Boris Johnson

Home Forum Chat Forum Boris Johnson

Viewing 40 posts - 81 through 120 (of 166 total)
  • Boris Johnson
  • Mr Woppit
    Member

    emove any benefits they once received, forcing them to either live on the streets or rely on charity in the form of foodbanks etc. In fact it’s even worse than that, many who have jobs are using food banks or even worse are resorting to pay-day loan-sharks to feed their kids. Did that sort of thing exist in the 70s?

    No.

    mt
    Member

    “Did that sort of thing exist in the 70s?” Yes!

    No really it was all wonderful and perfect in the 70’s there was nowt wrong and there was absolutely no reason for Thatcher to get elected.

    She did some bad stuff to industry but she got in for a reason.

    Premier Icon binners
    Subscriber

    The thing with Bozza (as Andrew Rawnsley pointed out in Sunday’s observer) is that he doesn’t even understand the capitalism he then claims to be the saviour of us all. And this isn’t be cause he’s thick, its because he’s lazy!

    He says the only driver for an individual to be entrepreneurial and set up companies, and drive forward technology etc is money. End of. Full Stop. Nothing else. Greed is good, blah, blah, blahโ€ฆ..

    Well Bozzaโ€ฆ it isn’t. Henry Ford didn’t set up Ford to make shad loads of cash. He wanted to develop mass transport. Were Bill Gates and Steve Jobs rapacious grasping capitalists who’s primary objective was making more money than they knew what to do with? I doubt it!

    The only form of capitalism the muppet haired ****-wit understands, where the pursuit of money trumps everything, is that sort that his chums in the City have delivered us! Anyone care to suggest how RBS, HBOS, and their diseased ilk are driving forward anything apart from their own unjustifiable bonuses, or are contributing anything to a wider society? What that form of capitalism is, is purely parasitic! Far from driving anything forward, It feeds of the economy like a leech, unconcerned completely with the health of the host (as RBS driving companies into bankruptcy has so graphically illustrated!)

    And thats the system that the blonde ****-tard triumphs, because he’s so terminally un-inquisitive that he’d never think to question the economic self-interest parroted to him endlessly by his corporate lobbyist friends, who must have thought all their birthdays and christmases had arrived at once when that fool was voted in

    ninfan
    Member

    He says the only driver for an individual to be entrepreneurial and set up companies, and drive forward technology etc is money. End of. Full Stop. Nothing else.

    Where does he say this?

    Mr Woppit
    Member

    mt – Member

    “Did that sort of thing exist in the 70s?” Yes!

    Odd. I was there. I don’t remember food banks or %4k APR loan shark companies.

    I was on drugs most of the time, but I think I’d remember that…

    Premier Icon blurty
    Subscriber

    Thatcher takes the rap for the change in the UK economy from a low value-added, to a high value added one. Heavy manufacturing has been replaced by specialized manufacturing and an ideas based economy.

    The structural change resulted in a generation being put out to grass on benefits, as victims of change. This was the unspoken price that was paid. What the Conservative governments of the 80s & 90s failed to appreciate was that, without significant investment in education, the children (and now grandchildren) of those who were victims of change in the 70s and 80s are still redundant and on benefits.

    It really galls me to think of that wasted resource and talent that the people on long-term benefits represents. Think of all the geniuses that we are missing, through lack of education/ opportunity. I think it’s scandalous.

    konabunny
    Member

    That’s not to say she didn’t have an overall deleterious effect on the country, but she would not approve of today’s political elite. Boris wouldn’t have stood a chance of getting in her cabinet.

