jimi
Well-known member
Is it me or has this country got its priorities well and truly screwed?
Olympics or 150,000 debt free graduates
- Thread starter jimi
- Start date
Twister_Ken
Well-known member
There\'s not much fun in debt free graduates
whereas having the Olympics would be a real giggle.
whereas having the Olympics would be a real giggle.
claymore
Well-known member
Re: There\'s not much fun in debt free graduates
And anyway - as long as they stay below the income level they can claim benefit and not have to pay back the debt - so lets have the olympics - after all if they are at University they won't be doing too much work so they'll have time to train and get fit and possibly win Gold. This could possibly be used to pay back some of the debt if they wanted to. I think EVERY school leaver ought to enrol into Higher Education and take out as much of a loan as possible - then get a job earning say around 5K, move back home rent free and then lets see just how long the treasury takes to rumble that it would have been more responsible government to grant young people what ought to be their birthright - quality education where they want it, without having to consider affordability.
That's my three penny worth on the matter.
It's Saturday morning and I'm going to do a bit of digging in the garden to find out why we have a pond where I thought we had a drain.
regards
Claymore
And anyway - as long as they stay below the income level they can claim benefit and not have to pay back the debt - so lets have the olympics - after all if they are at University they won't be doing too much work so they'll have time to train and get fit and possibly win Gold. This could possibly be used to pay back some of the debt if they wanted to. I think EVERY school leaver ought to enrol into Higher Education and take out as much of a loan as possible - then get a job earning say around 5K, move back home rent free and then lets see just how long the treasury takes to rumble that it would have been more responsible government to grant young people what ought to be their birthright - quality education where they want it, without having to consider affordability.
That's my three penny worth on the matter.
It's Saturday morning and I'm going to do a bit of digging in the garden to find out why we have a pond where I thought we had a drain.
regards
Claymore
Mirelle
N/A
Re: There\'s not much fun in debt free graduates
Oh that smart young Tony Blair
He had 35,000 men
He sent them off to invade Iraq
Then he brought them home again.....
which will also cost a pretty penny. We are about to build two big aircraft carriers, which every Government since Wilson has said we cannot afford, so that we can go and play gunboat diplomacy like the Americans.
We are still paying off the Milennium Dome farce.
But we cannot afford to pay teachers, let alone nurses, enough to live in London, we cannot afford council houses....we cannot afford the State Pension, we cannot afford unemployment benefit or sick pay at levels which allow people to live with dignity, the railways system cannot afford to run the number of trains we have now so 100 are to be reduced, the Underground is falling to bits, our streets are dangerous and dirty, and we have people signing up to live in "gated communities"
Private affluence and public squalor, as JK Galbraith said, plus prestige projects on a scale more suited to an African dictator than a British prime minister.
Oh that smart young Tony Blair
He had 35,000 men
He sent them off to invade Iraq
Then he brought them home again.....
which will also cost a pretty penny. We are about to build two big aircraft carriers, which every Government since Wilson has said we cannot afford, so that we can go and play gunboat diplomacy like the Americans.
We are still paying off the Milennium Dome farce.
But we cannot afford to pay teachers, let alone nurses, enough to live in London, we cannot afford council houses....we cannot afford the State Pension, we cannot afford unemployment benefit or sick pay at levels which allow people to live with dignity, the railways system cannot afford to run the number of trains we have now so 100 are to be reduced, the Underground is falling to bits, our streets are dangerous and dirty, and we have people signing up to live in "gated communities"
Private affluence and public squalor, as JK Galbraith said, plus prestige projects on a scale more suited to an African dictator than a British prime minister.
tcm
...
Sorry, JKG was wrong imho
From the posts above, it seems the contributors want lot more public spending. They quote JKG's "The Affluent Society" to enforce the point.
But that book is 40years old, and has surely been proven quite wrong.
Galbraith bemoaned that fact that private services and property such as houses, boats, companies, offices and so on is all lovely, new and shiny. Whereas public property and services are scruffy or of poor quality.
