General politics discussion thread

[Van Dammer]

Do you understand my meaning when I say "attitude," David?

Yeah you mean "has a different opinion to me".

 

Attitude has nothing to do with opinion.

[bobbins]

I wish they'd do more to protect useful degrees. Maths, Sciences, Engineering, Business and the rest that produce useful, productive skills. Making Music, Art, Drama students etcetera pay a lot more is fine, I have no problem with that but we desperately need more useful people leaving University.

What ridiculous bullshit, and this is the exact reason that the marketisation of education to this extent is completely wrong. Music, Art and Drama all enrich society. Culture is vital for the modern world. People who study culture and the humanities do it out of interest in the subject, a desire to educate themselves and improve their skills. This is what education is for. Education doesn't have the sole reason of existence to get a high-paying job as possible. These are skills that are less likely to lead to high paid jobs, they're even very likely to not lead to jobs at all within the industry that has been studied. Yet they should pay more for an education that tries to culturally enrich society, when they're less likely to be able to pay it back?

 

And what this marketisation creates is the people who do study "useful" subjects like Maths and Science, end up getting into financial services because they've been taught that money is the be-all and end-all, and they need to pay off their massive debts, instead of using their skills on something that could really benefit society like medicine, scientific research, green technology etc.

 

Most people I know from school and university got a degree then went back to working in a shop or call centre, or even started learning a trade that they could've started learning at sixteen. The degrees were meaningless, and achieved fuck all other than lining someone's pockets with the interest on the loan repayments. And even that was stupid, because half the people aren't making enough money to have to pay the loan back anyway. The ones protesting to keep the system the way it's been for the last while need a shlap. Whoever decided to "upgrade" the polytechnics in the first place needs raping.

Unpleasant casual rape-talk aside, who cares if people get a degree then start learning a trade they could have started at 16? Education is a good thing. An educated society is a happier and more productive society. Give me an electrician, plumber, plasterer with a degree and a bit of knowledge of the world outside his bubble over one that went straight out of school into an apprenticeship and never left his home town, any day.

 

Education is not a commodity for individual investment, depending on likelihood of returning a profit, it's an essential part of a civilised society and the only way we can grow as a nation.

Edited December 13, 2010 by bobbins

[bobbins]

Do you understand my meaning when I say "attitude," David?

Yeah you mean "has a different opinion to me".

 

Attitude has nothing to do with opinion.

Exactly, David doesn't have an attitude, SSB just disagrees with him.

[Van Dammer]

Do you understand my meaning when I say "attitude," David?

Yeah you mean "has a different opinion to me".

 

Attitude has nothing to do with opinion.

Exactly, David doesn't have an attitude, SSB just disagrees with him.

 

I dont think so, I think most people can see what SSB is talking about.

[bobbins]

Do you understand my meaning when I say "attitude," David?

Yeah you mean "has a different opinion to me".

 

Attitude has nothing to do with opinion.

Exactly, David doesn't have an attitude, SSB just disagrees with him.

 

I dont think so, I think most people can see what SSB is talking about.

Nonsense, which particular post shows a bad attitude?

[Van Dammer]

Do you understand my meaning when I say "attitude," David?

Yeah you mean "has a different opinion to me".

 

Attitude has nothing to do with opinion.

Exactly, David doesn't have an attitude, SSB just disagrees with him.

 

I dont think so, I think most people can see what SSB is talking about.

Nonsense, which particular post shows a bad attitude?

 

Well I cant speak for the guy who brought it up but for me its more to do with his attitude to other peoples opinions.

[bobbins]

Well I cant speak for the guy who brought it up but for me its more to do with his attitude to other peoples opinions.

In what specific instance?

[Van Dammer]

Well I cant speak for the guy who brought it up but for me its more to do with his attitude to other peoples opinions.

In what specific instance?

You cant pick out specific instances for an attitude can you? Its just always lingering. Generally enforcing his view and dis-regarding everyone elses. He often replies to posts in here without taking in valid points against his arguement and instead continues to badger about his own opinion. Plus when someone seems to just have the attitude where they are against everything a government does, is for every strike, for every violent protest and encouraging more it just devalues his arguements which he doesnt seem to get.

[bobbins]

You cant pick out specific instances for an attitude can you?

That's what I thought. Interesting that SmokeSoapBar seemed upset by the "attitudes" of people all on the opposite side of the debate to him. David, Lister and KoSwing. There's really no complaint to make, you're just frustrated because your constantly proved to be defending the indefensible.

 

Speaking of which, this is brilliant.

 

What a ridiculous slant to that interview. "There is a suggestion you were rolling towards the police in your wheelchair"

[SpursRiot2012]

bobbins, it's not about differing opinions or even if I've been "constantly proved to be defending the indefensible." It's the way in which David in particular puts his opinions across. I'm finding it hard to think of the right word for it, attitude was the only one that came to mind. Or tone, perhaps. Even though, like attitude, it's dodgy to use that term when you are talking about text.

[Jonathan Ford]

bobbins, it's not about differing opinions or even if I've been "constantly proved to be defending the indefensible." It's the way in which David in particular puts his opinions across. I'm finding it hard to think of the right word for it, attitude was the only one that came to mind. Or tone, perhaps. Even though, like attitude, it's dodgy to use that term when you are talking about text.

 

Without wishing to put words in anyones mouth, I suspect posts like the one below are the kind to which SSB refers.

 

That being said, if it were to turn out that this student *was* assaulted by a police officer, I would hope and expect that the officer be held accountable.

Just like the copper (who had previous before the event) who done in Ian Tomlinson?

 

The inference to be drawn from it is that because one police constable is suspected of using unreasonable force, that all police officers must use unreasonable levels of force when policing in public order situations, and be unfettered by legal due process as a result of their priveliged position.

