Also in the News - Part 2

[Footballwipe]

5 hours ago, Guesty said:

There's this festival in America called Burning Man. It started off as a sort of hippy type festival where people would drive into the middle of the Nevada desert and be self sufficient for week.

 

Now it's been commercialised and is basically just a bunch of Instagram influencers and rich people renting expensive RV's where they burn big structures (and apparently take a load of drugs).

 

Last night it chucked it down in the middle of the desert (it's also in a dried up lake bed). The sand turned to mud and all these people who are claiming they could survive the apocalypse are now trapped, upset and the toilets can't be cleaned. The government has had to declare a emergency and warn people the shelter in place. 

 

I love how the American right and free market zealots love to disparage and belittle government interference until they need it. Absolutely amazing stuff on a constant loop

[marbles]

6 minutes ago, Footballwipe said:

I love how the American right and free market zealots love to disparage and belittle government interference until they need it. Absolutely amazing stuff on a constant loop

I know what you’re going for, but you kinda have it backwards here.

Its the American Left at this festival now wanting assistance (clues are: celebs and influencers)

 

But I get what you’re trying to say, and it’s not split down party lines.

Examples-

Covid deniers wanting medical treatment once they catch Covid.

and

Defund the Policers now crying that the police won’t stop criminals from destroying their cities.

 

It is a loop of stupidity.

Edited 3 September 2023 by marbles

[Footballwipe]

1 minute ago, marbles said:

I know what you’re going for, but you kinda have it backwards here.

Its the American Left at this festival now wanting assistance (clues are: celebs and influencers)

 

But I get what you’re trying to say, and it’s not split down party lines.

Examples-

Covid deniers wanting medical treatment once they catch Covid.

and

Defund the Policers now crying that the police won’t stop criminals from destroying their cities.

 

It is a loop of stupidity.

Tbh I see what you mean. I just want people not to be massive hypocrites, that's all.

[marbles]

Just now, Footballwipe said:

Tbh I see what you mean. I just want people not to be massive hypocrites, that's all.

I agree 1000%
Start with not being massive, and work their way down to not being hypocrites at all - would make the world a better place

[Arkie Bennett]

Jeremy Hunt says the government will 'spend what it takes' to make schools safe.

 

I wonder which friends of the Tories are lined up to make huge profits at the taxpayers' expense.

[Bryn]

40 minutes ago, Arkie Bennett said:

Jeremy Hunt says the government will 'spend what it takes' to make schools safe.

 

I wonder which friends of the Tories are lined up to make huge profits at the taxpayers' expense.

 

Probably the same daft ***** that built them with shitty concrete in the first place.

[Jon the Hat]

10 hours ago, Sideshow Faes said:

I went to both state and private schools so have a perspective on both (I had a scholarship to private school, my parents couldn't have afforded it).

 

I can't really see any reason why private schools should exist. They are the equivalent of pay to win in the games world. They are able to suck up all the best teachers and equipment and give attendees huge advantages in terms of their access to quality teaching and materials, and inevitably also their links to Oxbridge etc. There's a lot of 'who you know' involved. It's the complete opposite of meritocracy. 

 

One of the things that's struck me in recent years is how big the private school advantage has become for those whose parents have the means to pay. Looking at state Vs private funding in recent years makes it looks almost intentional the way that the Tories have increased this advantage.

I don't disagree on the gap, although they certainly don't always get the best teachers, and the link between equipment / facilities and success is mixed - you certainly don't get double the success for double the funding, but there should be a minumum standard which the UK is miles from at the moment.  I do think there is an awful lot of energy wasted on worrying about what private schools are doing (in a lot of cases with foreign cash anyway) instead of concerning ourselves with the chronic underfunding of state schools.  Honestly if there was a real economic advantage to removing Private schools charitable status someone would have done it already.  

[Jon the Hat]

2 hours ago, Bryn said:

 

Probably the same daft ***** that built them with shitty concrete in the first place.

Most of the appear to have been built in the 1960's and 70s?

Edited 4 September 2023 by Jon the Hat

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-66655572

 

Tragic stuff.

 

The education system here is one massive pressure cooker - it either boils you hard or breaks you. Previously that was only the case for the students, now it appears to be the case for the teachers, too. Hopefully, this might act as a catalyst to get such a system changed - or at least give the hypercompetitive and self interested parents pause for thought.

[StanSP]

7 hours ago, Bryn said:

 

Probably the same daft ***** that built them with shitty concrete in the first place.

 

8 hours ago, Arkie Bennett said:

Jeremy Hunt says the government will 'spend what it takes' to make schools safe.

