Alan Johnson quits frontline politics

[Johnny Bognor]

Another ****ing "I've been grafting since I was five and the world still hasn't repaid me."

 

Dune's thick, it's as easy as that. Even if he was educated to the same level I would still call him thick.

 

No, I have been grafting since I graduated.

 

Anyway, let's look at the subject of this thread. Alan Johnson - no degree, no masters, no phd - a far more respected politician than many of the doctors and graduate MP's sitting in the house of commons (on both sides) and this coming from (what some would describe as) a one nation tory.

 

Let's look at some of the most universally recognised successful people in society from Richard Branson, Alan Sugar, Doug Richards, Theo Paphitis, James Caan through to Michael Dell, Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Simon Cowell and even Walt ****ing Disney (eat your heart out film studies graduates).......I could go on, but I am getting bored. Not a degree between them.

 

As I said, anyone with a degree, well done - have a certificate. You have proved you can learn - big deal.

 

In other news, my **** is bigger than your ****. Ha! Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

Edited 23 January, 2011 by Johnny Bognor

[Deppo]

Actually, it really bugs me.

 

These so called intellectual lefties despise the snobbery from the upper classes (or wealthier classes), yet they look down their educated noses at other people in the same way and like to rub it in. I think it is disgusting and shows them up for the green eyed hypocrites they really are. Not made it in life and so they have to make themselves feel better about themselves by comparing their academic trophies.

 

Bloody pathetic if you ask me.

 

We are talking about the subject of history. A bit of a difference to Business Studies. Of course you can learn more about business actually doing it. You'd be stupid not to know that. Where do you think you are going to find out more about history - studying it or... wait, what is the equative option to your analogy here? Travelling back in time and becoming a French Revolutionary?

[Deppo]

No, I have been grafting since I graduated.

 

Anyway, let's look at the subject of this thread. Alan Johnson - no degree, no masters, no phd - a far more respected politician than many of the doctors and graduate MP's sitting in the house of commons (on both sides) and this coming from (what some would describe as) a one nation tory.

 

Let's look at some of the most universally recognised successful people in society from Richard Branson, Alan Sugar, Doug Richards, Theo Paphitis, James Caan through to Michael Dell, Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Simon Cowell and even Walt ****ing Disney (eat your heart out film studies graduates).......I could go on, but I am getting bored. Not a degree between them.

 

But you're just naming people without degrees and saying that proves your point. Someone else could name successful people with degrees and say that proves the opposite. It doesn't prove anything. Now if you did a history degree you would learn all about proof and authentication, etc. Your post also proves that the why/how are important when talking about history and not just stating the who/what/when. You have stated the who/what/when and come to a conclusion which doesn't mean anything. But I suppose if you are happy with that conclusion, it just shows that education means nothing to you at all and thus I have no idea why you are posting on this thread.

[Johnny Bognor]

We are talking about the subject of history. A bit of a difference to Business Studies. Of course you can learn more about business actually doing it. You'd be stupid not to know that. Where do you think you are going to find out more about history - studying it or... wait, what is the equative option to your analogy here? Travelling back in time and becoming a French Revolutionary?

 

Not at all.

 

Take an average history graduate who gets a 2:1 and then goes on to stack shelves in Tesco's and holidays in Ibiza.

 

Then take someone whose real passion is history....reads history books every night, goes to museums every weekend / part takes in battle re-enactments and holidays in sites of archeoligical interest over a period of 20 years.

 

One is more 'qualified' than the other, but which one is the expert?

[Saintandy666]

Not at all.

 

Take an average history graduate who gets a 2:1 and then goes on to stack shelves in Tesco's and holidays in Ibiza.

 

Then take someone whose real passion is history....reads history books every night, goes to museums every weekend / part takes in battle re-enactments and holidays in sites of archeoligical interest over a period of 20 years.

 

One is more 'qualified' than the other, but which one is the expert?

 

The average History graduate doesn't go on to stack shelves at Tesco.

 

You are simply creating imaginary extreme examples to suit yourself. You can't just make sweeping statements and then declare your victory.

