Anything Political

[Brew 5,414]

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

On ‎4‎/‎10‎/‎2020 at 2:11 PM, Brew said:

Funding for apprenticeships goes mainly to employers not colleges as before. So not demolished, changed with the times.

 

This is just incorrect.

 

Perhaps when you are not so tired you'll explain why. 

The Education and Skills Funding Agency will pay the employer, or a provider of their choice up to 95% of the cost of training. For small businesses that meet certain criteria not only do they pay 100% there is additional support on top of that.

 

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

I'm getting rather fed up with people being fed up with people asking the Govt. questions.

 

We agreed there is a need for a vigorous opposition to curb the excesses of government. but, as had been pointed out the opposition can virtually do and say anything and claim Parliamentary privilege. As a voter I think I have a right to challenge and to question that which is done supposedly for my benefit - no matter who by.

 

My dig at Starmer is not that he asked questions, it's his use of his position for self-aggrandizement. Note I do not call him stupid, he is a barrister and well versed in the art of argument and counter-argument. His questions are carefully crafted to gain most column inches and air time by generating disparaging follow up statements.

Had the question been sensible  we wouldn't be talking about it now. If he had asked about the lack of PPE he would have been told that they were desperately trying source supplies, the same as the rest of the world, and there would be little or no traction or point scoring.

Asking a question he knows nobody can answer scores points with the faithful because he can then infer the government is incompetent. It's the same with asking about an exit strategy. The pandemic is a rapidly changing and dynamic situation and any exit strategy made today would probably be out of date and useless tomorrow.

 

10 hours ago, DJ360 said:

It's also now becoming apparent that this lot ignored the disastrous outcomes of a pandemic control study/exercise in 2016

 

I took part in one of those when there was a fear of the IRA attacking the National  Grid. It was a farce, a total waste of time. With nothing to go on most was guess work and all of it was wrong.

 

10 hours ago, DJ360 said:

Can people really not see the pattern?

 

Actually I suspect most can. I also suspect they know it applies to both parties, it's not just a Tory thing.

 

I voted both for and against Blair, ditto Thatcher. If you judge me Conservative so be it. Johnson is not high on my list of people I admire but in this instance I think he has done as well as any other leader.

 

10 hours ago, DJ360 said:

Grenfell.  3 years on and almost nothing resolved

 

Grenfell is undergoing an enquiry as you well know so I will not prejudge. The final report, when it arrives, will be rejected by those who do not agree with the findings. There will be cries of cover up, collusion etc.  and a call for a second and subsequent enquiries until a suitable scapegoat found.

 

I think when we look with hindsight we will see mistakes but in the here and now we are doing the best we can. I would also point out it's not just the government actions that we need to consider, the general public have a part to play and some are not playing by the rules.

 

The real test of the Blessed Boris will come when the pandemic has ended and the economy is on it's knees.

[HSR 286]

Clapped for the NHS 3 weeks ago, 2 weeks ago it was more subdued...

Last Thursday..it took off.

Two Moronic neighbours giving it large in full display of the whole Street..

 

Both have persisted in non essential travel and have visitors freely come and go...must be nice not to have a care in the world!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[DJ360 6,728]

1 hour ago, The Engineer said:

At some point we have to reverse all the measures and the exit strategy is just a plan of what, where and when. 

et. seq.

 

Well exactly.. and if you can articulate it why can't our mighty leaders?  Admittedly they need to manage expectations etc., but they come across as chaotic, inconsistent and clueless, which is helping nobody and is IME far more likely to lead to people ignoring/breaking the lockdown than if it was clearly explained that there will be a managed lifting at some point.

Govt were very strong on 'doing the right thing, at the right time', but that seems to have disappeared from the playlist.

[DJ360 6,728]

57 minutes ago, HSR said:

Agree, regarding the stupid questions the broadcasters ask,.Peston the pessimistic, from the mainstream is probably the worst!

In the current climate.Why ask a hypothetical question?

 

I'm not a fan of journos, but I noted with some bemusement that Kuenssberg, who was the darling of the Right when she was slagging off Corbyn and even editing video of him to put words into his mouth., is now getting it in the neck from the Right for having the temerity to criticise Johnson and his gang.

 

Boot.. Other foot etc.

[HSR 286]

I Would never criticise Laura, couldn't care less what she says, I like her accent! 

