General Election 2015

[Gwylan]

Don't want to get into a heavy political debate here, but from what I recall, when Mrs.Thatcher won the election in 1979, the unions were wielding far too much power in the country and the 'winter of discontent' just about characterised this.

I don't disagree with that - that was certainly a perception. What I was disagreeing with was HG's assertion that the 1975-79 Labour government left the country in economic chaos (and specfically had to be bailed out by the IMF). I'd say that the former wasn't true and the latter only partially so - I'm making no comment about the extent of union power but that was certainly a key factor in Thatcher's victory

 

[beorhthelm]

This is astonishing. 40% of new teachers quit within a year under a Tory watch. I dread to think how much money this chaos is costing us, and the effect it has on the children. It's a shocking figure.

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/mar/31/four-in-10-new-teachers-quit-within-a-year

you might like to account for twice as many teachers being qualified, and there's apparently a net increase in new teachers remaining. i reckon the problem with bribing graduates into teaching is alot arent so interested in the profession once qualified.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

you might like to account for twice as many teachers being qualified, and there's apparently a net increase in new teachers remaining. i reckon the problem with bribing graduates into teaching is alot arent so interested in the profession once qualified.

Recruiting twice as many to account for twice as many quitters is plain stupid. Which ever way you look at this, it is a totally inefficient way to operate.

 

[Gwylan]

Recruiting twice as many to account for twice as many quitters is plain stupid. Which ever way you look at this, it is a totally inefficient way to operate.

Unless they're quitting because there aren't the jobs available - if they're quitting because we're recruiting too many then that's an issue.

It's chicken and egg time

 

[Fitzcarraldo]

you might like to account for twice as many teachers being qualified, and there's apparently a net increase in new teachers remaining. i reckon the problem with bribing graduates into teaching is alot arent so interested in the profession once qualified.

Surely then you need to look at why you need to bribe graduates into the teaching? Maybe, just maybe, it is is because schools are becoming an increasingly miserable place to work thanks to the top down reforms of this government. Speaks volumes that the generous bribes that new qualifying teachers are given aren't enough to keep them in the profession.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

the 'dependency' on food banks is down to human nature, if it's offered , people will take it, no more , no less.

Without food banks there would be people suffering from malnutrition and potentially dying (it can only take 3 weeks to starve to death)

 

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

Neither of those statements is true: Clinton didn't get rid of the national debt (it was $5,8 trillion at the end of his last year) and, rather being out of control, US government spending is lower than its been for years - a deficit of $468 bn, pretty much what it was in the last years of Dubya. It's true that national debt has gone up considerably under Obama (that's what you get when you pursue Keynsian macroeconomics and fight a war) but it's increased by 53%, lower than the 100% increase under Bush

They DID HAVE a surplus: http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/ - so please don't say it wasn't true - when it is.

I am agreeing with you, GWB went mental on spending, and paid for two wars 'on a credit card'. Obama was dealt a shite hand with the debt. http://www.usdebtclock.org/

 

[beorhthelm]

Sorry Bozza but thats not the point. Labour hasn't caused the national debt to double but the Tories, who proclaim to have saved us from ruin, have. Thats whats difficult for me to understand..

no, that is exactly the point. the deficit is due to spending commitments made and baked into future expediture by Brown. he was running a deficit with increaseing GDP and increasing tax revenues, and thought that the good times would never end, while fiddling his own metrics of when he needed to curtail expenditure. it was recognised before 2007 that the deficit and hence debt was going to start rising significantly from fiscal year 2008 on (it was already rising).

so, with this in mind the only way you can cut the deficit is to cut spending or increase revenues (technically you can wait for inflation to make it disappear too, but they involves year on year real terms reduction). with growth small and increasing taxes you cant expect the revenues to increase much (a couple of billion tops) and we are left with one plan on the table. this was going to happen, to a lesser degree obviously, as Brown projected a perpetual deficit of around 38bn (in 2007 prices). sooner or later that wouldnt wash, it just came earlier and harder than expected.

 

[beorhthelm]

Recruiting twice as many to account for twice as many quitters is plain stupid. Which ever way you look at this, it is a totally inefficient way to operate.

