|
Post by heavenlyshrew on Dec 3, 2010 23:12:44 GMT 1
O well stoners rule eh marcus
|
|
|
Post by simianus on Dec 3, 2010 23:16:27 GMT 1
O well stoners rule eh marcus if thats what flies in ditherington, fill yer boots i suppose. i was pretty sure it was smack that was the drug f choice up there, but i have been out of circulation for a number of years.
|
|
|
Post by jaytee on Dec 3, 2010 23:22:41 GMT 1
I don't usually read too many serious threads, but what a pleasure it is to have monkee and Welshshrew back on b&a. ((Not that I agree with them all the time). Come back Billy, you know you want to. I also like to read Heavenly's point of view. Does that mean I can get a job as a diversity officer?
|
|
|
Post by simianus on Dec 3, 2010 23:24:14 GMT 1
I don't usually read too many serious threads, but what a pleasure it is to have monkee and Welshshrew back on b&a. ((Not that I agree with them all the time). Come back Billy, you know you want to. I also like to read Heavenly's point of view. Does that mean I can get a job as a diversity officer? sorry, it's for us girls only and the nose is offputting
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Dec 3, 2010 23:33:54 GMT 1
The nose is fecking awful tbh.......do I win a prize ?
|
|
|
Post by Jonah on Dec 3, 2010 23:34:11 GMT 1
Monkee my post is no way near being as weird as your new name. See it you are probably so far up it Sorry Monkee Should have read it first it should have read you are so far up your own anus
|
|
|
Post by simianus on Dec 3, 2010 23:38:53 GMT 1
Monkee my post is no way near being as weird as your new name. See it you are probably so far up it Sorry Monkee Should have read it first it should have read you are so far up your own anus ah, i see, abuse. i suppose that is your level then, "haha, he said anus". did you not want to discuss the issues you raised
|
|
|
Post by Jonah on Dec 3, 2010 23:42:37 GMT 1
Sorry Monkee Should have read it first it should have read you are so far up your own anus ah, i see, abuse. i suppose that is your level then, "haha, he said anus". did you not want to discuss the issues you raised It is pretty obvious to me you never had a university education so the answer is no
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Dec 3, 2010 23:43:32 GMT 1
Well that didn't take long did it Of course education is a right of a civilized society but is the behavior of the demonstrators civilized Jonah, a question. Last week you were part of a 6,500 crowd of people, were you not ? Possibly 50 of that crowd did not behave in a civilised way. Does that make the whole crowd hooligans and troublemakers ?
|
|
|
Post by simianus on Dec 3, 2010 23:44:19 GMT 1
ah, i see, abuse. i suppose that is your level then, "haha, he said anus". did you not want to discuss the issues you raised It is pretty obvious to me you never had a university education so the answer is no but how can you tell if i actually went and it was wasted on me, or that i didnt go?
|
|
|
Post by jaytee on Dec 3, 2010 23:47:01 GMT 1
The nose is fecking awful Ah well, not to be sniffed at........I missed univercity as well for some reeson.
|
|
|
Post by Jonah on Dec 3, 2010 23:47:33 GMT 1
It is pretty obvious to me you never had a university education so the answer is no but how can you tell if i actually went and it was wasted on me, or that i didnt go? So it's ok for you to be in a sarcastic mood but nobody else?
|
|
|
Post by simianus on Dec 3, 2010 23:49:03 GMT 1
but how can you tell if i actually went and it was wasted on me, or that i didnt go? So it's ok for you to be in a sarcastic mood but nobody else? no, you havent declared it on your profile, so no sarcasm for you uni boy
|
|
|
Post by Jonah on Dec 3, 2010 23:56:09 GMT 1
Good point Jamo and I agree you cannot tar everyone with the same brush.
Probably will be shot down in flames(again) but I guess the 'hooligans' are not our future High earners who were acting no better in the student demonstrations.
Sorry if that comes over condescending but that's my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by simianus on Dec 3, 2010 23:59:22 GMT 1
Good point Jamo and I agree you cannot tar everyone with the same brush. Probably will be shot down in flames(again) but I guess the 'hooligans' are not our future High earners who were acting no better in the student demonstrations. Sorry if that comes over condescending but that's my opinion. oh i dont know about that, our current top earners have vandalized our economy beyond all recognition this lot may ye balls things up more , but i doubt it
|
|
|
Post by jaytee on Dec 4, 2010 0:14:16 GMT 1
Right, it's a serious threat, so I'm out a here. Luckily, I'm a Star Trick expert. so...