[Johnny Bognor]

But you're just naming people without degrees and saying that proves your point. Someone else could name successful people with degrees and say that proves the opposite. It doesn't prove anything. Now if you did a history degree you would learn all about proof and authentication, etc. Your post also proves that the why/how are important when talking about history and not just stating the who/what/when. You have stated the who/what/when and come to a conclusion which doesn't mean anything. But I suppose if you are happy with that conclusion, it just shows that education means nothing to you at all and thus I have no idea why you are posting on this thread.

 

 

If you were that well educated, you would realise this thread is about Alan Johnson quitting frontline politics. Note how I brought him into one of my posts to make it relevant. The reason why I contributed to this thread is to raise the issue of intellectual snobbery and how those who are guilty of it are no better than the snobs they despise.

 

One thing I will give Alan Johnson, he's not a hypocrite like some other lefties I know.

[Deppo]

And where do you think they are getting this knowledge from in the books/museums/battle re-enactments/sites of archeological interest? Scholars. It all comes from academia, whether you like it or not.

[Deppo]

If you were that well educated, you would realise this thread is about Alan Johnson quitting frontline politics. Note how I brought him into one of my posts to make it relevant. The reason why I contributed to this thread is to raise the issue of intellectual snobbery and how those who are guilty of it are no better than the snobs they despise.

 

One thing I will give Alan Johnson, he's not a hypocrite like some other lefties I know.

 

That doesn't answer the point I was making.

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

No, I have been grafting since I graduated.

 

Anyway, let's look at the subject of this thread. Alan Johnson - no degree, no masters, no phd - a far more respected politician than many of the doctors and graduate MP's sitting in the house of commons (on both sides) and this coming from (what some would describe as) a one nation tory.

 

Let's look at some of the most universally recognised successful people in society from Richard Branson, Alan Sugar, Doug Richards, Theo Paphitis, James Caan through to Michael Dell, Henry Ford, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Simon Cowell and even Walt ****ing Disney (eat your heart out film studies graduates).......I could go on, but I am getting bored. Not a degree between them.

 

As I said, anyone with a degree, well done - have a certificate. You have proved you can learn - big deal.

 

In other news, my **** is bigger than your ****. Ha! Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

 

And they are all considerably richer because of the degree qualified accountants, lawyers etc that support their activities, protect their interests and help them maximise their investments etc

[Johnny Bognor]

And where do you think they are getting this knowledge from in the books/museums/battle re-enactments/sites of archeological interest? Scholars. It all comes from academia, whether you like it or not.

 

I don't have a problem with academia per se. I have a problem with socialist snobs.

[Fuengirola Saint]

At the end of the day Dune is a ****ing nutter though isn't he? I'm sure we can all agree on that.

[Johnny Bognor]

And they are all considerably richer because of the degree qualified accountants, lawyers etc that support their activities, protect their interests and help them maximise their investments etc

 

 

Indeed they are, but a degree does not guarantee success (as shown) and we need educated people to function, but why the need for **** swinging contest from the intellectual lefties on here?

[Johnny Bognor]

At the end of the day Dune is a ****ing nutter though isn't he? I'm sure we can all agree on that.

 

 

Hey Fuengirola, you despise snobs don't you?

 

Does that include intellectual snobs too?

 

Is there room for snobbery in your communist world?

[solentstars]

I don't have a problem with academia per se. I have a problem with socialist snobs.

 

rather than tory snobs calling people lefties like johnston who most people would say he is on the centre ground of politics like majority of real people in this country.

[dune]

rather than tory snobs calling people lefties like johnston who most people would say he is on the centre ground of politics like majority of real people in this country.

 

Who's Johnston?

[Johnny Bognor]

That doesn't answer the point I was making.

 

No I didn't conduct a scientific study and apply any form of analysis to it, so although it may not prove anything, it shows that you don't need a degree to be successful. It is clear that humility is not taught in universities these days, which brings me on to another point.

 

Universities are brainwashing people in terms of their earning expectations. Many graduates come through my doors with ridiculous earning expectations and it is only when they see the oxbridge 1st class honours graduates doing data entry for me, that they get brought back down to earth.

[Johnny Bognor]

Who's Johnston?

 

 

Paint trophy?