 

[DJ360 6,728]

On that major political point we'll have to agree to differ...

[mary1947 2,079]

Did any body see Bill Gates on TV this morning?

 

He warned us 5 years ago that something  like this Coronavirus; 19 would come along and instead of spending money on weapons  nuclear ect  We should be putting money into resesrch.

 

I also hope that if we get though to the other side,  NHS  nurses, doctor's and other staff  will get a wage rise and paid decent wagers for the job that they do.

[siddha 825]

Well said Mary

[nonnaB 4,895]

4 hours ago, mary1947 said:

Did any body see Bill Gates on TV this morning?

 

He warned us 5 years ago that something  like this Coronavirus; 19 would come along and instead of spending money on weapons  nuclear ect  We should be putting money into resesrch.

 

I also hope that if we get though to the other side,  NHS  nurses, doctor's and other staff  will get a wage rise and paid decent wagers for the job that they do.

 

Pay less to footballers and more to research and nursing staff.

[annswabey 599]

Agree with you about footballers, Nonna, but there are plenty of multiple million/billionaires in the UK and no doubt in Italy who should cough up.  Also, what have the Royal Family contributed?

[Brew 5,414]

A surprising amount in taxes from their estates considering they have no legal obligation to pay tax at all. Even the queen pays tax on a voluntary basis and a rate a damn site higher than probably you do.

 

[annswabey 599]

My husband and I don't have to pay tax at the moment, neither do many others as we have NO INCOME.  So they should pay tax at a higher rate but, come on, they're sitting on millions while we plebs struggle on nothing and plenty of people are much worse off than us.  I can't believe that you stick up for these people

[DJ360 6,728]

1 hour ago, Brew said:

A surprising amount in taxes from their estates considering they have no legal obligation to pay tax at all. Even the queen pays tax on a voluntary basis and a rate a damn site higher than probably you do.

 

 

And where precisely did Madge and her family get their estates from?

[Brew 5,414]

Col you will just have to accept they are rich unless you really want to rerun a 1000 yrs of history. Quite why you bother to ask the question when you know the answer.

 

Why would I not stick up for them? I'm an unashamed monarchist. Would you really have the Dreadful Boris as president?

I have no idea if you are plebeian or why you have no taxable income but I really can't see it's a good enough reason to be jealous and resent  someone just because they have lots of money.  Many who decry the rich claim they are not jealous but I think they are, what other reason do they have for whinging about the disparity in bank accounts?

You must have some income or you would be homeless and starving so I assume your income comes from taxpayers... like the Queen

[DJ360 6,728]

15 hours ago, Brew said:

Perhaps when you are not so tired you'll explain why. 

The Education and Skills Funding Agency will pay the employer, or a provider of their choice up to 95% of the cost of training. For small businesses that meet certain criteria not only do they pay 100% there is additional support on top of that.

 

I've looked at this and I'll admit it is a change to funding which I wasn't aware of.. having been 'out of the loop' for 6 years at least.  While on the face of it what you say is true, it is only so if employers actually bother to recruit apprentices rather than poaching staff.. which has been a big part of the problem for a long time.

 

It's also pretty clear that the onus is still on Govt. to provide funding for Apprentice Training, which flies very much in the face of Tory policy in general.  Or does it? 

 

They don't generally approve of Public Spending full stop.. but in this case, they are prepared to make an exception...  I've a;lways argued that business sghould pay for training it's own workfoce and there has been nothing to beat the former 'levy system' as operated under the system of ITB's which Thatch was so quick to scrap.

 

They also claim to be trying to do away with 'Training Provision Purely for Financial Gain'.  Obvious that they are aiming at assorted 'Training Providers', who are 'only in it for the money' and whilst I see their point , it also flies in the face of much other privatisation Tories do which is purely for financial gain.. by their mates.

 

I'd love to see an honest and actual figure for genuine apprenticships actually filled..as opposed to some notional figure based on 'approved' places.

 

And all of he above begs the question .Whatever happened to the provision of places for people to train or get qualified and then seek employment?  That is after all what happens in HE.  Attempts to too closely match provision with perceived demand smack very much of Soviet style 'Planned Labour'.

Back when I was actually involved in contributing to the planning of Training Provision in our area, we tried to cater for actual likely opportunities. plus some.. to allow for people moving out of area and so on.

