Paxman v Brand

[Lord Duckhunter]

Anybody deterred by the "costs" of going to university is too thick to go to university. The fees are a deferred tax, not payable until you reach a higher than average salary, which you will presumably earn because of your additional education.

 

Correct, and its about time the opponents of fees acknowledged this. You just can not have tax payer funded tuition fees if you're going to want 50% of kids going to uni. Once people accept that the options become, limit uni to the top 10/15% , pay as you go, or a deferred payment scheme that kicks in the more you earn. Its a no brainer

[pap]

Anybody deterred by the "costs" of going to university is too thick to go to university. The fees are a deferred tax, not payable until you reach a higher than average salary, which you will presumably earn because of your additional education.

 

The original claim was that the Conservatives were the only party who could make unpopular decisions for the benefit of the "bigger picture", however inexpertly that may be perceived. Labour made unpopular decisions during its previous tenure. Tuition fees were among them.

 

I disagree with your point, though. I wouldn't have thought it uncommon for smart kids to take a different path, in part based on the costs incurred at Uni. They may take the view that it's better to be financially solvent at 22 than degree educated, particularly if their vocation doesn't require a higher level qualification. Many apprenticeship schemes get you professional credentials on the job. If some kid decides to become an electrician instead of an engineer, is that a bad decision?

[Wes Tender]

The original claim was that the Conservatives were the only party who could make unpopular decisions for the benefit of the "bigger picture", however inexpertly that may be perceived. Labour made unpopular decisions during its previous tenure. Tuition fees were among them.

 

I disagree with your point, though. I wouldn't have thought it uncommon for smart kids to take a different path, in part based on the costs incurred at Uni. They may take the view that it's better to be financially solvent at 22 than degree educated, particularly if their vocation doesn't require a higher level qualification. Many apprenticeship schemes get you professional credentials on the job. If some kid decides to become an electrician instead of an engineer, is that a bad decision?

 

The system was fine before Labour decided that it wanted as many as possible to receive a university education. Before, only the very best gained entry and it was a reasonable assumption that the cost of their tuition was recouped by the higher taxation they paid back into the coffers for the rest of their working lives. Now, too many attend, taking useless degrees like Media Studies and the result is too many drop out, or swell the dole queues with their devalued degrees and the tuition fees now act as a deterrent to weed out those who might not take university seriously.

 

As you rightly say, there is increasingly a scenario whereby many are concluding that they ought instead to get a job after college with decent A levels and after three years work experience, they are better off than all those graduates with their pieces of paper, no work experience and an unknown quantity to the employers. I also agree with you that foregoing a decent wage from a dead-end job for three or four years whilst serving an apprenticeship for a skilled job that will set you up for life, is also a very good move.

[SuperMikey]

A lot of what Russell said in that interview resonated with me, but some of it didn't. I would count myself as one of the apathetic young people on this planet, I see modern politics as an almost entirely self-serving, self-preserving cycle of power. Something has to be done to address the serious shortcomings in the world - why should some members of the population be absolutely stinking rich while there are other, less fortunate people dying of starvation each day? The world is so f*cked up it's unbelievable, but people go along with things the way they are because "that's the way it is". Surely something can be done to make a change?

 

I'm not saying that he's going to be some kind of spearhead for a new global Socialist utopia, but some of his points are irrefutable (despite the best efforts of Paxman). And as he says, it's not up to him to devise how change is going to occur, but i'm sure we can all agree on what the end goal should be: no poverty, no starvation, and the global populous to be treated more fairly by the powers that be.

 

While I find his views abhorrent, Tommy Robinson (aka Steven Lennon) whipped up a real frenzy with the whole EDL movement and showed that there is a real underclass even in a very developed society such as ours that are being constantly f*cked up the jacksy by modern politics and modern politicians. I don't really think that now is the time for us all to rise up against the system, but there are some incredibly serious issues that can be addressed which are frankly being ignored.

