Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

cogito

Theophile wrote: »

Compulsory education yes, but failing.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-33993/Britain-worst-schools-Europe.html

It's not a coincidence that the country with the lowest literacy levels in the EU is the country that voted to leave it.

Remember 'education, education, education'? How the Blair government chucked untold amounts of money into the system and it's still a failure? Spending vast amounts of money is no guarantee of success but the politicisation of the education system which got under way in the 70's is a guarantee of failure. And the left wing carries all the blame.

cogito

Moby wrote: »

I agree that we have excellent security services but they depend on easy information sharing and co-operation between states. Is brexit going to make that more difficult? The USA is used as an example of how it can go for us in future but apparently its not easy with the USA either because the course of future law has an impact and leaving the ECJ will mean we won't have future alignment with the other states anymore?

And how exactly is that relevant to the work of the security services?

ukcarper

Arklight wrote: »

Most people who left education at 15 with no formal qualifications voted for Brexit. What other definition of little to none would you use compared to the fact that must graduates voted to remain?

I know Brexit is supposed to be some kind of peasants revolution, but maybe you should entertain the notion that your allies are just not well enough informed to have an opinion worth listening to.

Cue another Express article surrounded by links about a cat that weighs 8 stone, UFO sightings, and Kim Kardashian's buttocks...

So you are saying people who did not have opportunity to go on to higher education through no fault of thier own are not qualified to vote but an 18 year old with no experience of supporting themselves or life in general are. The contempt you are others show towards people who do not agree with your views is alarming and shows a misplaced arrogance.

Theophile

Tea_Four wrote: »

What a deceitful post.

There might not have been quite 100,000 but there was a considerable number and methinks far more than your suggested two OAP's.

The original page upon which that was posted says nothing even remotely similar to that which you try to suggest.

The original is in Huffpost and is entitled "Brexit Supreme Court Hearing Sees Pro-Israel Leprechaun Dance Outside" for anybody wanting to read the original.

Ok, I stand corrected. There were more than 2.

A pro-Brexit group had claimed 100,000 people would join Nigel Farage in a march against the decision to give Parliament a say on triggering Article 50.

However, the number that actually turned up for the first day of the government legal challenge was somewhat shy of the intended protest size, with fewer than 100 people making the effort to register their anger.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-supreme-court-hearing-article-50-nigel-farage-march-peoples-army-a7456406.html

Arklight

cogito wrote: »

Remember 'education, education, education'? How the Blair government chucked untold amounts of money into the system and it's still a failure? Spending vast amounts of money is no guarantee of success but the politicisation of the education system which got under way in the 70's is a guarantee of failure. And the left wing carries all the blame.

Young people are better educated than they've ever been, youth crime is lower than it's ever been. Young people are smart enough not to vote for Brexit and have seen right through the Tories' lies.

Where is the failure?

Arklight

ukcarper wrote: »

So you are saying people who did not have opportunity to go on to higher education through no fault of thier own are not qualified to vote but an 18 year old with no experience of supporting themselves or life in general are. The contempt you are others show towards people who do not agree with your views is alarming and shows a misplaced arrogance.

No, I think we should find every baby boomer with no 'O' levels and immediately promote them to be brain surgeons.

Maybe you'd like them to start on you.

cogito

Arklight wrote: »

Young people are better educated than they've ever been, youth crime is lower than it's ever been. Young people are smart enough not to vote for Brexit and have seen right through the Tories' lies.

Where is the failure?

Dodgy GSCE statistics?

You know, there's a very interesting thing about youth crime statistics. Back around 1990, there was a huge drop in the numbers of recorded youth crimes in the USA. City leaders took credit (of course) claiming that their policies had resulted in the reduction. The true reason was that the decision in Roe v Wade which made abortion legal, meant that many young people who would have become criminals because of deprived backgrounds didn't because they had been aborted. I suspect that the same factor is at play here.

Arklight

cogito wrote: »

Dodgy GSCE statistics?

You know, there's a very interesting thing about youth crime statistics. Back around 1990, there was a huge drop in the numbers of recorded youth crimes in the USA. City leaders took credit (of course) claiming that their policies had resulted in the reduction. The true reason was that the decision in Roe v Wade which made abortion legal, meant that many young people who would have become criminals because of deprived backgrounds didn't because they had been aborted. I suspect that the same factor is at play here.

So just to summarise, you believe that youth crime has fallen in the UK because in 1973 some states in America allowed abortion that previously hadn’t.

Yes, that sounds very probable.

Did you get any O levels by the way?

LHW99

With regard to eductaion versus age:

1) It appears that it was only the under 44 age groups which had a majority voting for remain
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36619342
You may feel old at 45, but I suspect many don't.

2) Between 1950 and 1970, university participation rose from just over 3% to around 4%, with the number in higher education in 1970 (unis + polytechnics) around 8.4%
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/participation-rates-now-we-are-50/2005873.article

This does not imply that the remaining 91.6% were uneducated or stupid - any more than that all the close on 50% now participating in university are "intelligent" or "better educated".
In the 1950's to 70's, many people supplemented school education with evening classes and other types of non-university education / training.

Arklight

LHW99 wrote: »

With regard to eductaion versus age:

1) It appears that it was only the under 44 age groups which had a majority voting for remain
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-36619342
You may feel old at 45, but I suspect many don't.

2) Between 1950 and 1970, university participation rose from just over 3% to around 4%, with the number in higher education in 1970 (unis + polytechnics) around 8.4%
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/participation-rates-now-we-are-50/2005873.article

This does not imply that the remaining 91.6% were uneducated or stupid - any more than that all the close on 50% now participating in university are "intelligent" or "better educated".
In the 1950's to 70's, many people supplemented school education with evening classes and other types of non-university education / training.

The dictionary definition of uneducated is not having received an education.

Someone who has a degree is educated compared to someone who has been to evening classes. They are both educated compared to a school leaver with no qualifications.

The less educated someone is the more statistically probable it is that they will vote for the Right, or what they see as right wing causes like Brexit.

If you want to look at it another way, if you look at entire countries and rank them based on literacy and participation in higher education, which ones are going to be more successful overall, the ones at the top or the ones at the bottom?

Why?