[Joensuu]

There are different schools of thought on the way all socal sciences are interpreted, objective approaches frequently suffer because their lack of interpretation frequently leads to overly simplistic assumptions. Subjective approaches do not attempt to provide a definitive interpretation, but instead look for multiple interpretations of the evidence from different perspectives. As such people being taught a subject in a subjetive way are challenged to look for alternative interpretations from a range of viewpoints. When presented without a range of interpretations (from different perspectives), a list of facts will often lead people into forming a narrow and simplistic understanding, normally heavily biased by their own personal worldview. Hense it would follow thay a typical Express reader might interpret, say, the factual events of Africa under the British Empire and conclude that it was a positive experience for the continent. This of course tells us much about the bias of a typical Express reader, but little about the history of Imperial Africa.

[Fuengirola Saint]

Hey Fuengirola, you despise snobs don't you?

 

Does that include intellectual snobs too?

 

Is there room for snobbery in your communist world?

 

 

In my Communist world i'd have all snobs put up against the wall ;-) I'm not sure that TLS was being a snob as such, just pointing out to our resident fascist that maybe he would know a bit more about history seeing as he has a degree in said subject.Dune is bonkers though isn't he? I know he is a fellow right winger but you must be able to see that.

[Deppo]

Who's Johnston?

 

Are you really picking somebody else up on a misspelling? There goes the mote beam mechanism again.

[archstanton]

Rat spunk

[LGTL]

Not at all.

 

Take an average history graduate who gets a 2:1 and then goes on to stack shelves in Tesco's and holidays in Ibiza.

 

Then take someone whose real passion is history....reads history books every night, goes to museums every weekend / part takes in battle re-enactments and holidays in sites of archeoligical interest over a period of 20 years.

 

One is more 'qualified' than the other, but which one is the expert?

 

Neither. An expert in an academic field will need an Undergraduate, Masters and a PHD, followed by numerous research in said field, with this research being published in many academic, peer reviewed journals, in my opinion. The graduate with the 2:1 is a hell of a lot closer to this then the guy with the passion. Just the way it is.

[Johnny Bognor]

In my Communist world i'd have all snobs put up against the wall ;-) I'm not sure that TLS was being a snob as such, just pointing out to our resident fascist that maybe he would know a bit more about history seeing as he has a degree in said subject.Dune is bonkers though isn't he? I know he is a fellow right winger but you must be able to see that.

 

Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't but Thorpe-Le-Snob, Snobbo, Versnob, Snob-too-far, Snob from the top, Saintsnob666, Anothersnobinsouthsea can't help themselves sometimes. I am glad to say that there is no Fuengirola Snob, so fair pay too you sir.

[dune]

There are different schools of thought on the way all socal sciences are interpreted, objective approaches frequently suffer because their lack of interpretation frequently leads to overly simplistic assumptions. Subjective approaches do not attempt to provide a definitive interpretation, but instead look for multiple interpretations of the evidence from different perspectives. As such people being taught a subject in a subjetive way are challenged to look for alternative interpretations from a range of viewpoints. When presented without a range of interpretations (from different perspectives), a list of facts will often lead people into forming a narrow and simplistic understanding, normally heavily biased by their own personal worldview. Hense it would follow thay a typical Express reader might interpret, say, the factual events of Africa under the British Empire and conclude that it was a positive experience for the continent. This of course tells us much about the bias of a typical Express reader, but little about the history of Imperial Africa.

 

Let's look at Rhodesia. Mortality rates decreased and life expectancy increased under Colonial rule. Mortality rates increased and life expectancy decreased post 1980.

[archstanton]

Hooray for the Monday Club

[um pahars]

Look at the my qualification is bigger then your qualification brigade.

 

A qualification is a badge which proves you can learn, but does not automatically make you an expert or inteligent. There are many people without degrees who are still intelligent. The intellectual snobbery (particuarly from the lefties) is rather lacking in class.

 

I have a Business Studies degree and I can honestly say, hand on heart, that a barrow boy from your local market has a better understanding of supply/demand or cash flow than any average Business Studies graduate. Most of what I know about business was not learned in a class room, but from real experiences and I have the scars on my back to prove it. These scars are worth far more than a bit of paper that I managed to achieve 20 years ago.

 

Have to say Johhny I think you have missed the point in the latest twist of the argument (IMHO). I actually agree that a degree (or any other qualification) isn't the be all and end all. However, in the context of trying to have a debate with the rather ridiculous Dune and his warped view on teaching it is relevant.

 

Some of his arguments are so nonsensical that it beggars belief.