[aintforever]

Anybody deterred by the "costs" of going to university is too thick to go to university. The fees are a deferred tax, not payable until you reach a higher than average salary, which you will presumably earn because of your additional education.

 

That's complete ******, there are plenty of ways you can earn good money by not going to uni and being saddled with massive debt. If I had to the make the choice now I would probably think twice about going. You have to be pretty thick to think going to uni guarantees a higher wage.

[hypochondriac]

That's complete ******, there are plenty of ways you can earn good money by not going to uni and being saddled with massive debt. If I had to the make the choice now I would probably think twice about going. You have to be pretty thick to think going to uni guarantees a higher wage.

 

But if you go to uni and then don't get a higher wage then you don't have to pay the loan back anyway.

[Colinjb]

That's complete ******, there are plenty of ways you can earn good money by not going to uni and being saddled with massive debt. If I had to the make the choice now I would probably think twice about going. You have to be pretty thick to think going to uni guarantees a higher wage.

 

The key word with his point was 'average.' A degree does improve your chances of getting a higher then average wage, equally there are many ways for you to get a high wages by taking routes outside of University. And as Hypo points out, if you do not get to that wage point you do not need to repay it.

 

As far as i'm concerned the fact that uni isn't the only way should be made more socially acceptable to those who have the obvious ability to go to university but who's skills may be better served elsewhere.

[aintforever]

But if you go to uni and then don't get a higher wage then you don't have to pay the loan back anyway.

 

Of course, if you earn under 21K (I think) - not exactly a 'high' wage. My point is that there are plenty of ways of earning decent money and not go to uni, the highest earning people I know never went to Uni.

 

I just know that if I had just finished my A Levels now I probably wouldn't go to Uni, I was worried about the debt I would get into back then and that's when fees were paid.

Edited 25 October, 2013 by aintforever

[Fitzhugh Fella]

The underclass are disenfranchised? When did that happen? On what basis are they no longer permitted a vote? Has legislation been passed that I missed that only allows home owners the vote, or is there some attainment of an educational qualification now needed?

 

Regarding the idiot Brand, I'm with Buctootim. If Brand feels that strongly about it, why doesn't he stand for Parliament himself to represent the interests of the underclass? Oh yes, because he can't even be bothered to vote, let alone rouse himself beyond self-publicising himself to earn peoples' respect by doing something more positive.

 

 

I think the answer to your question is because what is the point of standing for a political system that is - in his mind and mine - completely broken. Whatever side of the political fence you sit our current politicians are dysfunctionally only interested in staying in power and not actually governing to the greater good of society. Brand is articulating what a vast majority feel. Love him or hate him he talks more sense than any politician I have seen or heard in the last 10 years or more.

Edited 25 October, 2013 by Fitzhugh Fella

[Batman]

I think the answer to your question is because what is the point of standing for a political system that is - in his mind and mine - completely broken. Whatever side of the political fence you sit our current politicians are dysfunctionally only interested in staying in power and not actually governing to the greater good of society. Brand is articulating what a vast majority feel. Love him or hate him he talks more sense than any politician I have seen or heard in the last 10 years or more.

 

you only see it as broken as you dont agree with it

brand is the sort of person that dresses up as Bin Laden the day after 9/11 to taunt americans

 

funny how he now relies on them to earn his millions of £££

[Orange]

So Brand jets around the world, drives Range Rovers and Mercedes, has a net worth of 15 million and owns multi million pound properties yet he thinks he can lecture about more wealth distribution, profit and destroying the planet ? You couldn't make it up.

[aintforever]

you only see it as broken as you dont agree with it

brand is the sort of person that dresses up as Bin Laden the day after 9/11 to taunt americans

 

funny how he now relies on them to earn his millions of £££

 

Do really really think that voting blue, red or yellow will make the slightest bit of difference to the major issues we are facing over the next 10 years or so?