 

However, all of this is inference; what one person chooses to infer from written text may be different to the authors intent. Though David and I have largely differing political views, I don't beleive that he displays "attitude" or malice in his style of posting, though the post above does come across as though David is unwiling to consider that cracking this protester over the head *may* have been a perfectly reasonable thing to do in the situation.

[Loki]

I wish they'd do more to protect useful degrees. Maths, Sciences, Engineering, Business and the rest that produce useful, productive skills. Making Music, Art, Drama students etcetera pay a lot more is fine, I have no problem with that but we desperately need more useful people leaving University.

What ridiculous bullshit, and this is the exact reason that the marketisation of education to this extent is completely wrong. Music, Art and Drama all enrich society. Culture is vital for the modern world. People who study culture and the humanities do it out of interest in the subject, a desire to educate themselves and improve their skills. This is what education is for. Education doesn't have the sole reason of existence to get a high-paying job as possible. These are skills that are less likely to lead to high paid jobs, they're even very likely to not lead to jobs at all within the industry that has been studied. Yet they should pay more for an education that tries to culturally enrich society, when they're less likely to be able to pay it back?

 

And what this marketisation creates is the people who do study "useful" subjects like Maths and Science, end up getting into financial services because they've been taught that money is the be-all and end-all, and they need to pay off their massive debts, instead of using their skills on something that could really benefit society like medicine, scientific research, green technology etc.

 

Most people I know from school and university got a degree then went back to working in a shop or call centre, or even started learning a trade that they could've started learning at sixteen. The degrees were meaningless, and achieved fuck all other than lining someone's pockets with the interest on the loan repayments. And even that was stupid, because half the people aren't making enough money to have to pay the loan back anyway. The ones protesting to keep the system the way it's been for the last while need a shlap. Whoever decided to "upgrade" the polytechnics in the first place needs raping.

Unpleasant casual rape-talk aside, who cares if people get a degree then start learning a trade they could have started at 16? Education is a good thing. An educated society is a happier and more productive society. Give me an electrician, plumber, plasterer with a degree and a bit of knowledge of the world outside his bubble over one that went straight out of school into an apprenticeship and never left his home town, any day.

 

Education is not a commodity for individual investment, depending on likelihood of returning a profit, it's an essential part of a civilised society and the only way we can grow as a nation.

 

Great post, Bobbins. The premise of the government's new policy is that University degrees automatically guarantee a higher income. Leaving aside whether or not that's even fair, it's also a really simplistic way of looking at degrees. As you pointed out, Arts degrees aren't designed (and nor should they be) to train you for a specific job or career. If one went with Pity's idea of arts/humanities student paying more, then such degrees would become the exclusive domain of rich kids, which is what we're trying to get away from. If anything, they should pay LESS than vocational degrees as those ones stand a better chance of actually generating some decent income later in life.

 

Where I do disagree with you though is in the assumption that getting a "degree" is always the best thing a young person can do. Personally, I think the whole drive to send more and more people to university has been incredibly destructive. Vocational training courses, apprenticeships, internships - these are often much better ways of preparing someone for a career or giving them skills.

 

Universities are bound, in the structuring of their courses, by the principal that a degree revolves around academic study, theoretical and critical structures, written coursework, and so on. What a waste of time for people who, for example, are good with their hands but not great at essay writing! What you end up with, in many cases, is reams of graduates with a bunch of fairly useless theoretical knowledge and no practical experience or skills.

 

It's not a popular thing to say in politics, but what we need are LESS people going to universities, and more people training to be plumbers, builders, roofers, electricians. What we've ended up with is a shortage of skilled workers in practical areas (hence an influx of migrant workers filling those job vacancies) and a load of "graduates" sitting unemployed or working in telesales or whatever.

[tiger_rick]

I think we need to get away from the opinion that it's everyone's right to go to University. It'd be nice if that was true but it just isn't sustainable these days. University shouldn't be for the richest people, it should be for the brightest people. I'd quite like to see government money being used to broaden the minds of people who show an exceptional level of intelligence or talent, regardless of their background.

 

It'd be nice to see employers take a more open mind to people who don't have degrees too. It isn't the be all and end all. I started a job in 1999 with 2 graduates. I was 4 years younger and straight out of 6th form. I am much better at the job than they were, both went a long time ago. People develop differently and at different times. A degree isn't the be all and end all. I know some pretty stupid people with degrees. University should be about more than it is right now.

[Carbomb]

It's not a popular thing to say in politics, but what we need are LESS people going to universities, and more people training to be plumbers, builders, roofers, electricians. What we've ended up with is a shortage of skilled workers in practical areas (hence an influx of migrant workers filling those job vacancies) and a load of "graduates" sitting unemployed or working in telesales or whatever.

 

I've actually been saying this for a while now. Blair's obsession with sending half the nation to university was never going to work, and it's the reason why tuition fees had to be introduced in the first place, to support all the new unis being created.

 

As a result, there is now a ridiculous shortfall in properly apprenticed blue-collar workers, which makes for an untenable situation: you can't build an economy purely on white-collars.

 

What should be done is close down most of the new unis, re-introduce the Industrial Training Boards which Thatcher decided to get rid of, institute proper apprenticeship programmes, and make Further Education free again.

[Kenny McBride]

I'd like to see far fewer people going to university and far, far more being done IN university. I did an English degree and was the ONLY person in one tutorial who knew the difference between a noun and a verb. I'm not joking. That was the moment I lost all faith in a university education. If that's the standard, what meaning does it have? I mean really, that's stuff I learned in primary three. The drive to get more and more people into higher education hasn't increased the overall level of educational attainment in the country. It's just lowered the bar for everyone.