Beam me up, Mr Zulu.
|
|
|
Post by griff6732 on Dec 4, 2010 0:17:44 GMT 1
There was a time Ed when the youth of today actually earned the right to an education. Now they expect it Please explain to me why. What gives them the right in this economic climate to expect something for nothing. They are the future and if they are it is not very bright is it. No respect for authority blights our society and looking at the blatant law breaking by what should be the best educated of this generation doesn't bode well for the future does it. Unfortunately they have been given everything on a plate during the good times and I agreed they know no better. Life isn't fair so get used to it. are you real? i mean you arent some sort of trial from god or the ether sent to test us? you dont think people have a right to education? dont know how old you arebut, possibly the same rights as you enjoyed when you were at school? even from a staunch capitalist persprctive, do you not link education with better skilled and well adjusted workforce? what gives people the right to an education? get back to the 1800's where you belong. hey marcus what do you say to someone who as just left uni? big mac and fries please.Why should i pay for someone elses education
|
|
|
Post by simianus on Dec 4, 2010 0:28:55 GMT 1
are you real? i mean you arent some sort of trial from god or the ether sent to test us? you dont think people have a right to education? dont know how old you arebut, possibly the same rights as you enjoyed when you were at school? even from a staunch capitalist persprctive, do you not link education with better skilled and well adjusted workforce? what gives people the right to an education? get back to the 1800's where you belong. hey marcus what do you say to someone who as just left uni? big mac and fries please.Why should i pay for someone elses education because you may need a doctor one day? just an example though. there are all sorts of jobs that a basic education doesnt qualify you to do, so you have to pay somebody else to do them for you are we personally aqquainted? am i to assume you are my freind richard griffiths? in which case i will call you dick
|
|
|
Post by nicko on Dec 4, 2010 9:42:20 GMT 1
Probably will be shot down in flames(again) but I guess the 'hooligans' are not our future High earners who were acting no better in the student demonstrations. The difference is though the protesters involved in the violence at least have a cause. The violence perpetrated by the Hereford "fans" was gratuitous. These protests just aren't about young people not being able to afford University, but also about people like you and I who came late to HE. It's also about issues like the rehabilitation of offenders and a London University losing its funding for a course it runs for ex-prisoners. I was lucky in that the LEA paid for most of my first degree and my current one is part funded by Enhanced Learning Credits; I would hate for anybody not to have the same opportunities that I've been lucky to have. Anyway I shouldn't be on here, I should be doing research.
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Dec 4, 2010 10:24:17 GMT 1
The difference is though the protesters involved in the violence at least have a cause. Hmmmm that in no way justifies what the idiotic Students did. Fact is we need HE, fact is it costs money who pays ? I have two going through Uni at the moment and it costs me a fortune each month. For me the balance is wrong atm, too many people going to Uni makes it unaffordable to the state. Whether you , I or anyone else likes it the well off will always have an advantage. As for
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Dec 4, 2010 11:13:48 GMT 1
The difference is though the protesters involved in the violence at least have a cause. Hmmmm that in no way justifies what the idiotic Students did. By 'idiotic students' I take it you mean the likes of the person who threw a fire extinguisher, rather than the entire demonstration? But why concentrate on acts like this rather than the issues being raised by the protestors?It's nothing more than diversionary tactic employed by the Con Dems and their supporters to side-step debate of the unfairness and (in the case of the Fib-Dems) duplicity of their plans. Like I asked Jonah, how many protestors have been charged with criminal offences? Then employers should step in and offer more on the job training and decently paid apprenticeships with guaranteed jobs for those who complete them. Perhaps fewer jobs, in both the public and private sectors, should require a degree level education and there should be more in-house training. I disagree we should just accept that the system inherently favours those from wealthy backgrounds and not strive for a system that allows all people to achieve their potential regardless of their socio-economic background.
|
|
|
Post by simianus on Dec 4, 2010 13:06:31 GMT 1
Probably will be shot down in flames(again) but I guess the 'hooligans' are not our future High earners who were acting no better in the student demonstrations. The difference is though the protesters involved in the violence at least have a cause. quote] as much as people whine about it, civil insurrection changes things. it forces the hand of an ignorant goverment. you can peacefully sing blowing in the wind, but you will be ignored in this day and age. extreme behaviours change things. look at northern ireland, i dont for one moment condone blowing people up, but do you really think the politicians would have done anything if they had protested peacefully? I dont. it shows how strongly people feel, and maybe some go over the top but if they hadnt been ignored and lied to, maybe it wouldnt have happened.