[dune]

Rhodesia pre 1980

 

 

Rhodesia Today

 

[Saintandy666]

Let's look at Rhodesia. Mortality rates decreased and life expectancy increased under Colonial rule. Mortality rates increased and life expectancy decreased post 1980.

 

Do you think empires are justified then? Do you think that anything should be done to uphold the empire even against the people's will? What is your opinion on say... Amritsar?

[Verbal]

No I didn't conduct a scientific study and apply any form of analysis to it, so although it may not prove anything, it shows that you don't need a degree to be successful. It is clear that humility is not taught in universities these days, which brings me on to another point.

 

Universities are brainwashing people in terms of their earning expectations. Many graduates come through my doors with ridiculous earning expectations and it is only when they see the oxbridge 1st class honours graduates doing data entry for me, that they get brought back down to earth.

 

Oh dear Johnny, you're a bubbling boil of rage. Calm down, take a deep breath. Of course degrees don't confer a monopoly on wisdom. As your own experience testifies: you spent three years doing a business studies degree and yet you still don't understand the term 'manufacturing'.

 

The 'snobbery' as you call it is directed at those (singular) who are truly ignorant no matter HOW you measure it - by degrees, common sense, evidence of any neural activity whatsoever, etc - and combine ignorance with a vicious little streak that sees nothing but heroics in the brutal mindlessness of the white supremacists he slobbishly adores.

 

With these 'qualifications' does our ideologically diseased little creep pretend to tell us that he alone knows what's good for 'our' children.

Edited 23 January, 2011 by Verbal

[Deppo]

If you were that well educated, you would realise this thread is about Alan Johnson quitting frontline politics. Note how I brought him into one of my posts to make it relevant. The reason why I contributed to this thread is to raise the issue of intellectual snobbery and how those who are guilty of it are no better than the snobs they despise.

 

One thing I will give Alan Johnson, he's not a hypocrite like some other lefties I know.

 

But the point is they are discussing History. They are not making a sweeping statement that a degree means you are better in every area. In the subject of History, EVERYTHING we know comes from/via academia. Even first hand accounts and footage are directed through academia for authenticity. Just because you are embittered after doing a degree in something which you considered to be of little merit to you, try not to us this as a blueprint for your opinion on other areas of study. You talk about snobbery, yet you are the one making generalisations.

[dune]

Do you think empires are justified then? Do you think that anything should be done to uphold the empire even against the people's will? What is your opinion on say... Amritsar?

 

In the case of most African countries they weren't ready for majority rule - the process was rushed through in a "scramble out of Africa". Ian Smith was all for a gradual transition of power, but unfortunately the South Africans were foolish and they thought that by abandoning Rhodesia they would gain respect and be left alone - they were wrong. It was the South Africans blocking ship cargoes that finnished Rhodesia who had almost defeated the terrorists. That said the big mistake was made years before when the Rhodesians should have voted in favour of joining SA. If they had done so the Afrikaners would never have gained conntrol of the SA parliament and there would not have been a halt put on British emigration to increase the number of white settlers which would have ensured a more balanced black/white split.

[Deppo]

Let's look at Rhodesia. Mortality rates decreased and life expectancy increased under Colonial rule. Mortality rates increased and life expectancy decreased post 1980.

 

OK. Can we look at it on YouTube though? That way we don't have to worry about any in-depth analysis or citation.

[Deppo]

Rhodesia pre 1980

 

 

Rhodesia Today

 

 

Thanks dune!

[dune]

Thanks dune!

 

Your sarcasm is very very funny.

[Joensuu]

Let's look at Rhodesia. Mortality rates decreased and life expectancy increased under Colonial rule. Mortality rates increased and life expectancy decreased post 1980.

 

Seen as Rhodesia didnt exist after 1980 technically I'd have to disagree. But I assume you mean, Zimbabwe? If so, then on the narrow assessment criteria you have chosen you'd be correct. It's easy to find examples that 'proove' your opinion. However, a historian should be aware of their own bias, and look for examples that dont fit their interpretation.

 

I remember watching some greek students being challenged to argue why the Parthanon marbles should stay in London. They learn't more from the excercise, as it forced them to think from a different perspective.

 

Let's see if you can do the same, so rather than picking from the select examples which support your view, can you find any examples which contradict your opinion?

