Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
bogbrush

Labour Incompetence In A Nutshell

Recommended Posts

How bloody typical of them; announce long term plans, attack anyone who questions the wisdom; fail; pass laws to compel others to do it instead.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8095775.stm

Leaving aside the fact that anyone with an ounce of knowledge of our constitution knows that it is impossible to tie the hands of a future government, this is typical of people who don't know how to make something happen themselves but do know how to make announcements and pass laws.

Needless to say, the idiot Yvette Cooper is at the heart of it;

"This bill is about giving every child a fair chance in life.

"I want a society where children don't miss out on school trips, aren't stuck in poor housing with no space to do their homework and aren't left behind because they don't have a computer or internet access.

"This is a big challenge, and one which we will not shy away from. It holds current and future government's feet to the flames and won't allow any government to quietly forget about child poverty or walk away."

How symbolic that she thinks people get left behind when they don't have internet access. Now how did I learn to read and write before I got to school over 40 years ago? Was it my internet access....................?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

They'll just repeat what Brown did last time, Gordy lifted 2m kids out of poverty in a single day a few years back.... he changed the definition of poverty.

"I want a society where children don't miss out on school trips, aren't stuck in poor housing with no space to do their homework and aren't left behind because they don't have a computer or internet access."

Bull$hit, so why do they refuse to release land, grant planning permission and build new homes? We went over this yesterday.

Watch this space, the govt will pass legally binding obligations to improve children's lifes then also pass legally binding climate change legislation basically preventing the building of anything.

Doublethink eh?

Edited by sillybear2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How bloody typical of them; announce long term plans, attack anyone who questions the wisdom; fail; pass laws to compel others to do it instead.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8095775.stm

Leaving aside the fact that anyone with an ounce of knowledge of our constitution knows that it is impossible to tie the hands of a future government, this is typical of people who don't know how to make something happen themselves but do know how to make announcements and pass laws.

Needless to say, the idiot Yvette Cooper is at the heart of it;

How symbolic that she thinks people get left behind when they don't have internet access. Now how did I learn to read and write before I got to school over 40 years ago? Was it my internet access....................?

we didnt even have a phone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Labour's thinking on relative poverty is very confused to say the least:

Poverty in this case is measured relatively - those who live in households with an income of less than 60% of the average.

So according to Labour our goal should be to eradicate this? No-one with an income beloe 60% of the average should have children? Their solution seems to be to hand out enough money to anyone with children to take them over this statistical threshold. They do this without any thought to the perverse incentives it creates.

If they were really serious about this they would try to rebalance the economy (including not standing in the way of the house price correction) and look at the reasons why fewer and fewer educated women are having children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2
If they were really serious about this they would try to rebalance the economy (including not standing in the way of the house price correction) and look at the reasons why fewer and fewer educated women are having children.

If they want to improve peoples' standard of living, increase the real value of peoples' incomes and make us internationally competitive and create employment they need to drive down the cost of housing, the cost of accommodation should be at utility value. The process of mass house building would also create mass employment.

The other option is to do nothing, continue their policies of artificial scarcity then try and put a sticking plaster over the social fallout, the substandard living conditions, inequality, the educational failure leading to multi-generation welfare dependency and crime. The continuing decline of social mobility. Resulting in a mass of people so disaffected they would even be willing to vote for fascists.

Edited by sillybear2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next they will abolish illness and death by statute.

Now if they were serious about abolishing child poverty they could :

Ban online gambling and restrict access to betting.

Ban cheap alcohol in supermarkets

Crack down on drug use.

Build more council houses

Bring down the cost of housing generally

Keep wages at a reasonable level and ban EU immigration

Stop treating schools as political experiments, and give power back to teachers with real discipline in classrooms.

But no they can't do any of that, because they are more concerned with getting backhanders from VI's. This legislation is typical of the air head sound bite culture that NuLabour glory in. It will do nothing for child poverty, and will produce another raft of red tape that wastes money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They'll just repeat what Brown did last time, Gordy lifted 2m kids out of poverty in a single day a few years back.... he changed the definition of poverty.