 

Where I live it's a straight choice between the Tories and Lib Dem, vote for anyone else and you might as well role your poll card up and shove it up your arse. Vote Lib Dem and they just do the opposite to what they say. Anyway, whoever is in power are just slaves to global market forces anyway, any difference they make is so tiny it makes no difference to the average person.

 

Whoever is in charge wont do anything about the environment because it means making tough decisions that means they wont get re-ellected. The government are utterly powerless to change the bank system which has f*cked us all over and is doing exactly the same again. They are completely inept in stopping major multinationals paying no tax.

 

Brand is spot on in pretty much everything he says, wether he personally is a hypocrite or not is irrelevant.

[Batman]

Do really really think that voting blue, red or yellow will make the slightest bit of difference to the major issues we are facing over the next 10 years or so?

 

Where I live it's a straight choice between the Tories and Lib Dem, vote for anyone else and you might as well role your poll card up and shove it up your arse. Vote Lib Dem and they just do the opposite to what they say. Anyway, whoever is in power are just slaves to global market forces anyway, any difference they make is so tiny it makes no difference to the average person.

 

Whoever is in charge wont do anything about the environment because it means making tough decisions that means they wont get re-ellected. The government are utterly powerless to change the bank system which has f*cked us all over and is doing exactly the same again. They are completely inept in stopping major multinationals paying no tax.

 

Brand is spot on in pretty much everything he says, wether he personally is a hypocrite or not is irrelevant.

we get the politicians we deserve.

[Wes Tender]

 

Brand is spot on in pretty much everything he says, wether he personally is a hypocrite or not is irrelevant.

 

So don't do as I do, do as I say, eh? I despise hypocrisy in politicians and those who try and gob off about politics who are also hypocrites are no better. Brand isn't just a comedian; he's also a joke.

[trousers]

Human beings in making out that they are important shocker...

[Jonnyboy]

we get the politicians we deserve.

 

Tell that to the toddler starving to death.

[hypochondriac]

Tell that to the toddler starving to death.

 

Where is that then?

[saintmatt]

Edit

[Rasiak-9-]

 

He comes across like a genuinely well meaning chap.

 

However...

 

At 4.58 you get to the crux of what he and every other socialist under the sun has had to eventually put forward.

 

"A centralised administrative system in government etc.etc."

 

The problem with this has always been that in doing so, you only set up a new 'upper class' of bureaucratic elites with a monopoly on all the power, capital and resources they plan to redistribute. Precisely the kind of exclusive, unaccountable and irremovable political class that he seeks to rally people against.

 

What he's saying is nothing remotely new. The level of popularity the video has obtained is simply down to the fact that for a lot of (I'm sorry to say) fairly ignorant people this is the first they've heard of completely flawed, but ultimately very standard Marxist/Socialist theory. Simply because a pop culture icon is spouting it.

[Jonnyboy]

Where is that then?

 

Do African children get the politicians they deserve?

[Jonnyboy]

We need to abolish tax havens. Set a global maximum wage. Erase the 3rd world debts to western countries. Put meaningful reforms to global banking that will aid the 3rd world countries instead of keeping their monetary systems completely depressed. That will be the beginning of the healing of our planet and our species.

[Saint-Armstrong]

People getting the politicians and governments they deserve may just be one of the daftest comments I have ever heard.

 

Do sub-Saharan African states like Zimbabwe deserve Robert Mugabe?

 

Do they deserve to subjected to beatings and intimidation at election time, of if they use their right of protest? No.

 

Do they deserve to have international aid supplies diverted via Mugabe's account - and the money then going missing? No.

 

Do they deserve to be subjected to oppression and poverty because their elections are unfair? No.

 

Do they deserve to have people who have already passed away listed on the register as having voted for Mugabe? No.

 

 

That's just one country, it's ridiculous to suggest people get what they deserve in politics.

 

I agree with Brand, I'm thinking about voting and all I am seeing is far-right, right and centre-right. I totally understand the apathy.