Edited 24 January, 2011 by Joensuu
touch phone spelling

[Deppo]

Your sarcasm is very very funny.

 

Thanks dune!

[Deppo]

can you find any examples which contradict your opinion?

 

Only if they are on YouTube.

[Johnny Bognor]

In my Communist world i'd have all snobs put up against the wall ;-)

 

I should be OK then, as some of your old mates from the waterside will testify ;-)

[buctootim]

I like snobbishness. Its a useful shorthand for quickly separating those who have genuine intelligence and judgement from those who don't.

[Johnny Bognor]

Oh dear Johnny, you're a bubbling boil of rage. Calm down, take a deep breath. Of course degrees don't confer a monopoly on wisdom. As your own experience testifies: you spent three years doing a business studies degree and yet you still don't understand the term 'manufacturing'.

 

Come on Verbal, the intellectual **** swinging isn't exclusive to this thread

 

But the point is they are discussing History. They are not making a sweeping statement that a degree means you are better in every area. In the subject of History, EVERYTHING we know comes from/via academia. Even first hand accounts and footage are directed through academia for authenticity. Just because you are embittered after doing a degree in something which you considered to be of little merit to you, try not to us this as a blueprint for your opinion on other areas of study. You talk about snobbery, yet you are the one making generalisations.

 

I am aware that degrees in certain subjects are of merit (particularly those that relate to the professions such as medicine or law). I have doctors and lawyers as friends and not once do they need to mention their qualifications - to them it is irrelevant. Mine was of little merit and I am 4 years behind my plan for world domination as a result.

 

However, the **** swinging has been getting rather tedious and hasn't been exclusive to this thread. The one upmanship and "I am better than you because of my degree" is typical of your average graduate (and yes I did meet plenty outside of my chosen subject) and it is precisely why I didn't choose to socialise with what in my eyes was a bunch of knobs. I almost subscribe to Sturomseysaint's view of students in general. Those of a left persuasion will then spend the rest of their lives ramming it down people's throats when their careers falter and don't reach their full potential.

Edited 23 January, 2011 by Johnny Bognor

[Deppo]

Sounds to me like you have some self esteem issues you need to confront.

[Jonnyboy]

Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't but Thorpe-Le-Snob, Snobbo, Versnob, Snob-too-far, Snob from the top, Saintsnob666, Anothersnobinsouthsea can't help themselves sometimes. I am glad to say that there is no Fuengirola Snob, so fair pay too you sir.

 

Made me lol

well done Johnny Snobnor ;-)

(someone had to say it)

[Jonnyboy]

Come on Verbal, the intellectual **** swinging isn't exclusive to this thread

 

 

 

I am aware that degrees in certain subjects are of merit (particularly those that relate to the professions such as medicine or law). I have doctors and lawyers as friends and not once do they need to mention their qualifications - to them it is irrelevant. Mine was of little merit and I am 4 years behind my plan for world domination as a result.

 

However, the **** swinging has been getting rather tedious and hasn't been exclusive to this thread. The one upmanship and "I am better than you because of my degree" is typical of your average graduate (and yes I did meet plenty outside of my chosen subject) and it is precisely why I didn't choose to socialise with what in my eyes was a bunch of knobs. I almost subscribe to Sturomseysaint's view of students in general. Those of a left persuasion will then spend the rest of their lives ramming it down people's throats when their careers falter and don't reach their full potential.

 

if you grow up being told by sdociety to study hard and get good grades and it will help you out in later life it must be a ****ter to come up against your good self at a job interview who places no value in such endeavour

[Verbal]

Universities are brainwashing people in terms of their earning expectations. Many graduates come through my doors with ridiculous earning expectations and it is only when they see the oxbridge 1st class honours graduates doing data entry for me, that they get brought back down to earth.

 

It's just occurred to me that this is a pretty consistent thread running through your posts - a curious desire to humiliate university graduates...'bring them down to earth'. I spent some time at Google's HQ in Mountain View a couple of years ago, and it's really striking how quickly they promote the brightest and the best, and give everyone the chance to excel, while appearing to have an awful lot of fun doing it. One 22 year old Harvard Computer Science graduate I met had an idea about sourcing green energy in a company that uses VAST quantities of it. Because it was her idea, she was put in charge of it - and the $100,000,000 budget that went with it. Others were similarly promoted to develop their own ideas. For Google, graduates, with their well trained minds, were incredibly valuable, and as far as I know, it's impossible to get a meaningful job there without a degree of some sort, and to have excelled in it.