Thanks to Galbraith, two generations of economists and politicians have proceeded to more than treble public expenditure in real terms.
Unfortunately, shoddiness is inherent in government ownership. There's no incentive to do a better job, build a better mousetrap. Still less to do the very best job and work late. Indeed, there's actually lots of incentive for the reverse: sick days, early retirement, over-manning, expenses-paid trips ouot and about, snoozing on the job - work less hard for the same money. Temporary workers in the private sectr are exhorted to work as quickly as possible. In the private sector, they are privately asked to work more slowly and avoid rocking the boat.
Private entrepreneurs are the sole claimants to the property's value, or to their own value if they decide to increase it through hard work, extra qualifications. There's no such advantage gained by the individual consumer or provider of government-funded goods or services.
You can try a simple experiment yourself. I made an appointment to see the
doctor with sick child. I was given an appointment for 10:15, which came and went. Since i'd never been seen on time, I waited until 10:45 and asked the receptionsist - "Exactly how much money do you think this doctor would need before he kept an appointment?"
Because we aren't talking about an ill-educated person. Nor one who is flooded with five times as many appointments as normal - remeber that they set the time, not me.
We're simply discussing his apportionmant of the forthcoming extra health service expenditure - an extra 8 % ish. Unfortunately, I doubt that paying him an extra 8% would do very much. However, paying the good ones twice as much, and firing the bad ones probably would.
Tax revenues have already risen to deliver "world class service" but natural forces dictate that they'll never be as good s those in the private sector.
No government minister gets on a bus and heaves a sigh of relief at having got rid of their luxury car. If they can, they use private medcine and private education. So why do they pretend that others wouldn't do the same if they possibly can? Why do they ignore the fact that for a private business to work, it must at the very least offer a better service than something that is free?
Silly Galbraith was clever, but wrong. If there is are public and privately-owned/funded services competing (eductaion, transport, health, boats) it is axiomatic that public services and property will always be worse than private. And the communist experiment shows that in the limit, spending so much on the public option that the private option ceases to exist simply ensures that standards fall even further.
From the posts above, it seems the contributors want lot more public spending. They quote JKG's "The Affluent Society" to enforce the point.
But that book is 40years old, and has surely been proven quite wrong.
Galbraith bemoaned that fact that private services and property such as houses, boats, companies, offices and so on is all lovely, new and shiny. Whereas public property and services are scruffy or of poor quality.
Thanks to Galbraith, two generations of economists and politicians have proceeded to more than treble public expenditure in real terms.
Unfortunately, shoddiness is inherent in government ownership. There's no incentive to do a better job, build a better mousetrap. Still less to do the very best job and work late. Indeed, there's actually lots of incentive for the reverse: sick days, early retirement, over-manning, expenses-paid trips ouot and about, snoozing on the job - work less hard for the same money. Temporary workers in the private sectr are exhorted to work as quickly as possible. In the private sector, they are privately asked to work more slowly and avoid rocking the boat.
Private entrepreneurs are the sole claimants to the property's value, or to their own value if they decide to increase it through hard work, extra qualifications. There's no such advantage gained by the individual consumer or provider of government-funded goods or services.
You can try a simple experiment yourself. I made an appointment to see the
doctor with sick child. I was given an appointment for 10:15, which came and went. Since i'd never been seen on time, I waited until 10:45 and asked the receptionsist - "Exactly how much money do you think this doctor would need before he kept an appointment?"
Because we aren't talking about an ill-educated person. Nor one who is flooded with five times as many appointments as normal - remeber that they set the time, not me.
We're simply discussing his apportionmant of the forthcoming extra health service expenditure - an extra 8 % ish. Unfortunately, I doubt that paying him an extra 8% would do very much. However, paying the good ones twice as much, and firing the bad ones probably would.
Tax revenues have already risen to deliver "world class service" but natural forces dictate that they'll never be as good s those in the private sector.