 

Watching the political shows is just embarrassing and depressing, all bickering about who stands where whilst really not knowing where their parties are going to stand on anything come May 2015.

 

British politics is a bore-fest, it's depresssing, their is nothing and no one to inspire faith or to encourage the people. It's not about as Paxman says, "vote for change", because frankly - there is no change. It's all largely the same in different formats, they will face the same issues, act similarly and have the same outcomes.

 

I can't agree with the broad statement of we (the people) get what we deserve. Utterly absurd idea.

[Lord Duckhunter]

We need to abolish tax havens. Set a global maximum wage. Erase the 3rd world debts to western countries. Put meaningful reforms to global banking that will aid the 3rd world countries instead of keeping their monetary systems completely depressed. That will be the beginning of the healing of our planet and our species.

 

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one"

 

Meanwhile back in the real world, how do you abolish tax havens and set a maximum wage? Do we have a world government who set tax rates and wage levels? How do go ahead companies and market leaders recruit the best if they can only pay them what you deem the right amount.

[benjii]

I think you're underestimating this.

 

Any kid bright enough to go to Uni is affected, as are parents. If we have people that are deterred by the costs of University, we could also be losing out on real talent within our midst.

 

Labour's demolition of educational standards and mindless participation targets have ensured that anyone save a borderline retard can get into uni. So yes, we could, I guess. But it's probably not much of a loss.

[aintforever]

 

He comes across like a genuinely well meaning chap.

 

However...

 

At 4.58 you get to the crux of what he and every other socialist under the sun has had to eventually put forward.

 

"A centralised administrative system in government etc.etc."

 

The problem with this has always been that in doing so, you only set up a new 'upper class' of bureaucratic elites with a monopoly on all the power, capital and resources they plan to redistribute. Precisely the kind of exclusive, unaccountable and irremovable political class that he seeks to rally people against.

 

What he's saying is nothing remotely new. The level of popularity the video has obtained is simply down to the fact that for a lot of (I'm sorry to say) fairly ignorant people this is the first they've heard of completely flawed, but ultimately very standard Marxist/Socialist theory. Simply because a pop culture icon is spouting it.

 

Maybe some sort of Socialist model is the way forward, capitalism has worked well but you get the feeling it is reaching the end. These things are constantly changing you can't just look at history and say socialism doesn't work. The day the banks needed you and me to bail them out was the beginning of the end of the current capitalist system IMO.

 

We can't just keep on printing money like it's going out of fashion, while the country still gets into more and more debt, while banks and big corporations continue to syphon off billions and pay themselves billions in the process.

 

The end will come when the US defaults on it's debt (and it has to at some point), our banks will need bailing out again but it wont be possible so they will have to be nationalised.

[View From The Top]

Why do right wingers assume that socialists have to be poor?

 

It's about giving everyone the opportunity to be successful regardless of backgrounds and supporting those who really need it. I know many One Nation tories would say the same.

 

The 3 main political parties are in it for themselves, not for us. The tories are slaves to big business and their donations, Labour to the unions and the libdems will say anything to anyone.

 

More and more young people don't vote, they are disenfranchised and alienated from a political process that doesn't care about them and that suits the ruling classes perfectly.

[trousers]

Why do right wingers assume that socialists have to be poor?

 

For the same reason left wingers assume that capitalists have to be rich, I guess.

[Wes Tender]

More and more young people don't vote, they are disenfranchised and alienated from a political process that doesn't care about them and that suits the ruling classes perfectly.

 

There you go again with this absurd notion that an entire section of the population is disenfranchised. First it was the underclass and now it's young people in general. Nobody is disenfranchised. You and the idiot Brand might equate their sense of frustration and helplessness as being tantamount to disenfranchisement, but if there was such a widespread groundswell of opinion that wished to bring about change, then somebody would have recognised the opportunity to mobilise those votes and created a party that they felt they could support. It isn't as if new parties couldn't potentially bring about changes if they gained popularity, as the Scottish Nationalists, UKIP, the Greens etc have proved. It's just that the type of party Brand would want, is thankfully unelectable.