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Dec 4, 2010 13:31:57 GMT 1
By 'idiotic students' I take it you mean the likes of the person who threw a fire extinguisher, rather than the entire demonstration? But why concentrate on acts like this rather than the issues being raised by the protestors?It's nothing more than diversionary tactic employed by the Con Dems and their supporters to side-step debate of the unfairness and (in the case of the Fib-Dems) duplicity of their plans. I am not in any way concentrating on the violent factors, but they should not be excused or ignored. Do students really expect the state (by state I of course mean the taxes that you and I pay) to fund their "chosen" education ? The agreement that those at Uni entered under the previous administration has been made void by the financial mess we are in. In short tough they will have to bite the bullet until a better balance can be struck. Then employers should step in and offer more on the job training and decently paid apprenticeships with guaranteed jobs for those who complete them. I agree with that entirely, I feel the lack of apprenticeships being given in the last few decades has resulted in a huge imbalance and of course lack of "tradesman" in the workplace. There is of course a price then to be paid in the manufacturing industry. I disagree we should just accept that the system inherently favours those from wealthy backgrounds and not strive for a system that allows all people to achieve their potential regardless of their socio-economic background. But that is the issue Labour rightly tried to address the issue, however there has to be a balance and I feel they got that wrong. To be honest I earn a good wedge, would I put my lads through in a couple of years time.....prob not.
|
|
|
Post by nicko on Dec 4, 2010 18:30:37 GMT 1
The difference is though the protesters involved in the violence at least have a cause. Hmmmm that in no way justifies what the idiotic Students did. Depends on the outcome. Like I said on another thread a police inspector at the first march was quoted in the Independent as saying he was surprised how intelligent and articulate those arrested were. The Government haven't upset some small disenfranchised part of our (big) society, they've peed off a large chunk of the middle-classes, I'm not surprised that the police where caught by surprise. Again though I feel people miss the point. These demos just aren't about HE fees, but Education cuts in general; at all levels. Education is on a par with the NHS in as far as I'm concerned, it should be ring fenced. You talk about taxes. My taxes go toward an unwindable war that is propping up a corrupt (and ungrateful) regime in Afghanistan, like you said tough.... Yes the rich will always have an advantage, but in the civilized society that we like to think we live in the state should help those who are disadvantaged to get a decent start in life. Also, what shrewsace said.
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Dec 4, 2010 18:39:14 GMT 1
You talk about taxes. My taxes go toward an unwindable war that is propping up a corrupt (and ungrateful) regime in Afghanistan, like you said tough.... That Nick is exactly the point, and one I might add in that I fully agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by nicko on Dec 4, 2010 18:59:41 GMT 1
You talk about taxes. My taxes go toward an unwindable war that is propping up a corrupt (and ungrateful) regime in Afghanistan, like you said tough.... That Nick is exactly the point, and one I might add in that I fully agree with you. Reading it back it seems we are both making the same point... I find it hard to believe that anyone would object to their taxes going toward a students FE/HE fees. But then.....
|
|
|
Post by griff6732 on Dec 4, 2010 21:20:23 GMT 1
hey marcus what do you say to someone who as just left uni? big mac and fries please.Why should i pay for someone elses education because you may need a doctor one day? just an example though. there are all sorts of jobs that a basic education doesnt qualify you to do, so you have to pay somebody else to do them for you are we personally aqquainted? am i to assume you are my freind richard griffiths? in which case i will call you dick lol very good Marco buddy
|
|
|
Post by nicko on Dec 5, 2010 10:42:44 GMT 1
A move in the right direction? www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11920628On BBC news this am, this was reported as a "new policy". Has it always been in the pipeline, or is it a reaction to the demos?
|
|
|
Post by El Presidente on Dec 5, 2010 11:40:27 GMT 1
Having scan read ... I disagree, mildly, with the belief that those protesters who turned to violence did so because of their 'cause' - as we have seen with any protest lately, there are anarchist elements who generally hijack these protest simply to cause gratuitous violence and damage (I suppose that is their cause I guess...) Simianus (Lucy) is right that history has shown great change can be achieved by mass demonstration and usally mass disorder. However, protesters have to be prepared to face heavy punishment (ultimately) for any unlawful action, and must have large scale support. I do not think either condition has yet been met. With regards to those arrested, and those charged with criminal offences, suprisingly, the Police and CPS are able to utilise discretion in certain circumstances. If arresting someone and removing them from the situation is a proportionate way of dealing with the offence, then there is no need to further criminalise individuals where the necessity does not exist - remember people are only arrested on suspicion, not absolute guilt . I've long been an advocate of vocational training. When I was young, I was a practical learner; these days I learn better through theory. Someone earlier mentioned about HE being a right you earned; something I understand but perhaps has been mis-interpreted. I was able to go to a Grammar School as I passed my 11 plus, thus demonstrating I had the aptitude and determination to apply myself. Universities have similar vetting systems in place in that the better your exam qualifications, the more 'exclusive' education establishments you gain offers from. I see nothing wrong with this. I do see problems with universal acceptence to FE/HE for all in that, much money is wasted on certain people who: do not apply thesleves in lectures; have poor records of attendance; are disruptive in lectures. All this does is detract from the education of others, and ties up resources which could be better 'spent' elsewhere. Common sense, I would say, rather than controversy.
