Wesley Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 I'm only skimming the boring political stuff, but your first point about corporation tax? It was outlined in the budget, decreases year on year until 2015 I think.
Serebii Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 I'm only skimming the boring political stuff, but your first point about corporation tax? It was outlined in the budget, decreases year on year until 2015 I think. Excellent. Thanks.
Wesley Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 I can't tell what's sarcasm and what's not. But who cares this is my favourite! It's amazing how uncomfortable he looks.
Serebii Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 I can't tell what's sarcasm and what's not. But who cares this is my favourite! It's amazing how uncomfortable he looks. I'm very rarely sarcastic during serious matters. I'm not saying the conservatives are perfect. There are many things they do which I dislike as well, but I'm more objective and a lot of the hate I see them get is based on inaccuracies and foolishness. The tuition fee stuff, for example, with my past statement about it giving degrees more worth, but people just see "ZOMG COSTS MORE". They don't see the benefits
Wesley Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 I quite like Cameroon anyway, I think he's funny.
Daft Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 (edited) Just noticed your edits 1. Care to state where it has said that they cut the tax on corporations? As I'm self employed, I'd like to see this. 2. They haven't given anything to the rich. They're taxing the rich more by lowering the limit at which you hit the tax bands. They've dealt with benefits so that people can't just sit and live off of them, instead they have to actually go out and get a job. Shocking, I know. 3. Labour are the ones who increased the fees to £3,000 originally and implemented Tuition Fee Loans in order to counter it. Also, if everyone was entitled to free university education, then the Bachelor degrees will become meaningless. A Levels meant something for a while, until everyone started doing them and it's becoming the same of Bachelor degrees. Nowadays, employers don't care about Bachelor degrees, they want Masters degrees because it shows more dedication. So many people go to university and do ridiculous degrees just so they get the "university experience". It's worthless and I for one and glad that they are doing this. It is making it so the people who go to university go there to learn, not to doss about and get drunk. 4. You have to admit how important the economy is, so yes, they're trying to stabilise it after what Labour did to it. Use your head a bit more and stop being such a cynical Daily Mail opinion spouting person :/ 1. Tory tax cuts that benefit corporations. 2. How exactly are people going to get jobs with the Conservatives causing rising unemployment by not stimulating the economy with funding? Here's just one example of graduates struggling to find jobs. Shock horror, most people aren't happy to be on benefits. 3. Degrees used to be free. It's only now they are being devalued and it has nothing at all to do with the cost. That is the government's fault for setting ridiculous targets of 50% attendance to higher education - THIS is what should be addressed, not forcing economic pressures on a quite vulnerable demographic. Similarly A-levels were only devalued because of grade inflation, not because of how many people did them. 4. Of course the economy is important but this is short sighted. How many people are going to be put off going to university? I can bet you a lot. I doubt I would have gone. I know a few people now who can't afford to pay the current level. Not to mention the massive cuts to teaching budgets. Who in their right mind would pay more money for lower quality education? Cuts that are highly ideological, too. Graduates are the backbone of our economy and what's going to happen when only the few who can afford to pay are going to be propping up the country. I also fail to see how Labour brought about a global economic crisis. While Labour might have given into reckless spending they were quite obviously ultimately damned by their circumstance. Use your head a bit more and stop being such a cynical Daily Mail opinion spouting person :/ Hold on, you think I sound like I'm a Daily Fascist reader? You're so steeped in shit I can't help but get angry and I'm sorry for that. Edited February 23, 2011 by Daft
Noodleman Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Nowadays, employers don't care about Bachelor degrees, they want Masters degrees because it shows more dedication. What absolute rubbish.
Mr-Paul Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Use your head a bit more and stop being such a cynical Daily Mail opinion spouting person :/ Seeing that the Daily Mail is a right wing, Conservative Party supporting newspaper, I don't think you can accuse Daft of that. His opinions seem well informed to me. I wish Cameron would just drop this Big Society crap. No-one knows what it is and I don't think the tories themselves know either.
Emasher Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 So many people go to university and do ridiculous degrees just so they get the "university experience". It's worthless and I for one and glad that they are doing this. It is making it so the people who go to university go there to learn, not to doss about and get drunk. Wouldn't it be better just to raise the entrance requirements? Most of the people who go to university to party are the same sort of people who didn't get incredibly high grades in whatever you call your 9th to 12th years of education in the UK. IMO, Education should be accessible for those who are intelligent enough to take it seriously and actually benefit from it.