 

15 hours ago, Brew said:

We agreed there is a need for a vigorous opposition to curb the excesses of government. but, as had been pointed out the opposition can virtually do and say anything and claim Parliamentary privilege. As a voter I think I have a right to challenge and to question that which is done supposedly for my benefit - no matter who by.

 

I really don't see the need to invoke Parliamentary Privelege.  All parties promise the Earth.  Some are more believable than others.

15 hours ago, Brew said:

My dig at Starmer is not that he asked questions, it's his use of his position for self-aggrandizement. Note I do not call him stupid, he is a barrister and well versed in the art of argument and counter-argument. His questions are carefully crafted to gain most column inches and air time by generating disparaging follow up statements.

Had the question been sensible  we wouldn't be talking about it now. If he had asked about the lack of PPE he would have been told that they were desperately trying source supplies, the same as the rest of the world, and there would be little or no traction or point scoring.

Asking a question he knows nobody can answer scores points with the faithful because he can then infer the government is incompetent. It's the same with asking about an exit strategy. The pandemic is a rapidly changing and dynamic situation and any exit strategy made today would probably be out of date and useless tomorrow.

 

 

I just don't agree.. and BTW I'm no special fan of Starmer. He is entitled to ask what the hell he likes and he has at least offered to cooperate with Govt.. but.. as Liz Kendall (Shadow Social Care) has pointed out.. Govt need to be challenged if best practice is to be followed.

 

15 hours ago, Brew said:

I took part in one of those when there was a fear of the IRA attacking the National  Grid. It was a farce, a total waste of time. With nothing to go on most was guess work and all of it was wrong.

 

I'm a bit mystified as to how Terrorism and Pandemic Control have any practical similarity?

 

15 hours ago, Brew said:

I voted both for and against Blair, ditto Thatcher. If you judge me Conservative so be it. Johnson is not high on my list of people I admire but in this instance I think he has done as well as any other leader.

 

I never voted for Thatcher. Thoroughly reprehensible woman who played to exactly the same jingoistic rhetoric which Johnson is prepping for.  I too thought that Blair, despite numerous unpleasant personal foibles, did a decent job. I recall saying many times that he was obliged to pursue Economic Policies which were arguably 'Tory-Lite', but, the difference between him and the Tories was one of intent.  He was more interested in the economy for the benefit of the general populace, rather than a few priveleged mates.

He seriously blotted his copy book with the Gulf.

 

15 hours ago, Brew said:

If you judge me Conservative so be it.

 

I don't.  I see you as small c conservative on economics, but much more liberal on social issues.  Just like me.. you are a jolly decent chap, struggling to align his political thinking with the offers from a bunch of less than inspiring candidates in all parties.

15 hours ago, Brew said:

Grenfell is undergoing an enquiry as you well know so I will not prejudge. The final report, when it arrives, will be rejected by those who do not agree with the findings. There will be cries of cover up, collusion etc.  and a call for a second and subsequent enquiries until a suitable scapegoat found.

 

 

I think it's already pretty clear that unsuitable and unsafe cladding was used and that companies responsible are squirming.  They are using the  Law to delay accountability.  Meanwhile people are still living in unsafe buildings and Govt. is allowing the situation to fester.. mostly because they are protecting private Landlords.  This is not Rocket Science.

 

15 hours ago, Brew said:

I think when we look with hindsight we will see mistakes but in the here and now we are doing the best we can. I would also point out it's not just the government actions that we need to consider, the general public have a part to play and some are not playing by the rules.

 

The real test of the Blessed Boris will come when the pandemic has ended and the economy is on it's knees.

 

I don't think it requires genius to see that allowing, for e.g., the Cheltenham Festival, or the visit of 3000 Milan fans to Liverpool whilst Milan was already in the grip of CV, were major mistakes. not to say derelictions of duty.

Smarter people than me have concluded that the reality is our Govt is effectively continuing with its failed 'Herd Immunity' cobblers under another name.  They quarantined people from some cruise ship. yet later allowed people to embark freely from international flights with no checks.

I accept that the situation is unprecendented but this bunch of idiots have failed on all fronts with the possible exception of a poorly enforced Social Distancing policy.

Must do better.

[DJ360 6,728]

28 minutes ago, Brew said:

Col you will just have to accept they are rich unless you really want to rerun a 1000 yrs of history. Quite why you bother to ask the question when you know the answer.