|
|
|
Post by simianus on Dec 5, 2010 12:41:23 GMT 1
Having scan read ... I disagree, mildly, with the belief that those protesters who turned to violence did so because of their 'cause' - as we have seen with any protest lately, there are anarchist elements who generally hijack these protest simply to cause gratuitous violence and damage (I suppose that is their cause I guess...) Simianus (Lucy) is right that history has shown great change can be achieved by mass demonstration and usally mass disorder. However, protesters have to be prepared to face heavy punishment (ultimately) for any unlawful action, and must have large scale support. I do not think either condition has yet been met. With regards to those arrested, and those charged with criminal offences, suprisingly, the Police and CPS are able to utilise discretion in certain circumstances. If arresting someone and removing them from the situation is a proportionate way of dealing with the offence, then there is no need to further criminalise individuals where the necessity does not exist - remember people are only arrested on suspicion, not absolute guilt . I've long been an advocate of vocational training. When I was young, I was a practical learner; these days I learn better through theory. Someone earlier mentioned about HE being a right you earned; something I understand but perhaps has been mis-interpreted. I was able to go to a Grammar School as I passed my 11 plus, thus demonstrating I had the aptitude and determination to apply myself. Universities have similar vetting systems in place in that the better your exam qualifications, the more 'exclusive' education establishments you gain offers from. I see nothing wrong with this. I do see problems with universal acceptence to FE/HE for all in that, much money is wasted on certain people who: do not apply thesleves in lectures; have poor records of attendance; are disruptive in lectures. All this does is detract from the education of others, and ties up resources which could be better 'spent' elsewhere. Common sense, I would say, rather than controversy. they've been blaming anarchists for the violence since before the last century, and whilst a very few (statistically, compared to the size of the demo) do use it as an excuse to beak things, you will get that desire all over, cars get vandalized on estates, phone boxes etc some young people get a thrill from destruction, and blaming their politics is deliberatly missing the point imo. it is a distraction that governments use to distract the public from the real issues that the demonstrations are actually abou. Anarchists have always had a rough deal in the media, although these days its moved on to anarcho syndaclism. it's always associated with any violence at a demonstration and is a convenient hook to hang blame on. I have friends who are involved in direct action and it is quite interesting to see how they approach these things in a very organised way(i am talking about the peaceful ones, not the odd random who calls himself anarchist because he got cought thowing something). they are very well versed on their rights, carry prep cards to tell them what to do if arrested(for passive resistance, the people i knew were also pacifists). they also send witnesss to observe the behaviour of the police for their own protection. the reason they do this is because, more often than not, the uniformed police dont know most of the laws they are supposed to uphold(youtube is full of verbal exchanges between police and demonstrators, which show this). they also do this because of what i would consider quite dirty tricks used by police forces , that seem more focussed on the protection of private property than the rights of protestors(again, look at youtube to see how peaceful demonstrators are treated for vigils outside private arms manufacturers facilities, the abuse of the terror laws in these cases is staggering). but because of the adgenda set by succesive govts, these peaceful people are labeled as violent criminals who should be dragged away for exorcising their right to peaceful protest. there does not seem to be any understanding of the point of view of these people, which shows how little actual intelligence work is put into getting to know what these people are about. in many, if not most cases, the police dont care as they would rather see"a bit of action" and are pumped up before they arrive. just as an aside, i was struck by the difference between the approaches of different police forces toward different demonstrations. obviously we saw the horses going in and a quite heavy handed approcah with the students, with the justification being that the law has been broken. but contrast that with the police cheif in the midlands recently who suggested a "softly softly " approach with the EDL demonstations, a group that has a much larger proportion of criminals than your average bunch of students. why are the approaches so different?
|
|