 

In Britain, on the other hand, we have far too many low-grade employers who look at a graduate and think: I'll teach him/her - let them get a taste of the REAL world. Such employers then go on to waste the talent right under their noses.

 

Such is the rabid anti-intellectual culture of British business. Until many of the country's businesses cure themselves of their (literally) dimwitted obsession with putting down bright people, we'll be saddled with a business culture that is third rate, and that has no chance whatsoever to compete with graduate-heavy business cultures in America, China, the Tiger economies....and pretty much anywhere else.

 

Which - to bring this back to the thread - is why I'm happy to see Johnson gone. He plainly wasn't up to the job of mastering the complexities of being Shadow Chancellor. Johnson was lauded by many precisely because he was a postie, which would have been fine had he any idea what he was talking about. Ed Balls is an intellectually tough-minded politician. He may have other many other failings, but I doubt he'll fail to grasp the brief.

[solentstars]

It's just occurred to me that this is a pretty consistent thread running through your posts - a curious desire to humiliate university graduates...'bring them down to earth'. I spent some time at Google's HQ in Mountain View a couple of years ago, and it's really striking how quickly they promote the brightest and the best, and give everyone the chance to excel, while appearing to have an awful lot of fun doing it. One 22 year old Harvard Computer Science graduate I met had an idea about sourcing green energy in a company that uses VAST quantities of it. Because it was her idea, she was put in charge of it - and the $100,000,000 budget that went with it. Others were similarly promoted to develop their own ideas. For Google, graduates, with their well trained minds, were incredibly valuable, and as far as I know, it's impossible to get a meaningful job there without a degree of some sort, and to have excelled in it.

 

In Britain, on the other hand, we have far too many low-grade employers who look at a graduate and think: I'll teach him/her - let them get a taste of the REAL world. Such employers then go on to waste the talent right under their noses.

 

Such is the rabid anti-intellectual culture of British business. Until many of the country's businesses cure themselves of their (literally) dimwitted obsession with putting down bright people, we'll be saddled with a business culture that is third rate, and that has no chance whatsoever to compete with graduate-heavy business cultures in America, China, the Tiger economies....and pretty much anywhere else.

 

Which - to bring this back to the thread - is why I'm happy to see Johnson gone. He plainly wasn't up to the job of mastering the complexities of being Shadow Chancellor. Johnson was lauded by many precisely because he was a postie, which would have been fine had he any idea what he was talking about. Ed Balls is an intellectually tough-minded politician. He may have other many other failings, but I doubt he'll fail to grasp the brief.

 

good post the same principles seem to apply to germany of having highly skilled graduates which in turn makes them even stronger.

[Johnny Bognor]

Sounds to me like you have some self esteem issues you need to confront.

 

Not at all, just waving a bit of paper in front of someones nose, doesn't make you a better person.

 

Made me lol

well done Johnny Snobnor ;-)

(someone had to say it)

 

I was waiting for that :-)

 

if you grow up being told by sdociety to study hard and get good grades and it will help you out in later life it must be a ****ter to come up against your good self at a job interview who places no value in such endeavour

 

Not at all, see point below

 

It's just occurred to me that this is a pretty consistent thread running through your posts - a curious desire to humiliate university graduates...'bring them down to earth'. I spent some time at Google's HQ in Mountain View a couple of years ago, and it's really striking how quickly they promote the brightest and the best, and give everyone the chance to excel, while appearing to have an awful lot of fun doing it. One 22 year old Harvard Computer Science graduate I met had an idea about sourcing green energy in a company that uses VAST quantities of it. Because it was her idea, she was put in charge of it - and the $100,000,000 budget that went with it. Others were similarly promoted to develop their own ideas. For Google, graduates, with their well trained minds, were incredibly valuable, and as far as I know, it's impossible to get a meaningful job there without a degree of some sort, and to have excelled in it.

 

I get your point and can see how you deduce it as I guess I have been consistent. I have said before (on the tuition fees thread) that I would like to see certain courses subsidised, so I do value education, however on a selective basis - i.e. not all of it for education's sake. I want to see the UK be a world leader and to do that we will need well educated people, but the system needs to be designed in a way that will give the UK the best return on its "investment". An oversupply of soft-studies graduates does not help.