 

It's called a Rhetorical Question.  But you know full well that the origin of the Royal's wealth is in the inheritance of power. No merit or talent required.. just the ability to 'prove' (whether true or not.) some genetic descendency from the previous thief. The power to force others to submit, to pay whatever taxes the incumbent Monarch demanded, etc.  I'd like to think we've moved on from that.

You'll no doubt be delighted to learn that I'm not a Republican and I can tolerate our 'Constitutional' Monarchy, so long as they continue to perform their allotted function under our democratic system.  We already provide them with more than enough funds to perform their 'duties'.  The rest of their pile should be taxable.  Mine is..

41 minutes ago, Brew said:

Why would I not stick up for them? I'm an unashamed monarchist. Would you really have the Dreadful Boris as president?

 

I really don't see it as a Binary choice. I wouldn't give either of them any more power than they are authorised to weild via democratic election.

 

43 minutes ago, Brew said:

I have no idea if you are plebeian or why you have no taxable income but I really can't see it's a good enough reason to be jealous and resent  someone just because they have lots of money.  Many who decry the rich claim they are not jealous but I think they are, what other reason do they have for whinging about the disparity in bank accounts?

 

I have taxable income and I'm happy to pay my share.  Clearly some who 'make' (I refuse to use the term 'earn' in the context of  investment) far more than me.. resent making their contribution.

I have no resentment whatever of 'rich' people. I find many of them very shallow and sad.  What I resent is that many of them go to great lengths to avoid paying the taxes which they can well afford to pay.

47 minutes ago, Brew said:

You must have some income or you would be homeless and starving so I assume your income comes from taxpayers... like the Queen

 

This.. as you well know.. is cobblers.  My modest income is from two pensions.  Both contributory.  I worked hard and I paid my dues.  I am drawing the pensions to which I am entitled as a contributor.

As far as I'm concerned the Queen is entitled to no more than any other Pensioner.. and even then only assuming she's paid her contributions.  I'd be interested to see what the Council Tax payments are for Windsor, Sandringham, Balmoral et. al.  I'd give her a bit more to cover the costs of the hardship of a Royal Train, the odd Banquet etc.. but her so called 'personal' wealth, IMO should be subject to exactly the same rules as everyone else. I don't hate the woman or her family.. but they are just people and worth no more or less than the rest of us.

 

 

[Brew 5,414]

21 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

They don't generally approve of Public Spending full stop.. but in this case, they are prepared to make an exception...  I've a;lways argued that business sghould pay for training it's own workfoce and there has been nothing to beat the former 'levy system' as operated under the system of ITB's which Thatch was so quick to scrap.

 

The levy system is still active. Any company with a payroll over £3 million has to pay .5% to the Apprenticeship Levy Fund. Last year the scheme had over £130 million unclaimed. The fault of government or lazy employers? You may well be right about the poaching aspect but we can hardly lay the blame for that at the door of government. The sad truth is as I've already pointed out is there no need for formal apprenticeships as in the days of yore in many industries.

 

29 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

I really don't see the need to invoke Parliamentary Privelege.  All parties promise the Earth.  Some are more believable than others.

 

I was a little clumsy there. The point I'm making is that the government is held to account, the opposition can simply ignore any criticism

 

32 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

He is entitled to ask what the hell he likes

 

Yes he is but can we have meaningful questions please and if he is serious about cooperation I've yet to see any suggestion of it.

 

35 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

recall saying many times that he was obliged to pursue Economic Policies which were arguably 'Tory-Lite', but, the difference between him and the Tories was one of intent.  He was more interested in the economy for the benefit of the general populace, rather than a few priveleged mates.

 

I actually think Blair was more interested in Blair first, everything else second. I'm not going to list his faults  but speaking of privileged mates I'll just raise the 'cash for honours' scandal.

 

44 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

I think it's already pretty clear that unsuitable and unsafe cladding was used and that companies responsible are squirming.

 

First reports agree with that and it will come out in the final report. I can't agree the government is shielding private landlords, many blocks of this type, if not most, are council owned. However we live by the rule of law and we have let it take it's course.

 

49 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

I don't think it requires genius to see that allowing, for e.g., the Cheltenham Festival, or the visit of 3000 Milan fans to Liverpool whilst Milan was already in the grip of CV, were major mistakes. not to say derelictions of duty.

 

They were mistakes.