    Sorry, but this is utter ahistorical bobbins. Thatcher’s cabinets were rammed with (wealthy, influential, “high born”) people like Boris Johnson. Thatcher was arguably self-made to a degree (although marrying money didn’t hurt), but her support base and ministers were predominantly people exactly like Boris. You say you lived through it – do you remember the disdain that the old Tories had for the self-made Michael Heseltine, about whom Alan Clark said “the trouble with Michael is that he had to buy all his furniture”.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Thatcher_ministry
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Thatcher_ministry
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Thatcher_ministry

    mt
    Member

    Yes woppit I to was there in the 70’s.

    ask1974
    Member

    OK so I wasn’t on drugs during the 70s (Mr Woppit ๐Ÿ˜‰ ) but I have a pretty good reason for not remembering, I was five! But speaking to my folks it was a pretty dark and miserable time, literally. Reading through most of this thread it sounds like many feel that Thatcher was a bad thing which, considering the length she was PM is not surprising – a lot of what she did was highly controversial.

    I’m no political historian, I’m not a Thatcherite and neither am I a socialist so for this reason I found Boris’s speech interesting. When he talks of Thatcher rescuing the UK from a pretty deep shambles one can’t disagree that something was needed and that something was MT. For those who bark loudly about her evils and that of the Conservative party what exactly was the rest of political Britain going to do about it back then? strike? That worked well didn’t it.

    In a time of very similar politicians, largely speaking the same language from almost the same side of the fence I find Boris a bit refreshing. I will be very upset if Ed Miliband ever gets in. IMO Labour still have at least another five years of apologising to do. What was it? “We’ve abolished Boom and Bust” Ha, you had no idea what you were doing you bloody loonies…

    konabunny
    Member

    When he talks of Thatcher rescuing the UK from a pretty deep shambles one can’t disagree that something was needed and that something was MT. For those who bark loudly about her evils and that of the Conservative party what exactly was the rest of political Britain going to do about it back then? strike? That worked well didn’t it.

    fallacy #1: something needed to be done, Thatcherism was something, therefore Thatcherism needed to be done.

    fallacy #2: the only alternative to Thatcherism at the time was striking.

    ask1974
    Member

    fallacy #1: something needed to be done, Thatcherism was something, therefore Thatcherism needed to be done.

    Really? Quoting the BBC.

    But like so many stereotypes, the cliches of the grim 1970s have more than a grain of truth. These were desperately difficult years for Britain, both politically and economically.

    In many ways they marked a reckoning for a country that had been too complacent for too long, basking in the sunshine of post-war affluence, and indifferent to the fact that our foreign competitors had not only caught up with us – they were leaving us behind.

    Sailor Ted, however, soon ran aground, his ship scuppered by the lethal combination of an energy crisis, a financial crash and a second miners’ strike in two years.

    And though Labour’s Harold Wilson got the country back to work, it came at the price of inflation at almost 30% and a humiliating bailout from the IMF.

    Perhaps never before had the political establishment seemed so impotent and irrelevant – little wonder, then, that for the first time in years, emigrants actually outnumbered immigrants.

    Sounds just dandy…

    grum
    Member

    In a time of very similar politicians, largely speaking the same language from almost the same side of the fence I find Boris a bit refreshing.

    Yes he’d make such a refreshing change from the public-school educated elite currently running the country. ๐Ÿ™„

    I will be very upset if Ed Miliband ever gets in. IMO Labour still have at least another five years of apologising to do. What was it? “We’ve abolished Boom and Bust” Ha, you had no idea what you were doing you bloody loonies…

    Not this old chestnut. ๐Ÿ™„

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ramesh-patel/growth-cameron-austerity_b_2007552.html

    rogerthecat
    Member

    Boris = Politician with ambition = Morally bereft tosser.

    If, just for a moment, the political sides would stop lobbing historical rocks at one another, in a blame game that no one will ever win, they could look at where we are at the moment and seek to develop a future which does not entail sacrificing one or more generations of the country’s inhabitants or destroying it’s brilliantly inventive and entrepreneurial spirit.

    Sadly, I cannot ever see this happening because the vacuous idiots who are immersed in their own myopic ideologies will never develop a social conscience that will enable them to look beyond their own political ambitions.

    Politicians, burn them all.

    ask1974
    Member

    Yes he’d make such a refreshing change from the public-school educated elite currently running the country.