Surely then you need to look at why you need to bribe graduates into the teaching? Maybe, just maybe, it is is because schools are becoming an increasingly miserable place to work thanks to the top down reforms of this government. Speaks volumes that the generous bribes that new qualifying teachers are given aren't enough to keep them in the profession.

both inefficient and the wrong way to address issues in education. this is a great demonstration of why simply throwing money at a problem doesnt necessarily resolve anything. if teachers conditions and workloads are dire, then analyse why and look for a solution. simply trying to recruit an extra 10-12k a year teachers to replace those leaving above the natural arate of attrition isnt going to address the workload problem is it? sadly the political classes think in many areas the only "fix" is to pour in more money, and in some industries this means increase the head count.

the point i raise is that if they are being bribed into a challenging profession and dont find they have the vocation for it, they are more likely to leave so the apparently shoking statistic hides the full story.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

both inefficient and the wrong way to address issues in education. this is a great demonstration of why simply throwing money at a problem doesnt necessarily resolve anything. if teachers conditions and workloads are dire, then analyse why and look for a solution. simply trying to recruit an extra 10-12k a year teachers to replace those leaving above the natural arate of attrition isnt going to address the workload problem is it? sadly the political classes think in many areas the only "fix" is to pour in more money, and in some industries this means increase the head count.

the point i raise is that if they are being bribed into a challenging profession and dont find they have the vocation for it, they are more likely to leave so the apparently shoking statistic hides the full story.

**** me. We agree. The only "bribe" should be a good job with good pay, due respect from the government and the public and much less political meddling. It should, and could, be a fantastic career.

 

[somerset]

This is astonishing. 40% of new teachers quit within a year under a Tory watch. I dread to think how much money this chaos is costing us, and the effect it has on the children. It's a shocking figure.

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/mar/31/four-in-10-new-teachers-quit-within-a-year

Its not costing you anything, you live and work in Germany.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Its not costing you anything, you live and work in Germany.

I pay some taxes in the UK.

 

[Machiavelli]

Again, thought I better dive in with these before [MENTION=36]Titanic[/MENTION] got there:

LAB retakes lead with Populus
Lab. 34 (-), Con 32 (-2), LD 9 (+1), UKIP 15 (-), GN 5 (+1),
10:46 AM - 2 Apr 2015

ENGLAND+WALES shares today's Populus online
CON 33.7
LAB 34.5
LD 9.1
UKIP 16.5
This = CON to LAB swing of 4.5% since GE10

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Again, thought I better dive in with these before [MENTION=36]Titanic[/MENTION] got there:

LAB retakes lead with Populus
Lab. 34 (-), Con 32 (-2), LD 9 (+1), UKIP 15 (-), GN 5 (+1),
10:46 AM - 2 Apr 2015

ENGLAND+WALES shares today's Populus online
CON 33.7
LAB 34.5
LD 9.1
UKIP 16.5
This = CON to LAB swing of 4.5% since GE10

 

[Gwylan]

They DID HAVE a surplus: http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/ - so please don't say it wasn't true - when it is.

I didn't say that he didn't run a budget surplus, he did for pretty much his entire presidency but he didn't get rid of the national debt. You're confusing deficit and debt - they're not the same thing

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Sadly believe that Tories will nick it by more than a few percentage points, mainly because a) they have all the economic figures going their way at the moment and b) Ed Miliband cuts such a hugely unimposing figure. The rest are NOWHERE.

GO LARGE on the Tories, betting-wise.

 

[Horton's halftime iceberg]

Sadly believe that Tories will nick it by more than a few percentage points, mainly because a) they have all the economic figures going their way at the moment and b) Ed Miliband cuts such a hugely unimposing figure. The rest are NOWHERE.

GO LARGE on the Tories, betting-wise.

So is your betting guide for an outright win, minority government or a coalition - 326 being the magic number to rule us all

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

So is your betting guide for an outright win, minority government or a coalition - 326 being the magic number to rule us all

Minority government.

 

[melias shoes]

Don't want to get into a heavy political debate here, but from what I recall, when Mrs.Thatcher won the election in 1979, the unions were wielding far too much power in the country and the 'winter of discontent' just about characterised this.
Things had to change and although it was tough for some, I fear that had the Labour party remained in power, this country would have been dragged down for many years.

Will be again if we get the dreadED coalition of labour and snp. We really will be ****ed.

 

[melias shoes]

Again, I agree.

As an aside I worked at Parker Pen for a summer. And briefly at Bevan Funnell. Loved working in the pen factory. Bevan Funnell made my hands sore though.

Too hard work for them? Bless.