Darling the saviour of oo?

LillyJ

Yep exactly. I think we should all get it.

I don't think that people being hospitalised in England because they are students and cannot afford their asthma inhalers is a good thing, and they should be free for everyone, and if not everyone at least people in full time education!

epz_2

LillyJ wrote: »

Well as I said it was just anecdotal information from people I know in the north of scotland, maybe it is regional.
I have no idea about whisky (apart from that I don't like it) so can't comment, but I do know about healthcare.
I agree about the armed forces, but if we were to be independent of each other, I doubt highly that Scotland would be a major force in the military world and therefore there would be a huge amount of unemployment. Although I agree that places like Lossiemouth would be a loss.

i seriously doubt england would be much of a world power either without a large chunk of its scottish army doing the heavy lifting, its not just bases though building a new 5-10 billion pound replacement for the trident base wouldnt be fun, but a lot of critical infrastructure is dependant on scotlands resources (energy, water etc)

saying there would be high unemployment because our youth wouldnt be turned into cannon fodder because there are no other oppertunites is a short sighted tactic.

re us not paying our way, well aside from the fact lots of our resources have been ferreted away like oil tax or traded like fishing rights you also have to remeber our economy has repeatedly been sacrificed to deal with SE bubbles

seriously look at the resources scotland has and ask why all the english politicians want to keep hold of it, oil, gas, 500 years of coal, legal right so a huge fishing area, the best wind/tidal energy resources this side of hawaii, 93% non urban land, well educated english speaking population and an economy that would cope well with europes lower interest rates.

moggylover

Generali wrote: »

No bad thing if you remember the 70s!

Anyway, do you honestly believe that high unemployment was just about reducing trade union power? If so you should revisit your economic history books. High unemployment was caused by the UK taxpayer being unable to support millions employed in loss making nationalised industries being laid off.

Hi Generali
So what did we gain from the brutal power of the First Witch - now we do not support millions EMPLOYED in nationalised industries - according to the Fascist Mantra about benefit cheats and frauds we now support them because they are UNEMPLOYED !!!!! lol - I personally think that it was better to have loss making (and they probably could have been made profitable if the top cats had taken more realistic salaries) industries in our economy than the current one of worthless paper shuffling, and service industries - with those that are still capable of being manually creative given
little in the way of a chance to use that capability and no credit for it.


Trouble is - getting your hands dirty and doing something actually WORTHWHILE for a living has never been seen as something to be proud of by those with pretentions. I sincerely consider that a miner EARNED more than an office bod - purely because, even for a million pounds an hour - I COULD NOT HAVE GONE DOWN THERE! You would have had to shoot me first! But he produced something worthwhile and necessary. Ask yourself: do you?! Be really honest. Do you?

pickles110564

LillyJ wrote: »

everyone at least people in full time education!

This makes me laugh, most people that go into full time education are only going for the parties and being able to run up loads of debt doing it.
It should only be for people that get top marks in everything, knowing that they wont waste the education that is provided for them.

Benefits_Blagger

pickles110564 wrote: »

This makes me laugh, most people that go into full time education are only going for the parties and being able to run up loads of debt doing it.
It should only be for people that get top marks in everything, knowing that they wont waste the education that is provided for them.

totally agree, first time i have ever agreed pickles!

higher education is a total waste of money for a lot of people and is probably detrimental to the UK economy as i doubt that the supposedly better educated workforce is more productive. fact is that many jobs now ask for degrees because so many people have them, whereas in the past the same jobs didn't require them. can someone tell me how having a degree in "media studies" increases productivity when manning a telephone in a call centre ?

we should have less people in higher education, so it can be free for those who are truly deserving of that education regardless of their background.

jamescredmond

Benefits_Blagger wrote: »

totally agree, first time i have ever agreed pickles!

higher education is a total waste of money for a lot of people and is probably detrimental to the UK economy as i doubt that the supposedly better educated workforce is more productive. fact is that many jobs now ask for degrees because so many people have them, whereas in the past the same jobs didn't require them. can someone tell me how having a degree in "media studies" increases productivity when manning a telephone in a call centre ?