[dubai_phil]

The flaw with Politics and Democracy is People. All the ideals are perfect on both sides but then get screwed up by people and greed.

 

The Socialist example of Russia with the Elite in their Dachas and their cronies rolling round while the masses struggled to live on Beetroot Soup. The Capitalist Example of Banking - the only difference is that the masses got to foot the bill later on.

 

Thousands of factories in China spewing out Pollution and making zillions of tons of complete junk (but cheap junk) that The West buy in Primark and the East buy because a non Android Approved device is all they can afford even if it doesn't work properly. Markets full of garbage Plastic Toys that would kill children while some of you get raped for Green Taxes that are the equivalent of a fart in a Jacuzzi compared to the rest of the planet. (But oh no you'll pay them because you are doing your bit)

 

Saudi Arabia (one of THE most closed countries on earth) sending Convicted Murders to Syria to fight in a Jihad so that their version of Democracy can be introduced. The biggest Democracy on earth siding with one of the least Democratic countries to Ostracize a Nation that at least has SOME form of Democracy to prop up a Nation that helps to pay for the Gravy train in Washington.

 

Politicians in the UK who are only interested in staying in the Gravy Train with sound bites.

 

The whole system is screwed up over the whole planet.

 

The CONCEPTS are fine but somehow the implementation has gone all wrong.

 

Like Brand says, everyone can see the weaknesses, finding a solution is the problem.

 

Single Term Politicians might be a start..... Maximum terms of 8 years for all the Sir Humphries of the world another. And make Political lobbying and donations a criminal offence would help. ???? Honestly it doesn't matter what I think, it's politics, someone else has a different view...

 

Ah so that may be the solution, stop having opinions or reject everyone else's as being wrong. Yeah, I'll go live with Mugabe...

 

Or maybe I'll just go back to doing what I can for my family, friends and community around me and trying to do the right thing and leave the crooks, liars, cheats, bling merchants, celebrities and con-men to face the real truth when they die and rot in Hell.

 

We need a Star Trek Universe of shared ambition and resources....

[hypochondriac]

Do African children get the politicians they deserve?

 

I presume the we referred to people in this country.

[TheCholulaKid]

Why do right wingers assume that socialists have to be poor?

 

It's about giving everyone the opportunity to be successful regardless of backgrounds and supporting those who really need it. I know many One Nation tories would say the same.

 

The 3 main political parties are in it for themselves, not for us. The tories are slaves to big business and their donations, Labour to the unions and the libdems will say anything to anyone.

 

More and more young people don't vote, they are disenfranchised and alienated from a political process that doesn't care about them and that suits the ruling classes perfectly.

 

This.

 

Same usual posts from the same usual ****tards. Why the **** Delldays ever thinks he has anything worthwhile to contribute to these debates is beyond me.

[Orange]

Why do right wingers assume that socialists have to be poor?

 

It's about giving everyone the opportunity to be successful regardless of backgrounds and supporting those who really need it. I know many One Nation tories would say the same.

 

The 3 main political parties are in it for themselves, not for us. The tories are slaves to big business and their donations, Labour to the unions and the libdems will say anything to anyone.

 

More and more young people don't vote, they are disenfranchised and alienated from a political process that doesn't care about them and that suits the ruling classes perfectly.

 

They don't have to be 'poor', just not stinking rich. But if someone goes on about 'redistributing' more wealth, why don't they just do it themselves if that's what they believe in?

 

Amusing that he thinks profit is a filthy word but then again he doesn't live in the real world does he.

[Wes Tender]

This.

 

Same usual posts from the same usual ****tards. Why the **** Delldays ever thinks he has anything worthwhile to contribute to these debates is beyond me.

 

Isn't it amusing that anybody on the right of the political spectrum is a retard, whereas those on the left are by implication intellectuals?