Serebii Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Wouldn't it be better just to raise the entrance requirements? Most of the people who go to university to party are the same sort of people who didn't get incredibly high grades in whatever you call your 9th to 12th years of education in the UK. IMO, Education should be accessible for those who are intelligent enough to take it seriously and actually benefit from it. I'd settle for that too. However, people would say that that's discriminatory and that everyone's entitled to higher education.
Daft Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Wouldn't it be better just to raise the entrance requirements? Most of the people who go to university to party are the same sort of people who didn't get incredibly high grades in whatever you call your 9th to 12th years of education in the UK. IMO, Education should be accessible for those who are intelligent enough to take it seriously and actually benefit from it. No, because of grade inflation. How do you tell the difference between 10/20/30 candidates with straight As? Grades are meant to measure your ability (Which, honestly, I don't think they do well in their current state) but at the moment it's not distinguishing anywhere near enough.
Serebii Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Seeing that the Daily Mail is a right wing, Conservative Party supporting newspaper, I don't think you can accuse Daft of that.His opinions seem well informed to me. I wish Cameron would just drop this Big Society crap. No-one knows what it is and I don't think the tories themselves know either. His opinions seem rather narrow and cynical. That's what I took issue with. The Daily Mail comment was out of anger and I apologise, it was just because they're rather narrowminded and cynical also
Oxigen_Waste Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Really wish the idea that the conservatives favour the rich would die. That idea died decades ago, you're just channelling your parent's disdain. Believe me, they don't favour the rich I know nothing of your politics, but if they are a conservative party, they favour conservatism, and therefore they don't favour anyone, but want things to stay as they are - ie. the rich stay rich, the poor stay poor.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 No, because of grade inflation. How do you tell the difference between 10/20/30 candidates with straight As? Grades are meant to measure your ability (Which, honestly, I don't think they do well in their current state) but at the moment it's not distinguishing anywhere near enough. How does this system work in the UK? In Denmark, all grades are numbers: 12 = A 10 = B 7 = C etc. Higher education requires a number of specific subjects passed at specific levels, and everyone who fulfil these requirements can apply. All applications are then listed according to the applicants' grade average, and people are let in from the top of the list until the number of available slots are filled. The lowest grade average that got in is then published, and next year's applicants to that course then know roughly what average they need to attain in order to get in. That's the general system in a nutshell, and I think it works very well.
MoogleViper Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 How does this system work in the UK? In Denmark, all grades are numbers: 12 = A 10 = B 7 = C etc. Higher education requires a number of specific subjects passed at specific levels, and everyone who fulfil these requirements can apply. All applications are then listed according to the applicants' grade average, and people are let in from the top of the list until the number of available slots are filled. The lowest grade average that got in is then published, and next year's applicants to that course then know roughly what average they need to attain in order to get in. That's the general system in a nutshell, and I think it works very well. We receive the grades A through E (or U for a fail, and I think they're introducing A* now as well). UCAS has a points system for universities. A=120 points, B=100, C=80, D=60 and E=40. (As levels are worth half for the respective grades.)
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 We receive the grades A through E (or U for a fail, and I think they're introducing A* now as well). UCAS has a points system for universities. A=120 points, B=100, C=80, D=60 and E=40. (As levels are worth half for the respective grades.) So how is it decided who gets in at uni?
MoogleViper Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 So how is it decided who gets in at uni? Unis set requirements of x UCAS points (as well as other criteria in certain cases).
James Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Hasn't A* been around for yonks, or am I missing something?
Emasher Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Another thing that should be done to keep people from getting useless degrees just to get the 'University Experience' might be to have trade schools located on university campuses. I don't really know what the situation is like in the UK, but in Canada we have a huge shortage of trades people because people look down on learning a trade and everyone is pushed to go to university instead. There are tons of people who would be far better off learning welding or carpentry than philosophy or gender studies.
James Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 We kinda have apprenticeships which allow the youngsters to learn trades, while getting paid a bit of money, once completed I imagine trades pay alot more than what people achieve at uni, I wish I did a trade.
Daft Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Hasn't A* been around for yonks, or am I missing something? A* has only just been introduced for A levels. Expect them to mean little soon, too.
Recommended Posts