    I’m no Tory boy but as it happens I was public school educated, as was one of my sisters from GCSE through A Levels, my other sister was state educated. We all did OK, nothing exceptional, but you’d not know now which of us went to which school. What exactly what is your issue with public school education? The elite bit I can understand but you make it (public school) sound like a dirty thing? Weird.

    What was it? “We’ve abolished Boom and Bust” Ha, you had no idea what you were doing you bloody loonies…

    This was not an attack at Labour although it was GB who uttered the words, more an attack on politicians in general, it is my considered opinion that they ride what ever wave they can find and claim to be responsible for it and, when it all goes tits up, spend the next five years blaming everyone else.

    If, just for a moment, the political sides would stop lobbing historical rocks at one another, in a blame game that no one will ever win, they could look at where we are at the moment and seek to develop a future which does not entail sacrificing one or more generations of the country’s inhabitants or destroying it’s brilliantly inventive and entrepreneurial spirit.

    Sadly, I cannot ever see this happening because the vacuous idiots who are immersed in their own myopic ideologies will never develop a social conscience that will enable them to look beyond their own political ambitions.

    I’m with Rogerthecat, stop mucking about, stand up and be counted, say something different, do something different or stop pretending you know what you’re doing. Can’t see it happening as every time someone says something really useful but politically sensitive they get flamed. The ‘whip’? Now there’s democracy in action ๐Ÿ™„

    grum
    Member

    I’m no Tory boy but as it happens I was public school educated, as was one of my sisters from GCSE through A Levels, my other sister was state educated. We all did OK, nothing exceptional, but you’d not know now which of us went to which school. What exactly what is your issue with public school education? The elite bit I can understand but you make it (public school) sound like a dirty thing? Weird.

    You suggested that Boris Johnson would be a refreshing change – I was suggesting he is anything but a refreshing change (apart from being mildly amusing). Pretty obvious really. ๐Ÿ˜•

    In a time of very similar politicians, largely speaking the same language from almost the same side of the fence I find Boris a bit refreshing.

    The point about public school is that the vast majority of politicians in positions of responsibility now come from privileged backgrounds – hardly a broad representation of society.

    (Although personally I think public schools (and religious schools) should be abolished anyway – they simply entrench privilege).

    it is my considered opinion that they ride what ever wave they can find and claim to be responsible for it and, when it all goes tits up, spend the next five years blaming everyone else.

    I’m with you there.

    Can’t see it happening as every time someone says something really useful but politically sensitive they get flamed.

    I’m interested to know what you think is an example of this.

    teamhurtmore
    Member

    (Although personally I think public schools (and religious schools) should be abolished anyway – they simply entrench privilege).

    Not sure how religious schools entrench privilege but if there is a common theme between the two types of schools it is that they typically do good jobs at educating children. Seems very odd, if not surprising, that anyone would want excellence to be abolished. What next, get rid of Oxford and Cambridge and the Russell Group Unis?

    grum
    Member

    Religious schools entrench social division (never mind indoctrination of children) more than privilege admittedly.

    Seems very odd, if not surprising, that anyone would want excellence to be abolished.

    The Finnish school system constantly ranks much higher than ours, and there are no grammar schools, private schools, religious schools or academies.

    It places a great emphasis on equality – something you don’t seem too bothered about.

    teamhurtmore
    Member

    Ah, the system that was highlighted in yesterday’s broadsheets as suffering from an “accelerated decline in maths standards.” hmmm, how odd to see Grum and Gove defending the same thing (a little awkwardly perhaps given the stats!). You choose “great” things to attack and defend!

    Something I know you are not too bothered about

    Really?!?!

    grum
    Member

    Ah, the system that was highlighted in yesterday’s broadsheets as suffering from an “accelerated decline in maths standards.”

    And yes still doing better than us, despite not having any excellent private/religious schools.

    Despite the clear downturn, Finnish students remain one of the best performers among the OECD countries. Finland came in sixth place among the OECD countries in mathematics, third in literacy and second in science. Finland remains the best in literacy and science among the European countries.

    How do they do it?