"I want a society where children don't miss out on school trips, aren't stuck in poor housing with no space to do their homework and aren't left behind because they don't have a computer or internet access."

Bull$hit, so why do they refuse to release land, grant planning permission and build new homes? We went over this yesterday.

Watch this space, the govt will pass legally binding obligations to improve children's lifes then also pass legally binding climate change legislation basically preventing the building of anything.

Doublethink eh?

Great point, I notice with the modern left that one has to do a lot of doublethinking. Immigration is the same as your example. When a British family tries to build even one new home, they face a wall of restrictions and limitations as the country is already allegedly overbuilt to an extreme. Yet when it comes to 500,000 new immigrants coming in a year, we've allegedly got tons of room and anyone who says we're full up is a closet racist.

Labour is excited to expand heathrow to make it an even bigger and more used world airport - a great transportation hub helping London be a central city. Yet the next day they are passing climate change taxes to try to limit air travel in the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2
Next they will abolish illness and death by statute.

Now if they were serious about abolishing child poverty they could :

[...]

Stop treating schools as political experiments, and give power back to teachers with real discipline in classrooms.

Labour only has itself to blame for the decline in social mobility and the permanent enslavement of the lower orders. In 1965 Labour's new Secretary of State for Education Anthony Crosland vowed to do the following :-

"If it's the last thing I do, I'm going to destroy every f****g grammar school in England. And Wales and Northern Ireland".

Of course Crosland himself was born to wealthy parents and went to public school then went to Trinity College, a route he then went on to deny to countless thousands of clever working class kids ever since.

Labour want poor and downtrodden people, for they are their Raison d'ĂȘtre, an increasingly wealthy, prosperous and ambitious working class would be the death of the Labour party, for their aim is to breed victim hood and therefore entitlement. Not to mention the Establishment are scared of hungry, clever and ambitious people, because they themselves are so useless at their jobs they fear the competition.

Edited by sillybear2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2
Labour is excited to expand heathrow to make it an even bigger and more used world airport - a great transportation hub helping London be a central city. Yet the next day they are passing climate change taxes to try to limit air travel in the country.

Next they'll be introducing fuel duty escalators, showroom taxes, high VED rates for gas guzzlers then also spend millions bailing out Jaguar / Land Rover and the rest of the motor industry.

Socialism is at its heart doublethink, a privileged elite think they can help other people by constantly helping themselves, which then impoverishes the very people they are pretending to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How bloody typical of them; announce long term plans, attack anyone who questions the wisdom; fail; pass laws to compel others to do it instead.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8095775.stm

Leaving aside the fact that anyone with an ounce of knowledge of our constitution knows that it is impossible to tie the hands of a future government, this is typical of people who don't know how to make something happen themselves but do know how to make announcements and pass laws.

Needless to say, the idiot Yvette Cooper is at the heart of it;

How symbolic that she thinks people get left behind when they don't have internet access. Now how did I learn to read and write before I got to school over 40 years ago? Was it my internet access....................?

Are they gonna teach people about the monetary system and what causes inflation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How bloody typical of them; announce long term plans, attack anyone who questions the wisdom; fail; pass laws to compel others to do it instead.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8095775.stm

Leaving aside the fact that anyone with an ounce of knowledge of our constitution knows that it is impossible to tie the hands of a future government, this is typical of people who don't know how to make something happen themselves but do know how to make announcements and pass laws.

Needless to say, the idiot Yvette Cooper is at the heart of it;

How symbolic that she thinks people get left behind when they don't have internet access. Now how did I learn to read and write before I got to school over 40 years ago? Was it my internet access....................?

Why don't those idiots make it law to bring up your children:

1) to love hard work and self discipline

2) with a deep understanding of personal and civic responsibility

3) to embrace the pursuit of learning and self advancement

4) etc. etc.