No government minister gets on a bus and heaves a sigh of relief at having got rid of their luxury car. If they can, they use private medcine and private education. So why do they pretend that others wouldn't do the same if they possibly can? Why do they ignore the fact that for a private business to work, it must at the very least offer a better service than something that is free?
Silly Galbraith was clever, but wrong. If there is are public and privately-owned/funded services competing (eductaion, transport, health, boats) it is axiomatic that public services and property will always be worse than private. And the communist experiment shows that in the limit, spending so much on the public option that the private option ceases to exist simply ensures that standards fall even further.
Breoch
New member
IF IF IF we could run an Olympic Games as well as say the Aussies did then I think there would be a better return on the investment than on the MAJORITY of graduates about these days. If they'd only lower the standards in Sport to those of OUR education system then we might start winning something.
Glen
Glen
Ohdrat
New member
I would cut...
Defence spending ..in other words forget being a world power in the military sense.. go for the Japanese idea of winning by selling to the world (but with proper regulation of banking and investment)..
Invest in .. true academic degrees - arts or sciences and forget these silly degree courses that mean nothing and replace them with City and Guild type highly skilled / Craftsmen type courses...
and yes an OIympic bid .. and probably would support Hackney as a venue.. or alternatively a "Northern" bid from the real North of England (Northumbria and Cumbria) with Southern and Central Scotland.. now that would provide plenty of room / venues ... imagine the rowing on the Lakes or Kielder .. the marathon in the cheviots.. Sailing on the Clyde.. etc etc all with stunning scenery .. wow is all I can say..
Defence spending ..in other words forget being a world power in the military sense.. go for the Japanese idea of winning by selling to the world (but with proper regulation of banking and investment)..
Invest in .. true academic degrees - arts or sciences and forget these silly degree courses that mean nothing and replace them with City and Guild type highly skilled / Craftsmen type courses...
and yes an OIympic bid .. and probably would support Hackney as a venue.. or alternatively a "Northern" bid from the real North of England (Northumbria and Cumbria) with Southern and Central Scotland.. now that would provide plenty of room / venues ... imagine the rowing on the Lakes or Kielder .. the marathon in the cheviots.. Sailing on the Clyde.. etc etc all with stunning scenery .. wow is all I can say..
ThomasHome
New member
No contest - Olympics
I don't see why I should pay for some spotty to have an easy life for 3 years doing an RE degree of something even less useful, if they have to pay for it they might do something worthwhile. Put the money into training the city street kids, so they can get some skills and a job.
Alternatively we could have an Olympic games and have something the country could be proud of rather that clinging onto the memories or the 1966 world cup.
I don't see why I should pay for some spotty to have an easy life for 3 years doing an RE degree of something even less useful, if they have to pay for it they might do something worthwhile. Put the money into training the city street kids, so they can get some skills and a job.
Alternatively we could have an Olympic games and have something the country could be proud of rather that clinging onto the memories or the 1966 world cup.
CliveG
Well-known member
My son wants to do a medical degree and become a doctor to the benefit of all.
If he achieves this he will end up with a debt of £30,000 at the end of the 5 year course.
The country is crying out for more doctors.
This is how we encourage our young people to train to carry out these important duties!
This makes me so cross I – I – I am lost for words!!!
Do we really need the Olympics?
We need Doctors and a lot of other graduate trained professionals.
If he achieves this he will end up with a debt of £30,000 at the end of the 5 year course.
The country is crying out for more doctors.
This is how we encourage our young people to train to carry out these important duties!
This makes me so cross I – I – I am lost for words!!!
Do we really need the Olympics?
We need Doctors and a lot of other graduate trained professionals.
Mirelle
N/A
we could go on for ever
but I don't think any of us was calling for increased public spending, we were calling for a reallocation of existing spending, away from silly prestige projects and into serious education - the argument about what sort of higher education is useful is separate from the argument about who should pay for it.
Unfortunately we have a culture, in the private sector as well as in the public sector, which goes in for a great deal of nonsense, having managed to misunderstand almost all the management wisdom of the past 40 years. Sure, some private businesses are better but there is a fearsome amount of jobsworthism and obscurantism in both public and private sectors.
