Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Why can't adorno tell the difference between Greens and Socialists?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    He may be referring to a conversation he had with me.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Why exactly are we prioritising the provision of science and computing technology when in many schools it's the provision of books that's the problem?
    I'm not prioritising, the party was asked a question whether we felt we should make them compulsory, I said we're unaware of whether the party felt it should happen.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    He may be referring to a conversation he had with me.
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Yeah, that's a fine rhetorical flush as far as it goes, but we both know the conversation wasn't at all about the TSR government.
    Fair enough. I just assumed he was referring to this conversation with nixon - a socialist. But I'm often wrong in my assumptions. So I'll just :getmecoat: now.

    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Hopefully what it really means is that you'll provide more funding to universities - particularly in the much squeezed arts and humanities - so that students no longer need make a contribution (increasingly sizeable) to the costs of their education. Tuition fees are but a small slice of the overall costs of the training (not to mention resources) provided at university and it would be a shame to see that not met in order that the short-termism of "no more fees" is met.

    I've faith that you're already at this point in your planning, being a sensible party and all, but thought I'd double check!
    (Original post by nixonsjellybeans)
    Of course, more funding would be good Its something we'll deal with. I'd know being a humanties student
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Ah, well then I take back what I said at the end of my post. Tuition fees aren't about squeezing students just for the sake of it. They're about the rebalancing of the costs of higher education away from state subsidies of universities to direct participation by the beneficiaries of higher education - the students. You cannot just remove tuition fees without leaving universities with a black hole in funding. This cannot be about such short-termist politics, it has to be about the long-term financial security of the higher education sector.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    Fair enough. I just assumed he was referring to this conversation with nixon - a socialist. But I'm often wrong in my assumptions. So I'll just :getmecoat: now.
    I had exactly the same conversation with T&J and that sticks in my mind more. It was conducted via PM so you aren't party to it.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    I had exactly the same conversation with T&J and that sticks in my mind more. It was conducted via PM so you aren't party to it.
    Yes, you have a wonderful habit of saying things that I disagree with and then agree with about three months later. See: rail, devolution, political history. In this case I skipped out the middle man and just agreed!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    Yes, you have a wonderful habit of saying things that I disagree with and then agree with about three months later. See: rail, devolution, political history. In this case I skipped out the middle man and just agreed!
    I do?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    I do?
    Mmhmm. Not on everything; I lack your hatred of Thatcher (all of my hatred coupons are generally spent on Gove and Warsi), for example.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by MattFletcher)
    We believe in a fairer Britain, so we want every student who has the intelligence and ability to go to university to go, tuition fees are too high . There are other alternatives but we want as many people who are able to go to university as possible. We would equip schools with Science equipment and computing systems because we want to give them the best education possible. I'm unaware of whether we would be making computer science compulsory at the moment.
    Why are tuition fees too high? Do the poor (i.e me) not have their fees paid up front? Will i not pay less back each month than i would have under the old system?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    I had exactly the same conversation with T&J and that sticks in my mind more. It was conducted via PM so you aren't party to it.
    Fair enough. As long as you can tell the parties apart.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    Fair enough. As long as you can tell the parties apart.
    Have to admit that i'm increasingly unsure what the difference between Labour and the Socialists is.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    Fair enough. As long as you can tell the parties apart.
    Is it necessary to ask, or are you just being a prick?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Why are tuition fees too high? Do the poor (i.e me) not have their fees paid up front? Will i not pay less back each month than i would have under the old system?
    Yes but you therefore accrue a greater debt, which increases by a higher amount if you don't pay it back quickly than under the old system. Additionally, the means testing is awful, meaning that people like myself are given grants and full loans despite being capable of going without and people who are actually incapable of paying (perhaps because their parents don't help) who get far less and thus end up put off Uni.

    Swings and roundabouts.
    • Community Assistant
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    Yes but you therefore accrue a greater debt, which increases by a higher amount if you don't pay it back quickly than under the old system. Additionally, the means testing is awful, meaning that people like myself are given grants and full loans despite being capable of going without and people who are actually incapable of paying (perhaps because their parents don't help) who get far less and thus end up put off Uni.

    Swings and roundabouts.
    The debt is not really a massive issue for me given that it will be wiped out after 30 years if not paid back and it's not a debt that will ever pressure me seriously given that if i don't work i don't pay. Rather i see it as a an agreement to pay a 9% income tax for a period of time. I can see the means testing issues and if you have any policy ideas regarding that, feel free to shoot them to me.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Is it necessary to ask, or are you just being a prick?
    Seriously dude chill out. Although if we're playing that game having a PM conversation with one member of a party doesn't actually constitute a conversation with that party. Last time I checked parties were collections of individuals rather than individual members.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    Seriously dude chill out. Although if we're playing that game having a PM conversation with one member of a party doesn't actually constitute a conversation with that party. Last time I checked parties were collections of individuals rather than individual members.
    So in neither circumstance was your intervention necessary.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    So in neither circumstance was your intervention necessary.
    Nobody's intervention on this site is necessary, to deem whether something is necessary as a starting point for whether it's worth posting eliminates almost any intervention. It is not necessary for any of us to post on this site in the first place so to disregard something once we've started posting because it isn't necessary is a pretty pointless way of viewing this site:

    necessary: Required to be done, achieved, or present; essential.

    For example it certainly wasn't necessary for you to post your response to Matt Fletcher but you chose to anyway which suggests you don't view necessity as the only factor in whether or not something is worth posting.

    Given that in either circumstance you would've been being dishonest by claiming to have a conversation with a fairly vague entity such as a party whilst my intervention was definitely not necessary I felt it valid enough to post.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    The debt is not really a massive issue for me given that it will be wiped out after 30 years if not paid back and it's not a debt that will ever pressure me seriously given that if i don't work i don't pay. Rather i see it as a an agreement to pay a 9% income tax for a period of time. I can see the means testing issues and if you have any policy ideas regarding that, feel free to shoot them to me.
    Well the problem is that means testing is based upon the situation of the parents. But that isn't necessarily relevant in working out the child's need for support. For example, a child who will be the first in their family to go to Uni and has parents who aren't willing to sink their money in to a degree for whatever reason may not be given much help from his parents. So he needs more state help. But if the parents have a large amount of money and income, they aren't going to get it.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Mad Dog)
    Nobody's intervention on this site is necessary, to deem whether something is necessary as a starting point for whether it's worth posting eliminates almost any intervention. It is not necessary for any of us to post on this site in the first place so to disregard something once we've started posting because it isn't necessary is a pretty pointless way of viewing this site:

    necessary: Required to be done, achieved, or present; essential.

    For example it certainly wasn't necessary for you to post your response to Matt Fletcher but you chose to anyway which suggests you don't view necessity as the only factor in whether or not something is worth posting.

    Given that in either circumstance you would've been being dishonest by claiming to have a conversation with a fairly vague entity such as a party whilst my intervention was definitely not necessary I felt it valid enough to post.
    apply-cold-water-to-the-burned-area-240x180.jpg
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Have to admit that i'm increasingly unsure what the difference between Labour and the Socialists is.
    You would be quite surprised- if only you were a fly on the internet walls of the government subforum.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 18, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.