That'll help eradicate poverty.

Blood is still boiling with regards the govt's pending attack on folk who choose to educate their children at home....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How symbolic that she thinks people get left behind when they don't have internet access. Now how did I learn to read and write before I got to school over 40 years ago? Was it my internet access....................?

These days it's all internet work, high technology dependence teaching where the most stressful thing kids do is a multiple choice exam.

Kids are left behind if they don't have internet at home as the homework is all available online to do.

I think it's seriously wrong - and sooner or later they will be able to remove teachers from the equation altogether. They have no role left in the classroom once you automate the lesson starting.

Gawd help schools if the power goes off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Government is basically entering the "deploying phantom divisions" stage.

Won't be too long before they no longer have the money to enforce all this nonsense, and people will just start ignoring them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest pioneer31
They'll just repeat what Brown did last time, Gordy lifted 2m kids out of poverty in a single day a few years back.... he changed the definition of poverty.

"I want a society where children don't miss out on school trips, aren't stuck in poor housing with no space to do their homework and aren't left behind because they don't have a computer or internet access."

Of course stoking a housing boom will ensure that very thing Gordon you ****.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the Government is basically entering the "deploying phantom divisions" stage.

Won't be too long before they no longer have the money to enforce all this nonsense, and people will just start ignoring them.

".......and then Yeltsin said Ex-soviet soldiers on TV and it was all over."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jesus, this is all so retarded. There is no child poverty. what we have are idoits, retarded parents whose pestilent ridden souls eminate a total no go learning zone for their children where they are brought up in environmets where school is for fags and being hard is the number one rule.

Labour are a bunch of retards, they talk as though the issues are real, they are not.

What about the important issues in our society? I wont even say what they are, and i wont even hint at the other parties that have addressed them, you know what they are.

I cant beleive they'll waste another second of parliament time debating schools by concerned women who really care.

I hate women MP's

Men can deal with schools.

Debate open - Schools are pretty good - end of debate.

thank you.

Now lets get ponto the important issues of.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How are the government going to eliminate relative child poverty. This is impossible even if they machine gunned everyone that currently counts.

Relative poverty is impossible to eliminate, absolute poverty on the other hand already has been in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cardboard box for me at bottom of t'sewer

Wow, you had your own box?

How are the government going to eliminate relative child poverty. This is impossible even if they machine gunned everyone that currently counts.

Relative poverty is impossible to eliminate, absolute poverty on the other hand already has been in the UK.

Won't stop them trying...

I'm poor - when do I get eliminated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worse still is the "Early Years Foundation Stage"

http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/eyfs/

For God's sake, just look at this cr@p.

Armando Ianucci sums it up brilliantly...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...yyearseducation

What does it take to make you protest? For some people last week, the prospect of a new terminal at Heathrow was enough to make them want to climb the Palace of Westminster. Meantime, the BBC was inundated with complaints from people fed up with too much rugby on BBC1 and who next weekend are planning to scale Jonny Wilkinson. And there's a growing campaign throughout the country from people fed up having their view spoilt by seeing protesters on top of it, who are planning to find these protesters' own houses and sink them.

I always marked protesters down as young, naive students with time on their hands, a month until their next tutorial and so spaced-out that nothing would suit them better than a nice sit-down in the middle of the road.

Yet if my experience is anything to go by, you get more into protester mode the older you grow. As a student, I spent too much time in my books and not enough time boycotting major retail outlets or chaining myself to people such as Nigel Lawson. But a sea-change came with the Iraq anti-war demo in London five years ago. I suddenly felt so radicalised by the knobbish, ****-for-brains, gristle-for-a-heart, clod-happy hopelessness of the whole episode that I genuinely did come to think the only way I could make my point was by marching through London.

Fortunately, I organised my march to coincide with that of another million-and-a-half people, so I didn't look silly. But still, I set off into London wondering whether I was just a 40-year-old trying to shake off a midlife crisis.