 

Going on just this one comment of yours, I'd say that Delldays' level of contribution has as much validity as yours, but at least he expresses opinions on the subject in hand, whereas your forte seems to be insulting those with whom you disagree.

[tony13579]

I am afraid brand didn't get it. If you redistributed wealth the way he wanted it we would all starve! Profit is not bad, it is essential. Unreasonable profit that is bad. Especially on things that are basic essentials.

 

You don't necessarily have to vote to change things. 10 protesters or 1 ex-newsreader can get the law changed. A twitter campaign.. ( or even terrorism ? )

 

Brand only said what was wrong, he only gave the vaguest outline of what was right , which in fact would spell disaster. Equal distribution of wealth.... So the feckless would be running farms, oil power, roads, shops....

 

Brand didn't know much beyond a mantra. Profit bad, MP's going to eu to protect bonuses, equal distribution of wealth, I don't vote because it won't change anything.

[Jonnyboy]

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one"

 

Meanwhile back in the real world, how do you abolish tax havens and set a maximum wage? Do we have a world government who set tax rates and wage levels? How do go ahead companies and market leaders recruit the best if they can only pay them what you deem the right amount.

 

Course I'm a dreamer, every change starts with a dream.

 

Anyway, how its done is the big question but we won't get any changes by just leaving it all to market forces.

 

A lot of people fear a "new world order" but I think something like a single currency for the whole planet would be a good idea. At very least a democratically elected system to regulate global finances.

[Batman]

Course I'm a dreamer, every change starts with a dream.

 

Anyway, how its done is the big question but we won't get any changes by just leaving it all to market forces.

 

A lot of people fear a "new world order" but I think something like a single currency for the whole planet would be a good idea. At very least a democratically elected system to regulate global finances.

you make it sound like we live in a 3rd world country or one where the general population has nothing.

[Jonnyboy]

I presume the we referred to people in this country.

 

Does the blind lady in her specially adapted (2 bed) flat deserve the tory plan to evict her to an unsuitable (1 bed) flat in an area she doesnt know at all just so she can still afford to eat.

[tony13579]

And another thing.... The more you earn (and spend) the more you f,ck the planet.

 

The first 10k buys food and rent

Second10k buys a cheap holiday, maybe your own modest home

40k imported white goods, car, bigger home, more gas , throwaway society

100k 3 holidays a year, heated garage, big cars luxury items, second home

[CB Saint]

Equal distribution of wealth, ok Russel hand over your millions then. Show us the way.

 

as for excess profits being bad. Had bill gates no made excessive profits, he never would have been able to set up a foundation to eradicate malaria. Something that would have never been tackled if left to the worlds governments. It is not always bad.

[trousers]

Equal distribution of wealth, ok Russel hand over your millions then. Show us the way.

 

as for excess profits being bad. Had bill gates no made excessive profits, he never would have been able to set up a foundation to eradicate malaria. Something that would have never been tackled if left to the worlds governments. It is not always bad.

 

It does amuse me that a lot of people think governments are much better at 'distributing wealth' than individuals

 

P.s. You're not allowed to lecture left wingers on redistributing their own wealth. The thought police call that "missing the point"...

Edited 26 October, 2013 by trousers

[Sour Mash]

Maybe some sort of Socialist model is the way forward, capitalism has worked well but you get the feeling it is reaching the end. These things are constantly changing you can't just look at history and say socialism doesn't work.

You can actually. History has shown that it doesn't work and it has been rejected by 'the people'.

[Jonnyboy]

And another thing.... The more you earn (and spend) the more you f,ck the planet.

 

The first 10k buys food and rent

Second10k buys a cheap holiday, maybe your own modest home

40k imported white goods, car, bigger home, more gas , throwaway society

100k 3 holidays a year, heated garage, big cars luxury items, second home

 

True but it doesnt have to be this way and this is where it does come down to individual decisions and wether to spunk your money or invest into ethical/green funds. Basically high earners do have the financial power to "do the right thing" but most ignore the threat of climate change and global poverty and just buy that luxury Range Rover etc etc.