 

I wonder which friends of the Tories are lined up to make huge profits at the taxpayers' expense.

 

6 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Most of the appear to have been built in the 1960's and 70s?

What frustrates me the most is that the government knew the risks 4 (?) years ago and decided not to do anything about it. 

[Jon the Hat]

8 minutes ago, StanSP said:

What frustrates me the most is that the government knew the risks 4 (?) years ago and decided not to do anything about it. 

Seems like it has been known for many years, hence why this was banned for use in roofs nearly 30 years ago.  Sounds like this issue has been a bit of a pass the parcel and now the music stopped.

[StanSP]

 

 

[Daggers]

Still, at least the Dept for Education building is undergoing a £32M refit, so that’s something to be happy about.  

[Lionator]

2 hours ago, StanSP said:

 

 

I think everyone just wants a general election at this stage. The governing party cannot be allowed to continue the damage that they’re inflicting. 

[Guest Sideshow Faes]

8 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I don't disagree on the gap, although they certainly don't always get the best teachers, and the link between equipment / facilities and success is mixed - you certainly don't get double the success for double the funding, but there should be a minumum standard which the UK is miles from at the moment.  I do think there is an awful lot of energy wasted on worrying about what private schools are doing (in a lot of cases with foreign cash anyway) instead of concerning ourselves with the chronic underfunding of state schools.  Honestly if there was a real economic advantage to removing Private schools charitable status someone would have done it already.  

I think the issue is less about money and more about principal.

 

The wealthy/Tories constantly talk about strivers and how if you work hard and put the effort in you can reach the top - a British 'American dream' if you will.

 

But the reality is that, if you have the money, you can buy advantages in pretty much everything: from healthcare to schooling. You can't even go to a theme park without richer people skipping the queue nowadays.

 

Either we live in a society or we don't. It can't be fair that 5% of the population (or whatever it is) can get a head start on everybody else simply because their parents are rich. Surely we should aim to live in a meritocracy.

 

It only makes it worse that the same people that can give their offspring every advantage going are the ones that shout down any idea that might cause them to pay a little more tax to raise educational and other standards across the whole population. 

 

My view is that we should want a society where life outcomes are based on the skills and efforts of the participants, not the wealth of their parents. 

[dsr-burnley]

1 hour ago, Sideshow Faes said:

I think the issue is less about money and more about principal.

 

The wealthy/Tories constantly talk about strivers and how if you work hard and put the effort in you can reach the top - a British 'American dream' if you will.

 

But the reality is that, if you have the money, you can buy advantages in pretty much everything: from healthcare to schooling. You can't even go to a theme park without richer people skipping the queue nowadays.

 

Either we live in a society or we don't. It can't be fair that 5% of the population (or whatever it is) can get a head start on everybody else simply because their parents are rich. Surely we should aim to live in a meritocracy.

 

It only makes it worse that the same people that can give their offspring every advantage going are the ones that shout down any idea that might cause them to pay a little more tax to raise educational and other standards across the whole population. 

 

My view is that we should want a society where life outcomes are based on the skills and efforts of the participants, not the wealth of their parents. 

It needs to be tempered with pragmatism to make it work, though.  If you make inheritance tax 100%, that damages the poor far more than the rich because the rich will pass money onto their children while still alive, and still have plenty to spare.  If you abolish private education and private health and theme park queue jumping, then you remove the incentive to improve life outcomes.  And stopping people from becoming rich also stops them from giving other people jobs.  

 

Part of the problem of the advantage of private schools could be solved by reintroducing grammar schools.  They were a very useful way of giving children with the appropriate skills and efforts, a leg up into top quality education.  

[The Horse's Mouth]

23 hours ago, Daggers said:

Today's Observer summary of the Truss era - it's like recalling a dream where you are unsure if it actually happened because the whole thing was just so absurd.

Tbf to Truss she at least had a vision, executed it appallingly mind, I’ve got no clue what Sunak represents honestly. 

[Foxdiamond]

1 hour ago, Lionator said:

I think everyone just wants a general election at this stage. The governing party cannot be allowed to continue the damage that they’re inflicting. 

The country does appear to be in a right old state. Problems with NHS, schools, trains etc. The government are obviously blocking an end to the rail disputes. Settlements where devolved governments but in England the farce continues. 

[kenny]

On 01/09/2023 at 22:11, st albans fox said:

Media are reporting that RAAC has a lifespan of approx 30 years. Reading your post I suspect you’d disagree with that ?

I live in a house built in 1939.