As I live in Buckinghamshire, my local station into London was Gerrards Cross, the natural habitat of the wild stockbroker. That Saturday morning, I thought I'd be the only one on the train, but the station was packed with similarly minded people, most of them older than me. At the weekends, they would normally go on country rambles and so their demo gear was sturdy boots and boxes of gammon sandwiches wrapped in cling film.

But instead of carrying binoculars and The Observer's Book of British Birds, they were holding up neatly painted signs saying things such as: 'That's Quite Enough' and 'Really, Mr Blair, This Time You've Gone Too Far'. Since that momentous day, I find myself more ready to rail against stupidity, which is why I now find myself in a rage over just about the stupidest, cack-brained, sherbert-headed nonsense more likely to do more damage to children than a pile of witches.

It's a bizarre new initiative from the Department for Education and Skills called the Early Years Foundation Stage and, like most devastatingly life-worsening initiatives, it's been unwrapping itself slowly and unannounced, with few headlines, no votes and under the guise of safe-sounding phrases that make it appear designed for the greater good.

The EYFS is a series of targets anyone in the care of children as young as three has to aim for. They cover aspects of child education as diverse as emotional development and language skills and one would think the ambition behind them was a good one - to make sure that there's a solid, standardised starting point for all children's education. Except that because the targets are mandatory, it means someone other than the teachers or the school or the child-minder is telling you what to do with each child. Which is fine if the person setting the targets is sensible and a disaster if he or she is not.

Given that the targets at the moment include the obligation to make sure each three-year-old 'understands that s/he can expect others to treat her or his needs, views, cultures and beliefs with respect' and that the child 'interacts with others, negotiating plans and taking turns in conversation' (all things which it's probably taken me more than 40 years to perfect) and given also that any child-minder actually has to fill in a form assessing this, one suspects that the target-setter might live in an ideal rather than a real world.

One can go down the 'this is political correctness gone mad' route, which I always try to avoid doing, especially as I grow into the age and shape of someone who looks like they might say that. But actually, the silly language is something I could cope with; what's really sinister about the whole scheme is that it prescribes, in some detail, a set of reading and writing skills that are not only unrealistically complex for someone aged three, but at a time when a great and unsettled debate is raging in education circles over just how much reading and writing it's necessary for under-sevens to do in the first place.

Mainland Europe has a much better literacy rate than the UK and holds off reading and writing lessons until aged seven and up. Here, some deluded nincomcock, whose job it is to improve literacy among children, has concluded that the only way to do this is by doing the exact opposite of a large mass of the world that has a better literacy rate than us. I used the word 'debate' earlier, but the imposition of these weird targets shuts the debate down. It suddenly turns every nursery teacher, kindergarten supervisor, child-minder, parent or grandmother just baby-sitting into a state functionary legally obliged to perform mandated tasks and compulsory writing assessments on children who've just managed to stop dribbling.

Suddenly, all the bother people have put into finding a school of their choice in this, the Golden Era of Choice, is for nothing because the choice is suddenly a choice of one. It's a choice that hasn't been chosen by the band of state and independent schoolteachers, respected child psychologists and concerned parents who've long believed that a child grows in confidence and imagination through early years of unstructured play rather than the very structured demands of an imposed set of literacy targets.

Worse, for the country's 23 Rudolph Steiner schools where the curriculum relies on the more European reading-and-writing-at-seven-and-upwards model, the new system is a complete rejection of their entire educational philosophy.

And I, now seasoned protester that I am, will be joining this coalition of the troubled in their campaign. If you want to join me, you can sign the Open EYE Petition, or maybe climb on to the top of the Number 10 website.

Not that it will do any good. How do you stop one or two sockheads in authority who demand that every child 'understands that people have different needs, views, cultures and beliefs that need to be treated with respect' when they can't quite manage it themselves?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   285 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.