Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

The sentimentality and infantilisation of Britain watch

Announcements
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    And my point that it unregulated capitalism creates monopoly markets

    You have failed to understand my point. If unlimited capitalism was perfect we wouldn't have had a financial melt down. It isn't perfect, that much is clear, but it is better than all other systems of economics. It allows freedom and inspires entrepreneurship, etc..
    Ok, let me go through this simply. We did not have unlimited capitalism because interest rates were controlled by the central bank and still are. It's a myth propagated by Statists that we had "unlimited" or even a "laissez faire" banking system prior to the crash.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    Well that's your view. Because I persoanlly think they look damn scruffy and immature. Far, far from being adults. It's the same as if I was the leader of the opposition or the PM and a member of my shadow cabinet came in without a tie I would warn him to find one within 20 minutes or he would be fired on the spot.
    Great, even if they were an outstanding politician with great ideas? Oh, no, the tie comes first..

    But that is actually far from the point. We were talking about university. You go there to learn and as far as I am aware this doesn't require a smart suit to work. I wonder, will you wear one if you go to uni?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moe Lester)
    And? Barely anybody went to university then. Do you think the clothes worn in the 1950s were the same as what were worn in 1900 or 1850 or 1800 or 1750 or 1700 or 1650 or 1600...you get my point. The clothes of today simply weren't available then. The world changes and moves...so does fashion. I fail to see how the transition from suits to jeans and t-shirt is a bad thing?
    Lets be honest, it hasn't changed that much. Suits were worn by proffessionals in the 40s with little difference of how they are worn today. THe only differences is things like not wearing a waistcoat or a hat with it. Also the materials they are made of.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    So what. I also doubt how my mummy and daddy are going to pay for a suit as one lives on the other side of the world and the other at Sainsbury's. The one suit I do have a saved damn hard for you assumptive little turd.

    Well i dare say you will look nice prancing about campus like you just stepped out of a time machine, but i forsee an awful lot of strain on the seams washing it every few days, lest you start to smell and further add to the eccentricity which prevents your fellow students from approaching.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iwilson03)
    Great, even if they were an outstanding politician with great ideas? Oh, no, the tie comes first..
    Absolutly. Proffessionalism is key. Like I said, I would give them 20 mins to find one.
    But that is actually far from the point. We were talking about university. You go there to learn and as far as I am aware this doesn't require a smart suit to work. I wonder, will you wear one if you go to uni?
    It is a place of work. Why do so many of the better Sixth Forms for example have a dress code?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    Lets be honest, it hasn't changed that much. Suits were worn by proffessionals in the 40s with little difference of how they are worn today. THe only differences is things like not wearing a waistcoat or a hat with it. Also the materials they are made of.
    Exactly, the world is evolving rapidly and clothes/fashion with it, quite why you would wear a suit so you can be like the old days and not the flowing robes and cuffs of Newton is beyond me.....
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't see how she can complain about 18 year olds acting like teenagers when that's exactly what they are. Why should they behave like 50 year old men? They've got loads of time for that later.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    Lets be honest, it hasn't changed that much. Suits were worn by proffessionals in the 40s with little difference of how they are worn today. THe only differences is things like not wearing a waistcoat or a hat with it. Also the materials they are made of.
    No, I still wear a waistcoat. I don't wear a suit to uni though, lol, and I doubt uni students did in the 50s or 60s. They probably just wore trousers and shirts, like everyone should -_-
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    We did not have unlimited capitalism because interest rates were controlled by the central bank and still are. It's a myth propagated by Statists that we had "unlimited" or even a "laissez faire" banking system prior to the crash.
    Interest rates my be controlled, but in my opinion because the govt isn't likely to change interest rates hugely (eg. 50%) then I am fine with that. The markets are free and it has created plenty of wealth. But also plenty of problems. Anybody who has not been under a rock for the last 18 months can see that.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    It is a place of work. Why do so many of the better Sixth Forms for example have a dress code?
    It is a place of learning and a place that you live. You going to go out to the pub in that suit too?

    Also, I would have thought it pretty obvious that there are some differences between a school sixth form and uni. In one you are expected to be a fully matured adult - cooking for yourself etc. and in the other you are still viewed essentially as a child or a teenager. Therefore a uniform is often seen as a way of controlling behaviour and retaining school image blah blah
    Also most school sixth forms retain a uniform so that the sixth formers are less isolated and aren't seen as privileged as compared to the younger years (or so mine says anyway).

    In the case of sixth form colleges, most are own clothes.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    No, I still wear a waistcoat. I don't wear a suit to uni though, lol, and I doubt uni students did in the 50s or 60s. They probably just wore trousers and shirts, like everyone should -_-
    I am talking in general about a three piece (I still wear one). Not just unis. No they didn't in the 60s with the so called "liberation"
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iwilson03)
    It is a place of learning and a place that you live. You going to go out to the pub in that suit too?

    Also, I would have thought it pretty obvious that there are some differences between a school sixth form and uni. In one you are expected to be a fully matured adult - cooking for yourself etc. and in the other you are still viewed essentially as a child or a teenager. Therefore a uniform is often seen as a way of controlling behaviour and retaining school image blah blah
    Also most school sixth forms retain a uniform so that the sixth formers are less isolated and aren't seen as privileged as compared to the younger years (or so mine says anyway).