It is not reasonable to say they are pursuing a pseudo herd immunity policy. There are simply to many independent experts giving advice and opinions to the media for that to happen.

 

 

 

[Brew 5,414]

15 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

t's called a Rhetorical Question.

 

It's me age guv, I couldn't for the life of me think of the dammed word'

I'm not only delighted I'm surprised although I do recollect you have said as much in the past.

Most people, if they are honest, support inherited wealth. We only have to look at the furore the subject raises to see that.

 

Like you I pay tax, unlike you I resent every penny so no I don't pay up cheerfully and I'm careful to make sure it's one penny more than necessary.

 

As for QE she is one of the biggest land owners in the world, something around 6.6 Billion acres. It is as you are aware managed by the Crown Estates and 85% of the profits goes to the treasury -that's a lot of money. On top of that the 15% she receives as income is taxed.

 

27 minutes ago, DJ360 said:

This.. as you well know.. is cobblers.

 

That part was in reply the post by AS who claimed no income.

[mary1947 2,079]

What Party to Vote for!!!!

Quote   From my father in law (who is no longer with us ) The working man when it come's to choice of what Party to vote for his  is own worst enemy.

Education 

I did not enter teaching till I was 40 and passing my 730 teacher training I found the teaching very enjoyable but I could only teach my own trade and ages from 16 upwards .

My opinion for what its worth the UK needs a better education system and the Qualification they get should be reconized all over the world, all, or most of the coutries should work to-wards the same syllabus, but having said that this is never going to happern. 

 

While in teaching TDLB which at the time was an NVQ level 3 qualification, one of my students passed with flying colours, she and her hubby were going to live in Canada, they would not take her Qulification as in Canada they did not have our system.

 

[Waddo 921]

In my own experience, as a instructor for the CITB, i totally lost all interest in the NVQ system, it just seems to be a short cut. We always said that NVQ stands for Not Very Qualified, and judging by what I have seen in my trade, appears to confirm it. Most of those out there, I wouldn't pay with holes in washers.

[mary1947 2,079]

NVQ system to me was to help give youngsters a qualification . some thing to aim to. if the CITB did not put into the NVQ what they wanted for their trade then it's them that were wrong, we were only the small clog put there to teach it, by the way was your place of work at Bulwell?

[DJ360 6,728]

20 hours ago, Brew said:

Like you I pay tax, unlike you I resent every penny so no I don't pay up cheerfully and I'm careful to make sure it's one penny more than necessary.

 

If that's true.. then I'm not surprised you are so disturbed by public spending and borrowing, as it looks like you take it all as a personal attack.

 

Of course there's nothing wrong with limiting the tax you pay within the Law.

 

However, I know you to be a decent sort so I'm not convinced by your claim to resent every penny.  I'm sure you know that Health, Education and much more., are all paid for out of taxes and I doubt you'd see any of them disappear for want of your few quid in tax.

[DJ360 6,728]

8 hours ago, Waddo said:

In my own experience, as a instructor for the CITB, i totally lost all interest in the NVQ system, it just seems to be a short cut. We always said that NVQ stands for Not Very Qualified, and judging by what I have seen in my trade, appears to confirm it. Most of those out there, I wouldn't pay with holes in washers.

 

I too am a qualified NVQ Assessor to Level III, though in my own field only.  To be honest I hated being an assessor, because I found the whole process unweildy, paper heavy, over complex etc.

 

However..

It is not sustainable to be dismissive of NVQ in the way you are doing.  This because NVQ changed.. and generally improved over the years and therefore was not a single entity capable of a single criticism.  In the early days it was very evident that far too much emphasis was placed on competence divided into tiny portions and far too little on underpinning knowledge, for e.g.  But that changed.  NVQ had some good effects, such as doing away with 'time serving', which was often just a case of going out for chips and carrying a 'mash can'.  (And yes.. I experienced that.. I wasn't always a Career Adviser.)

 

But, I'll bow out here.. It's a good few years since I assessed anyone or even worked in the field, so I'll leave it to the younger folk to fight it out.

[Brew 5,414]

It was a little harsh wasn't it... truth is I don't give it a lot of thought other than once a year when I  make sure not to pay more than I must.

 

I said in a reply, can't remember who too or what it was about, that I don't mind paying for education, health, some council facilities etc...

 

[Brew 5,414]

I wasn't an assessor but I was a mentor/supervisor and quite frankly most of certificates should have had multiple names on them