My quotation from JKG was an allusion to the squalid state of our public spaces and public transport, which are far worse than they were 40 years ago.
but I don't think any of us was calling for increased public spending, we were calling for a reallocation of existing spending, away from silly prestige projects and into serious education - the argument about what sort of higher education is useful is separate from the argument about who should pay for it.
Unfortunately we have a culture, in the private sector as well as in the public sector, which goes in for a great deal of nonsense, having managed to misunderstand almost all the management wisdom of the past 40 years. Sure, some private businesses are better but there is a fearsome amount of jobsworthism and obscurantism in both public and private sectors.
My quotation from JKG was an allusion to the squalid state of our public spaces and public transport, which are far worse than they were 40 years ago.
janie
New member
Looking abroad
I fear that the graduates we want here will be going abroad, especially with the positive discrimination that the elite universities are going to have to introduce. Forget entry based on merit, 'means' will be the new criteria. I'll certainly be looking at foreign universities for my children.
I fear that the graduates we want here will be going abroad, especially with the positive discrimination that the elite universities are going to have to introduce. Forget entry based on merit, 'means' will be the new criteria. I'll certainly be looking at foreign universities for my children.
clueless
New member
from the mens british olympic rowing team which did so well in sydney three members (and their coach) were graduates of imperial college london. as was one of the womans team.
the rector of imperial sir richard sykes is the very man who started a lot of this fees nonsense. what does this say about the proirities of the people with influence in our country?
the rector of imperial sir richard sykes is the very man who started a lot of this fees nonsense. what does this say about the proirities of the people with influence in our country?
ccscott49
Active member
This country has got it's priorities well and truly screwed! You're quite correct Jim! But if the powers that be could get their collective arses in gear, they could, like the yanks did, make money out of the olympics. But that might be asking a little much of this shower of..............just look at the dome fiasco and the new wembley pillocks the lot of them!
david_e
Active member
Re: never heard of JKG, just tell it as I see it..
What about the railways and tracks etc? Haven't fared too well under private ownership.
We all want better services but unwinding all public sector ones won't always achieve this. It is more about people, as you intimate, and the public sector is so far up it's own cultural a******e that it will never change.
Radical change didn't work, just as pumping cash in won't. Reason is the system will never attract the type of people required in sufficient numbers to make a difference.
Politicians are too corrupt to care.
You're GP does though, I hate waiting for appts but, if he has spent a little longer caring for sick peeps then it is not such a bad thing, after all, he rarely knows the problem before you go in, and it is worth taking the time to diagnose the problem correctly, otherwise we will all be back asking for another prognosis and clogging up the surgery.
Then again there are private GP's to call upon. My grandparents used to pay the Doctor, but peeps would be sick rather than pay and most never lived too long under that regime. Now that would be a new one for the sick note; "No cash for the Doc 'cause you're wages are crap and my debts are 2 big"
)
What about the railways and tracks etc? Haven't fared too well under private ownership.
We all want better services but unwinding all public sector ones won't always achieve this. It is more about people, as you intimate, and the public sector is so far up it's own cultural a******e that it will never change.
Radical change didn't work, just as pumping cash in won't. Reason is the system will never attract the type of people required in sufficient numbers to make a difference.
Politicians are too corrupt to care.
You're GP does though, I hate waiting for appts but, if he has spent a little longer caring for sick peeps then it is not such a bad thing, after all, he rarely knows the problem before you go in, and it is worth taking the time to diagnose the problem correctly, otherwise we will all be back asking for another prognosis and clogging up the surgery.
Then again there are private GP's to call upon. My grandparents used to pay the Doctor, but peeps would be sick rather than pay and most never lived too long under that regime. Now that would be a new one for the sick note; "No cash for the Doc 'cause you're wages are crap and my debts are 2 big"
)
david_e
Active member
Agree, thing is, we will end with the Olympics (which we can get free on the telly if someone else does it) and end up paying for the grads through increased taxes.
jimi
Well-known member
I am absolutely staggered at the sheer stupidity of some of the ideas. Leave University with major debts , try and get a mortgage ... never mind think of starting a family .. I'm sure its a sophisticated commie plot to get rid of the educated classes ..