we should have less people in higher education, so it can be free for those who are truly deserving of that education regardless of their background.

tend to agree. HE has morphed into a 'one-size fits all' entity, and def. not the panacea that was promised to address the skills shortage.

to bore you all:

in the late 70's, only 16% of my county's 16yr-olds stayed on to sit A levels.
just half of this figure went on to uni.

so, if you're now in your mid-40's and went to uni you were one of a small minority (8%).

if you studied for a deg. in the arts, some of your fellow students probably looked with disdain on those studying for a deg. in,'say', engineering.

you probably come from a middle-class background, where your parents put a high premium on education and encouraged.

you probably had enough room in the house for a study, where you could be left undisturbed.

I well remember how grads glided effortlessly down from uni into a well-paid job, with plenty of prospects.

for lesser mortals, getting into HE was still a struggle, for numerous reasons.
not least a low-income background that necessitated a teen wage to supplement low h/hold income.

Lab. knew all about this edu. apartheid and the class/economic divisions it helped to maintain. 'SOMETHING HAD TO BE DONE'.

and, sure enough, they have made a complete and utter B******* of it.

reaching for their faded copy of Gaitskell observations, they settled on his disappointment with the w/class and 'the poverty of aspiration'.

so, how to lift the w/class out of their condition?

simple.

dumb-down and sex-up courses (golf course m'ment - I ask you)

make 'em pay for it and tell 'em they'll earn more (17%) than someone who hadn't bothered. (17% is prob. another piece of spin)

and now we're all middle-class, with a jobs market flooded with people waving deg.papers of (mostly) dubious quality.

tah-daaaahh! we've just created 'opportunity for all'!

God bless labour.........

I'm hyper-ventilating again.

PasturesNew

Warning: Remember interest rates will vary. If you do not keep up payments on your home it will be repossessed.

Simple... how come nobody noticed it?

PasturesNew

I agree with this. Those that were middle class etc and DID do the degree will say you can do anything you want etc etc .. but the reality was, in my school, we simply weren't TOLD about Uni/degree.

As a girl I was given 2 minutes with the careers teacher to chooise one of four choices:
- secretary
- nurse
- hairdresser
- work in a shop or factory

jamescredmond wrote: »

in the late 70's, only 16% of my county's 16yr-olds stayed on to sit A levels.
just half of this figure went on to uni.

so, if you're now in your mid-40's and went to uni you were one of a small minority (8%).

...
you probably come from a middle-class background, where your parents put a high premium on education and encouraged.

you probably had enough room in the house for a study, where you could be left undisturbed.

Reading through your points, yes, 8% (wealthier people) went to Uni

A room in the house for a study, left undisturbed. Yes. In my house there was one coal fire in the living room. Even to do homework there was my younger sister playing around/watching TV and mum wanting to clear the table so we could eat tea. My bedroom was 6'x7' and there was no heating.

Also, you might like to chuck in "being female" ... I bet more boys went to Uni than girls. As a girl, it was expected you'd get married/have kids.

It's a different world now to then.

pickles110564

Benefits_Blagger wrote: »

totally agree, first time i have ever agreed pickles!

higher education is a total waste of money for a lot of people and is probably detrimental to the UK economy as i doubt that the supposedly better educated workforce is more productive. fact is that many jobs now ask for degrees because so many people have them, whereas in the past the same jobs didn't require them. can someone tell me how having a degree in "media studies" increases productivity when manning a telephone in a call centre ?

we should have less people in higher education, so it can be free for those who are truly deserving of that education regardless of their background.

Perhaps we should join forces on this one, you are spot on.All that has happened is that degrees are now worthless, common sense and hard work is a better education for most of us.
I could have gone to uni but did not see the point because I would not have got high enough marks to then go on to a decent career.

mellowtimes

LillyJ wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/22/nscot122.xml
I have nothing against Scots (and half my family are from there) I just find it unfair that your government decides what they want to do, then take money from England to do it.

Us subsidising you is not an attitude it is a FACT.

I think you will find that it is not "FACT" at all. Can back this up with some proof ?