I don't like this comments thing, btw >.>
Big thanks to Andrew for developing this!~J, shoot me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org to raise any points with the design as I don't really want to get into discussion here (though it's definitely staying at least while I'm still techy)
100 leading economists have already stated in the Independent today that Brown is correct on this and Cameron is just plain wrong. Cameron's cuts will cause a double dip recession.http://ht.ly/1ED15
"every business leader" says your right Cameron. More like every leading economist says your wrong!
Ok Gordon "four year plan" is a really unfortunate name lol
What is a vice chancellor clegg? Some newfangled hung parliment Lib Dem position? lol!
Its not really relevant but I'm so glad that Berlusconi video made it onto Nouse! x
Anybody else think that if they made 'Barbie & Ken 40 years on' dolls, Cameron = Ken?
Nick clegg aka DICK clegg! The man doesnt know his right hand from a proper economic policy!
Please learn when to use you're and when to use your. Your comments are boring enough without errors.
Dimbleby - finally a professional in charge. Thank god for the BBC.p.s. love the new structure for comments/updates - great work Nouse.
Charlotte - yes it is beneficial. Having more university-educated people is *surely* better for society than having less?Booom.
"@Sam Seaborn, really? Of all the jobs in society how many is it pertinent to have a University degree?"University is about more than providing people for jobs.University education breaks down bigoted opinions towards class, race, sexuality, nationality. It creates individuals who are more independent and socially responsible. All of which have nothing to do with specific qualifications to get someone a job. But all of which are undoubtedly good for society.
haha, Clegg saying "get real" now
I think Brown may be having more of an influence than Clegg may like
"@Sam Seaborn BUT should society come at the cost of an individual. I have a friend who is a ship builder and didn't go to University." Did you also meet a black man the other day... On serious note - I'm not saying he should be forced to go to University! Just that if he wanted to, he should have had the opportunity."He isn't bigoted or narrow minded and I think it's highly patronizing to suggest that people who don't go University are."Me too. Which is why I didn't say that! Read my post again - I said going to University helps break down opinions like that. I didn't say that not going automatically makes you have those opinions."Are you suggesting that he should have paid to go to University and get a completely unnecessary degree, just because that makes other people feel that he's helping to create a more valued society?"I've answered this question above.
"Please learn when to use you're and when to use your. Your comments are boring enough without errors."I'm glad my dyslexia provides you with sone entertainment!
Surely dyslexia doesn't cause grammatical errors?
Sorry I stand corrected
"@Sam Seaborn, do you not think that by saying (sorry I cant quote your post, my computer is acting up) that the more people that go to University the better, you are somehow implying that people that don't aren't as valued in society?" You are confusing the argument - the individual level is different from the aggregate level. Think about a more simple example: is it beneficial for more people to be able to read/write in society? Yes. Does it make one person better than another? Of course not."I completely agree with you that people that want to go to University should be able to, but the fact is that I think lots of people go to University not because they have a passionate desire to, but because, well, it's what everyone seems to do!"Okay then, what would you do if 100% of 18 year olds this year wanted to go to University? I rest my case.
Pretty poor from Cameron to completely ignore Brown's mention on inheritance tax, twice
I don't like guys who run for parliament because they think it's a great gig. Find yourself a live one and I'll get interested. In the meantime, the devil you know beats the devil you don't. And I like the devil I got. Vote for Gordon Brown.
I think that Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg all need to learn how to answer a question. Perhaps one of them will even be so impressed by the outcome of such training that they will put it into the national curriculum?It's hard to understand how we can trust people who seemingly lack the ability to understand and answer simple questions to somehow sort out the problems in our country. Without suggesting that it's only him doing it I think it's fair to say that Brown in the king of constantly proposing false dichotomy's. How many times does Clegg have to say that Child Tax credits are not progressive before Brown actually deals with that point? Simply because something has a nice name doesn't mean it is a good thing.In all 3 debates I've been depressed beyond belief by their fundamental inability to address each others policies critically, resorting to 'they look like children', 'look at them squabble like old ladies' or 'I hear the old parties spouting old promises' none of these constitute legitimate answers to important questions.If the British public is not more confused than ever before by the hideous abuse of rhetoric in these debates I'll eat one of my ridiculous hats.
"My question is why do these 18 year olds want to go to University and is it the right thing for them, individually, to do?"So it's up to you to decide what the 'right reasons' are? Jog on."My point is that lots of people go to University when it's not necessarily the right thing for them to do"So it's up to you to decide what the 'right reasons' are? Jog on."This is not only relevant to them, personally, but to society as a whole, as it produces a vast proportion of people who expect to go into well paid, typical "graduate" jobs, despite that fact that society demands a wide range of jobs, many of which do not require, or need, a University degree."You what?! You're saying that ambition is a bad thing? Jog on."My point isn't that going to University isn't useful, or doesn't make you a "better" person. It is that it leads people to expect a certain level of employment and average wage, and that at the moment the amount of graduates the UK is producing isn't equal to the amount of typical graduate jobs available at the moment."Repetition of a poor argument is not a good debating technique. Jog on."I do think that University allows you to meet different people from different backgrounds, and that in doing this you are likely to remove some of the prejudice surrounding certain areas."If you think this is a good thing (which you imply), the you fall prey to your own argument in your previous post! Again, jog on."However, I also think that education extends further than University and that in being "well educated" in the respect of being aware of other countries, current affairs, basically what's going on around you etc. university is helpful, not crucial. Society produces many people without "bigoted opinions towards class, race, sexuality, nationality" as well as "individuals who are independent and socially responsible". Not all of them went to University."Helpful, not useful?! You WHAT? It's this type of opinion change that got slavery banned. That got women the right to vote. That got civil partnerships. I'm surprised you think these weren't essential.Jog. On.
Oops I pressed enter too early and meant:Helpful, not crucial?! You WHAT? It's this type of opinion change that got slavery banned. That got women the right to vote. That got civil partnerships. I'm surprised you think these weren't crucial. And all were led by groups of individuals participating in the top level of education at the time.Jog. On.
"whichever party wins the next election will have to impose such draconian legislation that they will be out of power for over a generation" Mervin King
@J.Barlet/Sam Seaborn I think you've just illustrated how you are missing my point. I'm not saying that University isn't crucial in society. I'm saying that it isn't crucial for everyone. When slavery was banned not everyone went to University, and as you've pointed out yourself, society still managed to develop and evolve. Education is always important, but a degree isn't necessarily always the path to "break down bigoted opinions" as you are suggesting. Sometimes, not always.
"I'm not saying that University isn't crucial in society. I'm saying that it isn't crucial for everyone. When slavery was banned not everyone went to University, and as you've pointed out yourself, society still managed to develop and evolve. Education is always important, but a degree isn't necessarily always the path to "break down bigoted opinions" as you are suggesting. Sometimes, not always."That's the key phrase, Charlotte: 'sometimes, not always'. So sometimes it *is* needed. Therefore, allowing anyone to go to University is surely neccesary to make sure this can happen, and moreover, if everyone goes to University surely this has the greatest chance of removing as many bigoted and prejudiced opinions as possible? Finally - you've not addressed my point about the progression of education. Why do you think the amount of compulsory learning has increased over human history? The general level of education of society is directly linked to social progression in things like civil rights.
Credit to Ali for the So Solid Crew reference!