 

I do have intelligent people who work for me (in fact some of them are more intelligent than I'll ever be) but they also have other attributes which are just as important such as personality, communication skills, flair, dedication, humility, inventiveness, creativity and the list goes on. Their academic achievements are just one piece of a complex jigsaw which makes a real star. This fits with your example of the graduate from Havard. She didn't get that responsibility solely due to her degree (athough that got her through the door) as Google employ hundreds of them, but her ability to think beyond the norm and her inventiveness/creativity which goes beyond that bit of paper and makes her stand out from the other graduates at google.

 

Last week I was on a film shoot (you'll be pleased to hear) and there was a young Chinese chap who graduated in film studies at Pompey Uni last summer. He was working for nothing for work experience and I thought, fair play. He contacted local film companies and offered his services for free. He is clearly passionate about film and prepared to make the sacrifices to get into the industry as his bit of paper alone does not guarantee this. With his attitude, I don't think he'll be out of work for long.

 

I guess my view has been formed having seen an abundance of graduates in the last 5 years and many of them have their head in the clouds and/or are distinctly average and to get on, they'll need more than a bit of paper.

 

However, the venom that I display on here is not for people with a bit of paper (as I too have a bit of paper, but maybe not as nice as your bit of paper), but the attitude of people who want to belittle others because they are more intelligent. This type of snobbery does lack class (as I have said before) and it is the snobbery that I have a problem with. It also seems to be a common trait of those with a left political leaning, but I am sure you will point out that it is because people on the left are more intelligent...... I remember a thread about that fairly recently, which shows that the snobbery is not exclusive to this thread.

 

Which - to bring this back to the thread - is why I'm happy to see Johnson gone. He plainly wasn't up to the job of mastering the complexities of being Shadow Chancellor. Johnson was lauded by many precisely because he was a postie, which would have been fine had he any idea what he was talking about. Ed Balls is an intellectually tough-minded politician. He may have other many other failings, but I doubt he'll fail to grasp the brief.

 

I agree that he was out of his depth for Shadow Chancellor, but nevertheless he is a well respected politician and respected by all quarters. I would wager that in a straight national vote between Johnson and Balls, Johnson would win by a country mile.

Edited 24 January, 2011 by Johnny Bognor

[dune]

I agree that he was out of his depth for Shadow Chancellor, but nevertheless he is a well respected politician and respected by all quarters. I would wager that in a straight national vote between Johnson and Balls, Johnson would win by a country mile.

 

Thinking about it the appointment of boggle eyed Balls has one advantage for the geek - he makes him look less abnormal.

[Special K]

Not content with throwing it up Mrs Johnson, it seems as though the bodyguard has been poking Alan Johnson's PA too. Not related to Berlusconi is he?

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

Come on Verbal, the intellectual **** swinging isn't exclusive to this thread

 

 

 

I am aware that degrees in certain subjects are of merit (particularly those that relate to the professions such as medicine or law). I have doctors and lawyers as friends and not once do they need to mention their qualifications - to them it is irrelevant. Mine was of little merit and I am 4 years behind my plan for world domination as a result.

 

However, the **** swinging has been getting rather tedious and hasn't been exclusive to this thread. The one upmanship and "I am better than you because of my degree" is typical of your average graduate (and yes I did meet plenty outside of my chosen subject) and it is precisely why I didn't choose to socialise with what in my eyes was a bunch of knobs. I almost subscribe to Sturomseysaint's view of students in general. Those of a left persuasion will then spend the rest of their lives ramming it down people's throats when their careers falter and don't reach their full potential.

 

Yes, but do people question your lawyer friends ability to do his job? I bet they don't! My abilities as a historian were being attacked, how did you expect me to defend my capabilities?

[Johnny Bognor]

Yes, but do people question your lawyer friends ability to do his job? I bet they don't! My abilities as a historian were being attacked, how did you expect me to defend my capabilities?

 

But the bit of paper proves nothing. I remember many a **** teacher (degree qualified), so even though you have a history degree, it does not make you a better history teacher. However, if you could tell me how your input has improved the average history grade within your school, then I would be impressed.