    Really?!?!

    Your regular staunch defence of public schools certainly suggests so. Why are you against greater equality in education?

    I have no idea what Gove said BTW – link?

    Premier Icon Lifer
    Subscriber

    teamhurtmore – Member

    (Although personally I think public schools (and religious schools) should be abolished anyway – they simply entrench privilege).

    Not sure how religious schools entrench privilege but if there is a common theme between the two types of schools it is that they typically do good jobs at educating children.

    Religious schools can be very selective over the students they pick. So is it because they are better educators, or because they can pick the better students?

    zokes
    Member

    IMO Labour still have at least another five years of apologising to do. What was it? “We’ve abolished Boom and Bust” Ha, you had no idea what you were doing you bloody loonies…

    Yes, it was clearly all LAbour’s fault that there was a GLOBAL financial crisis ๐Ÿ™„

    A crisis perpetuated by what? A deregulated financial sector?

    Now then, remind me which side of the political fence most proponents of ‘light touch’ regulation sit.

    mt
    Member

    ask1974 “can’t disagree that something was needed and that something was MT”

    I’d like to pint out that though I did manage to work (redundancies and Punk rock aside) through some of the 70@s it would be wrong to say I was needed.

    Premier Icon dazh
    Subscriber

    Yes, it was clearly all LAbour’s fault that there was a GLOBAL financial crisis

    A crisis perpetuated by what? A deregulated financial sector?

    Now then, remind me which side of the political fence most proponents of ‘light touch’ regulation sit.

    Indeed. It would appear we’ve all miraculously forgotten how in the mid-noughties the tories were screaming that we should regulate the banks more tightly and raise taxes to build a surplus for the impending crash. They must have adulterated the water with some sort of mind altering substance. The tragic thing is that a lot of otherwise sensible people actually believe this fiction.

    konabunny
    Member

    Can we dispose of the incorrect statement that Finland has no private schools? It’s not true. There are.

    Really? Quoting the BBC.

    What is that you think you’ve demonstrated?

    grum
    Member

    Can we dispose of the incorrect statement that Finland has no private schools? It’s not true. There are.

    AFAIK there are a few independent schools but they are publicly funded and aren’t allowed to charge fees.

    Junkyard
    Member

    Seems very odd, if not surprising, that anyone would want excellence to be abolished.

    I think they want religious schools and private fee paying schools to be abolished – who mentioned abolishing excellence apart from you?
    You do like to misrepresent what folk are saying ๐Ÿ˜•

    they are also selective [ as are private schools] so it is not surprising that they get better results.

    Any selective school can achieve better than average results, and Church and other faith schools are selective: They usually take a less than representative sample of deprived children and more than their share of the children of ambitious and wealthier parents. This covert selection goes a long way towards explaining their apparent academic success. โ€œSelection, even on religious grounds, is likely to attract well-behaved children from stable backgrounds,โ€ said a spokesperson for Ofsted in the Times Educational Supplement, 16/2/01.

    they ahve a lower % of free school meals and statemented kids as well which is odd given their humanitarian mission wouldn’t you say

    ninfan
    Member

    Of course the ‘religious schools’ discussion is interesting

    Bearing in mind that about 25% of all primary and middle schools are owned and run by the Church of England

    teamhurtmore
    Member

    So Grum, why do so many foreign students come to the UK rather than Finland to be educated? Are they mad or simply mis-informed?

    zokes
    Member

    So Grum, why do so many foreign students come to the UK rather than Finland to be educated? Are they mad or simply mis-informed?

    They come to the UK to be educated at school (what this offshoot of discussion is about), or to university (totally irrelevant straw man in the context of this discussion)? If the former, lets have some numbers…

    teamhurtmore
    Member

    Yes, but why Zokes?. Why spend money to come to the UK when we are apparently so poor. And god forbid, some of our schools are even exporting education, setting up schools in fast growing economies to satsify the increasing demand. And these are establishments that folk want to abolish. Can’t see the logic personally. But may be, as suggested above, all our Asian friends are simply too stupid (?) to realise and are all being duped by their agents. Looking at those in front of me, I find that hard to believe.

    zokes
    Member

    Answer the question. Are they coming for school (relevant to this conversation), or university (irrelevant to this conversation) education?