[Sour Mash]

Why do right wingers assume that socialists have to be poor?

 

It's about giving everyone the opportunity to be successful regardless of backgrounds and supporting those who really need it. I know many One Nation tories would say the same.

 

The 3 main political parties are in it for themselves, not for us. The tories are slaves to big business and their donations, Labour to the unions and the libdems will say anything to anyone.

 

More and more young people don't vote, they are disenfranchised and alienated from a political process that doesn't care about them and that suits the ruling classes perfectly.

Most don't assume that, just dislike the hypocrisy of someone complaining about our impact on the planet, while regularly flying around the world and generally enjoying a hollywood lifestyle.

[buctootim]

It does amuse me that a lot of people think governments are much better at 'distributing wealth' than individuals

 

 

Its a slightly bizarre idea that individuals are going to redistribute their own wealth. The vast majority of humans are basically selfish. Those who have power will make more money for themselves at the expense of other people. Thats why FTSE100 CEOs organise such huge salaries for themselves - far more than most genuine entrepreneurs who have created their own companies. You only have to look at the huge variation in what people are paid for the same jobs in different countries to see that the idea that people are paid what they're objectively worth is a fallacy.

 

There is a lot of research showing that foreign wealth is attracted into a country by factors like low crime, high quality public infrastructure, lack of corruption and lack of visible public poverty. You don't get that investment in a country where the government allows the top 1% to screw the rest of the population.

Edited 26 October, 2013 by buctootim

[Sour Mash]

People getting the politicians and governments they deserve may just be one of the daftest comments I have ever heard.

 

Do sub-Saharan African states like Zimbabwe deserve Robert Mugabe?

 

Do they deserve to subjected to beatings and intimidation at election time, of if they use their right of protest? No.

 

Do they deserve to have international aid supplies diverted via Mugabe's account - and the money then going missing? No.

 

Do they deserve to be subjected to oppression and poverty because their elections are unfair? No.

 

Do they deserve to have people who have already passed away listed on the register as having voted for Mugabe? No.

 

 

That's just one country, it's ridiculous to suggest people get what they deserve in politics.

 

I agree with Brand, I'm thinking about voting and all I am seeing is far-right, right and centre-right. I totally understand the apathy.

 

Watching the political shows is just embarrassing and depressing, all bickering about who stands where whilst really not knowing where their parties are going to stand on anything come May 2015.

 

British politics is a bore-fest, it's depresssing, their is nothing and no one to inspire faith or to encourage the people. It's not about as Paxman says, "vote for change", because frankly - there is no change. It's all largely the same in different formats, they will face the same issues, act similarly and have the same outcomes.

 

I can't agree with the broad statement of we (the people) get what we deserve. Utterly absurd idea.

It's a generalisation, but we do get the governments we want and deserve typically. We didn't all just wake up one morning in 2013 and find ourselves with different governments picked completely at random.

[Smirking_Saint]

Anybody deterred by the "costs" of going to university is too thick to go to university. The fees are a deferred tax, not payable until you reach a higher than average salary, which you will presumably earn because of your additional education.

 

Exactly, I never understood the arguement about tuition fees, it was used as a stick to beat the tories by those that required more of one and seemingly upset an entire generation who no doubt wanted to continue to ride an easy system and avoid doing something meaningful and all in all contribute to society (no doubt all the time conplaining about johnny foreigners offering nothing)

 

Then it was said that the university process now made it elitest... Um.. Isnt that the point or is that just me ?

 

As per brand, he is obviously an intelligent chap who does make very valid points from time to time however I wonder if his foray into politics is utterly useless. Sometimes I listen and wonder if his (no doubt brilliantly vibrant) articulation is effectively just to gloss over the fact he makes very dilute points and offers no solution or even any real description, is it just to attempt to confuse the layman ?

