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

get yourselves to TRAFALGAR SQUARE for 12:00 this tuesday Watch

Announcements
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Low Profile)
    That's your view but surely if education is left to a minority elite there would be great inequality in society.
    I agree entirely. Which is why I don't want that to be the case, ever. For one, it hardly benefits the rest of us if a bunch of thickies happen to be getting into university on the back of their own wealth.

    I still want people who receive great benefit from their university education to - eventually - pay directly for it though. Which is why the Coalition's proposals don't bother me in the least. No-one will ever be poor as a result of student loan repayments.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Lol, not gonna happen with the snow.
    • Offline

      16
      David doesn't care. There is a reason he is doing this at the start of his term in office because you can't do anything about it. You get violent and start destroying things and everyone else turns against you and then students are the bad guys. Sitting back or doing something the result will remain the same.
      • Offline

        14
        It's actually quite amusing how heated you're getting. Again, you've quoted my whole reply probably without reading, analysing or absorbing. Intelligence and common sense fail.

        (Original post by missygeorgia)
        The reason that I (as you keep whinily pointing out) didn't address any of your argument
        <Pedant>The "(as you keep whinily pointing out)" should follow the "didn't address any of your argument". The way you're structuring the sentence suggests that I'm whining about you personally. Guess what? I'm not, because I'm mature and above that - unfortunately, you don't appear to be. Also, "whinily" isn't a word and you obviously have no understanding of "tone" in written literature. I was not "whining" - I was assertively stating an interpretation and facts based on what was laid down in front of me.</Pedant>

        is because your argument basically consisted of ME ME ME, this is MY SITUATION, lets talk about ME and the reasons I THINK THIS, prove this about ME. I'M SCOTTISH WHY SHOULD I CARE, AND LETS TALK ABOUT MY COMPUTER HABITS.
        You brought up "computer habits" by accusing us of being glued to ours. Not only that, you charged into this thread and called us all "pathetic" without any kind of critical analysis or counter-argument. The article written by David Mitchell doesn't really count, by the way - it's not really in context and you haven't legitimately used it to back up your argument.

        If anyone here is pathetic, it's you. You could have read through the posts here, thought "bugger this" in private disagreement and moved on or, at the very least, come in here with some kind of composed and logical counter-argument to spark a sensible debate. Instead, you just had to stick the boot in and start trolling in a hopelessly unsubtle and plain rude manner. At least some trolls can be subtle and amusing but it's an acquired skill.

        Why on earth would I be interested in "providing proof" that you aren't involved in protests, or whatever it is you asked? I couldn't give a crap about whether you're involved in protests or not. I don't care about your own personal stance on the protests, why on earth would I want to discuss them with you?
        1. "...whatever it is you asked?" - if you'd actually read it, this would not be required as you'd actually know
        2. You rudely accused us of never having been personally involved in one, thus implicitly inviting discussion
        3. I demand proof if you're making an allegation which indirectly affects me. Don't like it? Tough. This is what libel and slander laws are for.
        4. You never did properly answer my question, instead turning it into some kind of twisted ad hominem attack on me for daring to ask you to explain or prove yourself. I like your style, we should get married.
        5. "I don't give a crap?" I take you so much more seriously when you're talking like one of those gobby tarts from Eastenders... not



        *SIGH* - BACK ON TOPIC... AGAIN...

        I often wonder if the fee rises could be mitigated by also cutting back on courses and places? Right now, we've got something ridiculous like 50%, I believe, of the young population going to university (don't have any statistics and not 100% sure where to find any with regards to this). How many of these are doing second-rate subjects with no job prospects? How many of these courses don't need to be degree courses at all and, instead, could be offered in the form of an NVQ/BTEC/similar or even an apprenticeship? The idea of a nursing degree is relatively recent, for example - is a degree really necessary when nursing is primarily a practical occupation?

        Cut back on the unnecessary courses and free up some funding for the real academic stalwarts like medicine (yes, you could argue like nursing that it's a mostly practical subject, but there's a lot more theory and learning behind it) and law. Fees for these courses could then be lowered for those who are genuinely academically capable and not just rich enough to be able to pay the fees.
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by DancinBallerina)
        Will all this protesting have an effect on the whole fee thing though? . . :dontknow: . .
        Depends how both local communities and trade unions react.

        http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11870742 is what happened when Lewisham tried to pass a "cuts" budget this evening. And that was in the freezing cold snow.

        All of the trade union general secretary speakers (RMT, UNITE and PCS - nearly 2,000,000 members under their banners) that attended http://www.coalitionofresistance.org.uk/?p=4966 paid tribute to the students' protests and committed to mobilising their resources to support them and wider anti-cuts movements.

        Now, what this will look like I do not know. As I've said on other threads and forums, the scale of the cuts are such that they will hit a large percentage of society in infintesimally different ways and in different magnitudes. Therefore how people will react will also be as varied.