    In the case of sixth form colleges, most are own clothes.
    I didn't say uniforms, I said dress code.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    Well i dare say you will look nice prancing about campus like you just stepped out of a time machine, but i forsee an awful lot of strain on the seams washing it every few days, lest you start to smell and further add to the eccentricity which prevents your fellow students from approaching.
    Well I am still waiting to my apology........
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    Interest rates my be controlled, but in my opinion because the govt isn't likely to change interest rates hugely (eg. 50%) then I am fine with that. The markets are free and it has created plenty of wealth. But also plenty of problems. Anybody who has not been under a rock for the last 18 months can see that.
    They don't need to be changed hugely. A decrease from 4 to 2% halves the interest rate, I.e.... 50%. How can you be fine with that? If you're fine with that why aren't you fine with the Government controlling how much bread is produced or how many cars are sold, so long as they don't change the amount by 50%?

    The Federal Reserve held interest rates as low as 1% for a great many years. This is absolutely ridiculous. A company could borrow 100 million from the Central Bank and pay back only 1% on it. That's why there was so much borrowing, so much malinvestment and so much temporary wealth. Almost all mainstream economists in their descriptions of the credit crunch blame an abundance of credit that dried up because there was too much insane borrowing. They just don't place the blame of that abundance on credit on the central bank... which is stupid, because the central bank is where all money comes from in the first place.

    In free exchange the market produces the market optimum for anything, be it bread, cars, or money. When the Government sets prices, like it does with interest rates, it almost always sets them too low or too high for political reasons. Either you have an abundance, or a shortage of credit. We had an abundance, because the Government created so much of it. (In fact Daniel Hannan has also said this, so...)
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    I didn't say uniforms, I said dress code.
    :rolleyes:

    The same thing still stands.

    Face it, people don't wear suits at uni and haven't for many years because it is no longer a tory-fest.
    I still haven't heard a valid answer as to why we should wear suits at university.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I imagine the infantilisation of undergraduates has something to do with the massification of Higher Education?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bagration)
    They don't need to be changed hugely. A decrease from 4 to 2% halves the interest rate, I.e.... 50%. How can you be fine with that? If you're fine with that why aren't you fine with the Government controlling how much bread is produced or how many cars are sold, so long as they don't change the amount by 50%?

    The Federal Reserve held interest rates as low as 1% for a great many years. This is absolutely ridiculous. A company could borrow 100 million from the Central Bank and pay back only 1% on it. That's why there was so much borrowing, so much malinvestment and so much temporary wealth. Almost all mainstream economists in their descriptions of the credit crunch blame an abundance of credit that dried up because there was too much insane borrowing. They just don't place the blame of that abundance on credit on the central bank... which is stupid, because the central bank is where all money comes from in the first place.

    In free exchange the market produces the market optimum for anything, be it bread, cars, or money. When the Government sets prices, like it does with interest rates, it almost always sets them too low or too high for political reasons. Either you have an abundance, or a shortage of credit. We had an abundance, because the Government created so much of it. (In fact Daniel Hannan has also said this, so...)
    So let me ask you a question; do you think there should be no regulation what so ever? Control of interest rates isn't going to stop a recession or start one. The market is relatively free. You need regulation in certain areas to stop monopolies from springing up. I agree with you (as you have said in past posts) that the govt is too heavy handed etc. But I have a firm belief in the state stepping in every now and then.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nolongerhearthemusic)
    And people have been complaining about "the youth of today" for thousands of years.
    Exactly. Typical, harking back to some golden-age that never really existed.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iwilson03)

    The same thing still stands.

    Face it, people don't wear suits at uni and haven't for many years because it is no longer a tory-fest.
    I still haven't heard a valid answer as to why we should wear suits at university.
    :facepalm: YOu say people wore suits because they were Tory's? When John presscot went to uni he remarked that all the poor kids wore suits for the first lecture whilst the posh kids wore casual clothing.

    Here is my valid answer. It is a proffessional place of work so one should dress properly.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adamrules247)
    So let me ask you a question; do you think there should be no regulation what so ever? Control of interest rates isn't going to stop a recession or start one. The market is relatively free. You need regulation in certain areas to stop monopolies from springing up. I agree with you (as you have said in past posts) that the govt is too heavy handed etc. But I have a firm belief in the state stepping in every now and then.
    I believe that the only regulation required is that provided by the Civil Courts; enforcement of contracts, enforcement of Tort law (negligence, so on and so forth) and that the English Common Law would develop to solve economic regulation problems like it has done in the past. Six hundred years ago, Britain didn't have a law of contracts. It didn't have a law of negligence, or any other kind of tort. These things were created by the Courts without Parliament ever really needing to intervene in them. People do not need Parliament to tell them how to live. The Common Law is entirely sufficient for that. Politicians act for the extension of their own power. Judges and Courts by definition cannot extend their own power and act in the best interests of the people and of justice and liberty.

    You just said "control of interest rates isn't going to... start a recession" without replying to my point about how control of interest rates did start our present recession. I would do that first before making assumptions.

    (Original post by adamrules247)
    Here is my valid answer. It is a proffessional place of work so one should dress properly.
    On the other hand, when I'm pulling an all nighter in the library, I'm rather glad that I can roll up my shirt sleeves and undo a button or two. Lecture theatres too are not designed for comfort whereas most professionals I know work in rather comfortable offices simply because they're going to be there all day in formal clothing. I sympathise with you that more people ought to dress their age (not necessarily people our age, but 21 year olds are adults and should acknowledge this), but I don't think it would make any difference if people walked around in suits all day.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
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: February 27, 2010
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

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

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