2nd idea base entrance qualifications on postcode, rich kid fails A levels, rich daddy buys flat in Peckham, rich kid applies from Peckham
No its not a commie plot its to ensure that university education is only available to the well heeled .. I've got 3 bright daughters, I left Uni with a whopping overdraft in 1977, was still paying it off 8 years later, I swore that no child of mine would ever be in that situation so good bye early retirement ... oops, thats gone already. Think I'll join the army, they seem to get whatever they ask for!
2nd idea base entrance qualifications on postcode, rich kid fails A levels, rich daddy buys flat in Peckham, rich kid applies from Peckham
No its not a commie plot its to ensure that university education is only available to the well heeled .. I've got 3 bright daughters, I left Uni with a whopping overdraft in 1977, was still paying it off 8 years later, I swore that no child of mine would ever be in that situation so good bye early retirement ... oops, thats gone already. Think I'll join the army, they seem to get whatever they ask for!
jimi
Well-known member
Re: Sorry, JKG was wrong imho
I do'nt want more public spending .. I want less
BUT
I want it spent effectively and efficiently. IMHO the treasury take is more than ample to finance a decent education,health and pension service.
But as Mirelle has stated why do we spend on defence as if we were still a superpower? We're not!
I do'nt want more public spending .. I want less
BUT
I want it spent effectively and efficiently. IMHO the treasury take is more than ample to finance a decent education,health and pension service.
But as Mirelle has stated why do we spend on defence as if we were still a superpower? We're not!
tcm
...
Re: Efficient spending
I have often wondered why they don't have an easy wall chart, showing how much they get,. and what it's spent on.
I think the reason is that we'd all freak out. I beleive things are much worse than we imagine. For example, I heard that if we decided (say) to have no fire service and no police force, we'd only save 70% of these budgets - the remainder is spent on pensions for these retired firemen and police, and the proportion is rising. I'm also fascinated by the statistic that Camden Council employs 70,000 people, in a borough with fewer than 400,000 inhabitants.
I have often wondered why they don't have an easy wall chart, showing how much they get,. and what it's spent on.
I think the reason is that we'd all freak out. I beleive things are much worse than we imagine. For example, I heard that if we decided (say) to have no fire service and no police force, we'd only save 70% of these budgets - the remainder is spent on pensions for these retired firemen and police, and the proportion is rising. I'm also fascinated by the statistic that Camden Council employs 70,000 people, in a borough with fewer than 400,000 inhabitants.
claymore
Well-known member
Re: Efficient spending
I think the engagement of an unwieldy raft of administrative staff is a common symptom. Colleges became incorporated in 1994 and at that time the ratio of Lecturing staff to Admin staff was around 10:1 - (very much an average figure) - with the main supportive work of Payroll, HRM, Central Purchasing, Maintenance etc. being done in County Halls.
Now we have the ration completely in reverse with 10 administrators to each member of 'academic' staff within colleges - each reflecting the mini local government structure from whence they came.
In counties where there are several colleges this does become a complete nonsense. reflecting the lack of ability to think long term strategically by the Government of the day.
regards
Claymore
I think the engagement of an unwieldy raft of administrative staff is a common symptom. Colleges became incorporated in 1994 and at that time the ratio of Lecturing staff to Admin staff was around 10:1 - (very much an average figure) - with the main supportive work of Payroll, HRM, Central Purchasing, Maintenance etc. being done in County Halls.
Now we have the ration completely in reverse with 10 administrators to each member of 'academic' staff within colleges - each reflecting the mini local government structure from whence they came.
In counties where there are several colleges this does become a complete nonsense. reflecting the lack of ability to think long term strategically by the Government of the day.
regards
Claymore
Will_M
Member
We voted the losers party in... What more can we say!