 

As per his obvious want of a Utopia and disdain of capitalism his ideas just wouldnt work, there is and always have been a disparity, you'll never escape that. As much as it is hard and we need to help our fellow man life isnt equal. Added to this his berating of corperations turning a profit when he himself is no doubt making a mint from his upcoming tour.

 

Pap, your an intelligent man, sometimes I think you realm into the brand realm of nonsense that you attempt to mask by ultimately diverting the attention from your sometimes flimsy points. But how can you not see it is not just the tories, it is politics in general, labour spectacularly went over the top with their overly PC and equality nonsense and effectively saw the downfall of our economic system, I cant see that the tories should be blamed for anything right now as they are essentially trying to fix a broken system but realistically they will outlast themselves and everyone will be glad to see the back of them

 

And so the wheel keeps turning

[Smirking_Saint]

That's complete ******, there are plenty of ways you can earn good money by not going to uni and being saddled with massive debt. If I had to the make the choice now I would probably think twice about going. You have to be pretty thick to think going to uni guarantees a higher wage.

 

Way to completely miss the point there fella

[aintforever]

Exactly, I never understood the arguement about tuition fees, it was used as a stick to beat the tories by those that required more of one and seemingly upset an entire generation who no doubt wanted to continue to ride an easy system and avoid doing something meaningful and all in all contribute to society (no doubt all the time conplaining about johnny foreigners offering nothing)

 

Then it was said that the university process now made it elitest... Um.. Isnt that the point or is that just me ?

 

I can see the argument for fees but the fact is if I had to pay what students do now there is no way I would have gone to university. I wasn't from a wealthy background and at that age the idea of getting into debt scared the sh!t out of me. I qualified for a grant, had my fees paid, lived like a scumbag for 3 years but still got into a fair amount of debt by the time I graduated.

 

I just think it's a shame if promising youngsters are put off doing worthwhile professions, I know I would have been.

[Smirking_Saint]

I can see the argument for fees but the fact is if I had to pay what students do now there is no way I would have gone to university. I wasn't from a wealthy background and at that age the idea of getting into debt scared the sh!t out of me. I qualified for a grant, had my fees paid, lived like a scumbag for 3 years but still got into a fair amount of debt by the time I graduated.

 

I just think it's a shame if promising youngsters are put off doing worthwhile professions, I know I would have been.

 

The thing is you need to look at the root cause, for instance the fact many cannot get jobs with their shiney new degrees is because of the massive levels of take up and rediculous amounts of useless courses that are being sat. Ultimately this completely devalues the degree. I think it needs to go back to being the elitest establishment that it is supposed to be.

 

Tuition fees are far from the crippling debt many make out anyway and much more a cheap loan on reasonable terms that Id say rarely are paid back in full. The majority of 'debt' is probably accounted for from boozing it up anyway and Im not really going to argue tgat point as realistically I was the same.

 

Personally Id like to see universities being more linked in industry, I am degree educated but it was funded by my company whilst learning on the job. This sort of scheme effectively creates a better employee imo anyway.

[aintforever]

The thing is you need to look at the root cause, for instance the fact many cannot get jobs with their shiney new degrees is because of the massive levels of take up and rediculous amounts of useless courses that are being sat. Ultimately this completely devalues the degree. I think it needs to go back to being the elitest establishment that it is supposed to be.

 

Tuition fees are far from the crippling debt many make out anyway and much more a cheap loan on reasonable terms that Id say rarely are paid back in full. The majority of 'debt' is probably accounted for from boozing it up anyway and Im not really going to argue tgat point as realistically I was the same.

 

Personally Id like to see universities being more linked in industry, I am degree educated but it was funded by my company whilst learning on the job. This sort of scheme effectively creates a better employee imo anyway.

 

I agree that it should be more elitist, but that should mean the cleverest people. This policy will do the opposite, there will still be plenty of rich kids using uni as an excuse to bum around on some pointless course while potentially better students from less secure backgrounds will choose to do something less worthwhile.