        Some - like myself whose job and career is on the line - are gathering under campaigns backed by trade unions of which we/they are members of. This, amongst other things provides some sort of legal cover on what activities that can be done. It also means that there are some restrictions. For example, civil servants cannot go guns blazing towards the mainstream media in a way other campaigners can.

        Others, who are members of political parties may take it upon themselves to use political lines to lobby those in Parliament or those who have ministerial or council office.

        Others may choose to campaign online rather than on the streets. Some may choose to organise music nights or workshops to get people together. (Will we see a renassaince in the music and arts scene against the corporate blandness we've been fed for so long?)

        Some may choose non-violent direct action - such as some of the student occupations.

        Some may choose very violent direct action - and use the cover of large crowds in order to carry out their actions.

        The challenge for any administration in a democracy that is seeking to implement policies that are unpopular is to decide how much flexibility it can give to those protesting peacefully while trying to ensure that law enforcement agencies have the resources and support to apprehend those who carry out violent direct action.
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by ch0llima)
        It's actually quite amusing how heated you're getting. Again, you've quoted my whole reply probably without reading, analysing or absorbing. Intelligence and common sense fail.



        <Pedant>The "(as you keep whinily pointing out)" should follow the "didn't address any of your argument". The way you're structuring the sentence suggests that I'm whining about you personally. Guess what? I'm not, because I'm mature and above that - unfortunately, you don't appear to be. Also, "whinily" isn't a word and you obviously have no understanding of "tone" in written literature. I was not "whining" - I was assertively stating an interpretation and facts based on what was laid down in front of me.</Pedant>



        You brought up "computer habits" by accusing us of being glued to ours. Not only that, you charged into this thread and called us all "pathetic" without any kind of critical analysis or counter-argument. The article written by David Mitchell doesn't really count, by the way - it's not really in context and you haven't legitimately used it to back up your argument.

        If anyone here is pathetic, it's you. You could have read through the posts here, thought "bugger this" in private disagreement and moved on or, at the very least, come in here with some kind of composed and logical counter-argument to spark a sensible debate. Instead, you just had to stick the boot in and start trolling in a hopelessly unsubtle and plain rude manner. At least some trolls can be subtle and amusing but it's an acquired skill.



        1. "...whatever it is you asked?" - if you'd actually read it, this would not be required as you'd actually know
        2. You rudely accused us of never having been personally involved in one, thus implicitly inviting discussion
        3. I demand proof if you're making an allegation which indirectly affects me. Don't like it? Tough. This is what libel and slander laws are for.
        4. You never did properly answer my question, instead turning it into some kind of twisted ad hominem attack on me for daring to ask you to explain or prove yourself. I like your style, we should get married.
        5. "I don't give a crap?" I take you so much more seriously when you're talking like one of those gobby tarts from Eastenders... not

        I made a generalising post criticising students who were apathetic and just jumping on the cynical bandwagon. If you're not one of these, then why on earth didn't you just read it and think 'well, she's obviously not talking about me, so I'll move on'. Instead you went into great length detailing why you weren't one of the people I was talking about, as if I'd made a personal attack on you. I didn't. I wasn't talking about you. I have no idea why you seem to think I was.

        You rudely accused us of never having been personally involved in one, thus implicitly inviting discussion
        No, I didn't. I basically said 'if you have never been involved in a protest and are just sat at your computer being sarcastic then you're lame'. I didn't say 'every student who opposes the protests are like this'. That would be ridiculous.

        I was not "whining" - I was assertively stating an interpretation and facts based on what was laid down in front of me
        You were whining. You still are. It's boring.

        you haven't legitimately used it to back up your argument.
        Er, what argument? My 'argument' is that the attitudes of some of the apathetic, anti-protest computer-glued students is pathetic. What exactly do I need to back up there?
        Offline

        0
        ReputationRep:
        As far as I'm concerned, these riots are not just about tuition fee's, there about pretty much everything the coalition government is doing.

        I will never such great cuts are necessary while we are still at war, and have money to give to ireland.
        Offline

        2
        ReputationRep:
        Any big ones planned for the summer?
        Offline

        9
        ReputationRep:
        Unfortunately nowhere near London... but marching to Clegg's office tomorrow (well, today) with a load of other uni students to make a point.

        On a sidenote, while I agree with those who are saying doing this probably/almost definitely won't make a difference to the education cuts, I feel it's our duty to let the Government know that we're not happy with it. Also, whilst I don't condone the violence, I do think the violence shows how strongly some students feel about it and that we don't want to just roll over and accept it.
        • Political Ambassador
        Offline

        17
        ReputationRep:
        Loving all these moronic students *****ing about the police saying they were tear gassed.
        Offline

        1
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by Tommyjw)
        Cuts are good for the economy
        You over-simplify soooooo much.
       
       
       
      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: June 6, 2011
    • 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
      Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
      Useful resources

      Groups associated with this forum:

      View associated groups
    • 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.