This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
2024 General Election
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 Badger11  Beckenham 29 May 24 12.25pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
On a serious note, if you actually support taxpayer money being used to subsidise the richest in society being able to send their kids to a better school than you can afford, I think you can only be described as partaking in a quite staggering display of boot-licking. As I said in previous posts much of the charity sector is open to abuse, they are playing by the rules but the rules need to be amended. Regarding schools they should only be allowed charitable status if they are open to the brightest and the best and not based on economic income. Most private schools pay lip service to this with a few free scholarships sorry that isn't enough to justify the tax break.
One more point |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| EverybodyDannsNow SE19 29 May 24 12.47pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
The concept of sending the brightest to elite education isn't wrong. It's right: society declines without the brightest being matched to the most demanding jobs. Where I would agree is that the model we have is a corrupted version of what should be that intent. It's yet another example of how money ruins outcomes. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 May 2024 12.03pm) Sure, but that isn't remotely what we have.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| EverybodyDannsNow SE19 29 May 24 12.48pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
As I said in previous posts much of the charity sector is open to abuse, they are playing by the rules but the rules need to be amended. Regarding schools they should only be allowed charitable status if they are open to the brightest and the best and not based on economic income. Most private schools pay lip service to this with a few free scholarships sorry that isn't enough to justify the tax break. Agree with all of that.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
ASCPFC  Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 29 May 24 5.06pm |
|
|---|---|
|
I had one of the scholarships for public school. Proof positive that it's not the brightest that get in.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 29 May 24 8.12pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow
Sure, but that isn't remotely what we have. Agreed, the principle is right, the implementation isn't. However, we know that Labour....who are ideologically wedded to blank slate....would oppose these schools even if they did run purely upon meritocratic lines. Edited by Stirlingsays (29 May 2024 8.12pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Croydon 30 May 24 10.54am |
|
|---|---|
|
Another one falls. Royal Mail, once the nations pride. A rotten debt-fuelled privatisation deal, no doubt. Over to you Labour, what are you going to do about the utilities? Not a lot, I think.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 30 May 24 12.16pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
Another one falls. Royal Mail, once the nations pride. A rotten debt-fuelled privatisation deal, no doubt. Over to you Labour, what are you going to do about the utilities? Not a lot, I think.
When the Royal Mail went on striker I never noticed. At some point the government (whichever) has to be brave and realise that people no longer send mail. The idea that we have a universal postal service in this day and age is simply ridiculous. Many European countries have accepted that and charge more for longer distance. The current model is not sustainable and forcing the Royal Mail to continue like this is just driving the service to the brink of destruction.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 31 May 24 3.52pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
We do not need to privatise the NHS but radical change is required which will require the banging of heads. My understanding is that the biggest obstacle to change are the doctors not government as they will not agree to any modernisation or change as a matter of course
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| steeleye20 Croydon 31 May 24 4.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Looked up Jeremy Corbyn's 2019 manifest key points; If this was presented now? It looks relevant and transformational.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| YT Oxford 31 May 24 4.48pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
Another one falls. Royal Mail, once the nations pride. A rotten debt-fuelled privatisation deal, no doubt. Over to you Labour, what are you going to do about the utilities? Not a lot, I think.
You are saying that the privatisation of Royal Mail was fuelled by debt. Whose debt exactly do you mean? Not the employees' debt obviously, as they received shares for free; so whose? Even if true, do you have a problem with people borrowing money to invest in an enterprise? What about investing in a Premier League football club?
Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| YT Oxford 31 May 24 4.52pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by steeleye20
Looked up Jeremy Corbyn's 2019 manifest key points; If this was presented now? It looks relevant and transformational.
Deluded politicians can promise all sorts of things. The problem they then face is delivering it while getting someone else to pay for it.
Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 31 May 24 4.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
My understanding is that the biggest obstacle to change are the doctors not government as they will not agree to any modernisation or change as a matter of course I agree with that which is why we need a leader and why it wont happen. I would pass a law in Parliament that all NHS staff must commit to solely working for the NHS within 6 months. Those that choose not to would be sacked without compensation. I would then hold discussions about pay but the bottom line is consultants need to stop pushing patients into the private sector where they benefit. The unions of course would go mad and there would be a bloodbath as some consultants would resign. However once the initial pain was over we could then have a 7 day NHS.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.