchers and Conservative politicians in opposition should not be constrained by such etiquette.
    Ed Davey isn't constrained in his criticism.
    Elon Musk recognised this and called him a "snivelling cretin"!
    Indeed? I'm surprised Musk was so forthright, although I have to say I would have gone a lot fur...oh, sorry, is the 'he' in question Ed Davey?
    How can it be that there's such an empty chair in British Politics? The LDs haven't turned up for a very long time now.
    They did throw up that woman who thought she could be Prime Minister. What was her name again? Liz something?
Sign In or Register to comment.