 

Modern houses under NHBC guidance are built to last 60 years and that is a relatively recent increase.

 

I wonder on that basis how many buildings in the UK are past their designed lifespan?

 

The IStructE released a guidance document with that statement as a throwaway line in the introduction which as it happens is particularly lazy. The document then goes onto explain and conclude that RAAC is fine as long as it was built correctly, hasn't been altered, had loads applied it wasn't designed for and doesn't get wet to the point of the reinforcement corroding.

 

Stating that it's past its lifespan is more fun polically and for the media though.

[Guest Sideshow Faes]

52 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

It needs to be tempered with pragmatism to make it work, though.  If you make inheritance tax 100%, that damages the poor far more than the rich because the rich will pass money onto their children while still alive, and still have plenty to spare.  If you abolish private education and private health and theme park queue jumping, then you remove the incentive to improve life outcomes.  And stopping people from becoming rich also stops them from giving other people jobs.  

 

Part of the problem of the advantage of private schools could be solved by reintroducing grammar schools.  They were a very useful way of giving children with the appropriate skills and efforts, a leg up into top quality education.  

I didn't suggest we stop people becoming rich.

 

There's one thing you wrote that I'd like to pick up on (highlighted). The idea that removing people's ability to jump queues or get private education would stop being striving to improve their lives or do well is laughable.

 

It's very noticeable that when it comes to the rich, such as with banker's bonuses, the argument is used that they need to be able to earn extortionate amounts as otherwise there's no incentive for them to work hard. 

 

Yet when it comes to public sector workers or minimum wage jobs etc, we can't possibly pay them more because then there's be no incentive for them to work hard to improve their lot.

 

Both are laughable, and clearly incorrect, arguments.

[dsr-burnley]

13 minutes ago, Sideshow Faes said:

I didn't suggest we stop people becoming rich.

 

There's one thing you wrote that I'd like to pick up on (highlighted). The idea that removing people's ability to jump queues or get private education would stop being striving to improve their lives or do well is laughable.

 

It's very noticeable that when it comes to the rich, such as with banker's bonuses, the argument is used that they need to be able to earn extortionate amounts as otherwise there's no incentive for them to work hard. 

 

Yet when it comes to public sector workers or minimum wage jobs etc, we can't possibly pay them more because then there's be no incentive for them to work hard to improve their lot.

 

Both are laughable, and clearly incorrect, arguments.

I wasn't specifically referring to the very rich on bankers' bonuses.  Approx 13% of the country has private healthcare, for example, and they aren't all bankers.  What I understand you're proposing on the face of it is that ALL benefits from parental wealth would, in an ideal world, be eliminated, and the only way to do that is to eliminate parental wealth - the family with enough to spare for holidays has a big advantage over the family struggling to pay the gas bill, for example.  And having enough to pay for a holiday does not qualify as super-rich.  And if ALL benefits of parental wealth are eliminated in that way, the incentive to earn money disappears.  Hence the need for pragmatism.

 

The last two arguments aren't my arguments, so I'll pass on them.

[Zear0]

For those of us who went to elite schools such as Stonehill/Longslade like myself, I wonder how long the below would last before someone kicked it over with a pupil inside...

Edited 4 September 2023 by Zear0

[Trav Le Bleu]

Do you think that any building inspectors have been into a school recently and having been satisfied with the standard of construction said to the headmistress, "nice raac".

[Guest Sideshow Faes]

18 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

I wasn't specifically referring to the very rich on bankers' bonuses.  Approx 13% of the country has private healthcare, for example, and they aren't all bankers.  What I understand you're proposing on the face of it is that ALL benefits from parental wealth would, in an ideal world, be eliminated, and the only way to do that is to eliminate parental wealth - the family with enough to spare for holidays has a big advantage over the family struggling to pay the gas bill, for example.  And having enough to pay for a holiday does not qualify as super-rich.  And if ALL benefits of parental wealth are eliminated in that way, the incentive to earn money disappears.  Hence the need for pragmatism.

 

The last two arguments aren't my arguments, so I'll pass on them.

That's quite a leap from what I've said to communism. Perhaps if you engage with what I actually said, instead of a perverse extrapolation we could have a more meaningful discussion. We were discussing private education, whether there's any good reason for it's existence and some of the tax breaks it's afforded. 

[Bellend Sebastian]

5 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

For those of us who went to elite schools such as Stonehill/Longslade like myself, I wonder how long the below would last before someone kicked it over with a pupil inside...

I know what you mean, I went to Longslade and the only thing I learned there was how to be a gentleman