    If the former, please also provide figures to back this up. If the latter, quit changing the subject and defend your argument.

    Junkyard
    Member

    Are they mad or simply mis-informed?

    Are these really the only two answers you can come up with?

    Every time you “answer” your own question its some little obvious dig, slur or misrepresentation.
    A Skoda may be a better car than a BMW but the BMW still has the prestige.
    Perhaps its just that and the fact they can speak English?
    Easy to think of hundreds of reasons tbh

    when we are apparently so poor

    Are you disputing the stats now ?

    grum
    Member

    Yes, but why Zokes?. Why spend money to come to the UK when we are apparently so poor.

    Because they want the prestige/historical reputation, English language skills, and the networking connections of going to a school for the privileged probably.

    Do you really have to keep putting trolly little comments like this into all your posts?

    Are they mad or simply mis-informed?

    Again, why do you have a problem with equal educational opportunities for everyone?

    teamhurtmore
    Member

    Zokes, actually neither are relevant to this thread actually since its about BJ and his main thrust re-education included IQ and actually attacking Mrs T for closing more grammar schools than Tony Crossland. But leaving that (the subject of the thread) aside they are coming for both. I don’t have the nationwide statistics at the secondary level, but this is an issue “highlighted” at recent headmasters’ conferences and not necessarily in a good way. I am sure the stats are available, I will have a look. Anecdotally, in my younger son’s case he has had and Asian, and Italian, a Dane and a Jamaican join in his house alone for the sixth form. So out of 15 in his year,there is a Russian, Asian, Dane, Jamaican, Italian and even a Scot! The orchestras are dominated by highly talented Asian musicians (all well beyond grade 8 and diploma standards). And in recent chats in the common room, there were strong debates about whether the fact that places can easily be filled from overseas students was a good thing or not this year. Not sufficient data for PhDs or peer reviews, I grant you.

    But yes, they are coming to the UK for secondary and tertiary education – i have been asked to house some of them! They are neither mad nor misinformed – simply making good choices.

    grum
    Member

    They are neither mad nor misinformed

    Lucky no-one has suggested they are mad or misinformed then, or that private schools here don’t (generally) provide a good standard of education, Captain Strawman.

    The point you seem to fail to grasp is that Finnish schools offer a similarly good standard of education without entrenching privilege.

    simply making good choices.

    Good choices that are (pretty much) only available to the wealthy.

    teamhurtmore
    Member

    Again, why do you have a problem with equal educational opportunities for everyone?

    why do you ask, when you say you know what I think?

    I do not have a problem about equal education opportunities for everyone (which is why I am involved). But I do not see abolishing certain tyoes of schools as the answer. Different thing altogether.

    grum
    Member

    I do not have a problem about equal education opportunities for everyone (which is why I am involved). But I do not see abolishing certain tyoes of schools as the answer. Different thing altogether.

    So should everyone get to go to public school? Otherwise how do you suggest we establish equal opportunities for all (which is what Boris has subsequently claimed his speech was all about)?

    hora
    Member

    Interestingly this is Boris’s Great grandfather: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Kemal_Bey

    Junkyard
    Member

    But I do not see abolishing certain tyoes of schools as the answer.

    How can we have equal schools when we have fee paying selective schools with smaller class sizes?

    Are you really going to claim they dont entrench privilege or deliver better results for their pupils?
    How are they part of the solution?

    FWIW i have no problem with grammar or selective schools but they should be based on ability not the wealth of your parents

    Education should educate each individual to the fullest of their potential. That may be grammar school for some , comprehensive for others or technical college for others

    I dont see how fee paying improves equality – could you explain?

Viewing 40 posts - 81 through 120 (of 166 total)

The topic ‘Boris Johnson’ is closed to new replies.