Recent posts

#11

Off the Record / Re: The Off Topic Topic

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 07:33:09 AM

hmm, interesting to see the overweight/obese split.
As purely in my anecdotal experience Switzerland absolutely doesn't compare to the UK, no way would I consider there to be only a 10% difference...but I guess its that obese difference that is really noticeable.
Still reported numbers seem much higher than it seems to me - I do know I'm in one of the fattest parts of the UK, maybe I was also in one of the fittest bits of Switzerland?

Surprised the Dutch score so high on overweight... Again I do wonder whether Amsterdam and the surroundings are where all the thin people are.

Could just be the fat folks never go outside and walk around so we don't see them.

#12

Gaming HQ / Re: Baldur's Gate 3 announced

Last post by Syt - Today at 07:20:39 AM

If you don't save every 10 seconds, are you really playing the game?

The funny thing is, I almost never reload.

#13

Off the Record / Re: The Off Topic Topic

Last post by crazy canuck - Today at 07:16:39 AM

It would be interesting to see regional differences. I think the Northern parts of Italy bring up it's average

#14

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Sheilbh - Today at 06:40:18 AM

I don't know what you define as Northern Europe but by the only objective measure there is (PISA), the UK is 14th in the world and 5th in Europe - behind Finland, Estonia, Ireland and Switzerland but ahead of everyone else including Sweden, Netherlands, Germany and Norway. And that's despite Scotland dragging the scores down.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/pisa-scores-by-country

Our universities are way behind the States in any rankings but way ahead of any other country in the world. Oxford, Cambridge, Imperial and UCL are all in the top 25, only one other European University (ETH Zurich) is.

Yeah I'd add that on the metrics we can look at in terms of an international comparison of higher education (research and international students), the UK does very well.

I also think the relatively high rates of minorities getting degrees (broadly speaking every minority group is more likely to go to university than white British kids) is also a big part of the relative success of integration in Britain compared to a lot of other European countries. And I think universities are the only tool I've seen the state use for "leveling up" or regeneration that I think has actually worked. It's why I think Hunt's idea of those "freeport"/"economic zone" areas being centred on a university is a really good idea.

There's a lot of problems in higher education. The finances are under huge pressure (I think some may go bust if things don't change) and there's been consequences from tuition fees that are negative on a sort of "marketisation" way. But, broadly, in lots of ways I think they're a bit positive and I think education policy is generally working - just look at Scotland: lower results, fewer university places and working class kids are increasingly locked out of them. Among young people (18-25), Britain has a similar rate of tertiary education as Canada, Korea, Ireland and Sweden and it is ahead of most of Europe. I think that's generally a good thing, especially given that we're a services economy.

I've found in other North European countries there's a lot more respect for vocational education with an actual clear and respected higher educational path available. In the UK we've this attitude that if you don't go to university then you're a loser and due to terrible policy decisions in changing polytechnics to universities and the various commercialisation that followed, we have a huge gap where we just aren't properly providing for young people in this technically-inclined higher-level niche.

I think this goes back to Confucianist Britain a little bit. So first of all most Further Education Colleges also offer degrees now. The barriers between "vocational" and "academic" education are pretty blurred now.

Similarly three quarters of students are doing what I'd call vocational subjects: medical professions, law, accountancy, business. That's excluding the creative degrees, so it'll be even higher than 75%. But those are not academia for academia's sake courses. And all the evidence is the expansion of universities has been demand led - it is what young people and parents want.

And again - not to get all Marxist - but I think that reflects our economic structure. We are services dominated economy and we have an awful lots of students studying services vocational subjects. The economic structure of some other European countries (particularly Germany) includes a lot more manufacturing (and a lot higher skilled manufacturing) - and their education system has people studying those vocationally. I think those structural factors matter more than anything else like attitude.

I think there could be an argument for a government basically saying that we, as a country, strategically need a certain industry and will commit to supporting the industry so there are jobs which, in turn, could support specialised education for the industry. I think there's been a recent proposal for that in relation to the nuclear sector which makes sense to me. But if you're just looking for growth and productivity I'd look at higher education and I'd look at the economy we've got, not what we wish we had.

Speaking of the fees they have been £9k for ages and many of our universities would go under without the fees charged to foreigners.

This is one of the big challenges and bluntly there's no obvious solution - read a really interesting piece by an education wonk on this and it's really difficult.

Tuition fees worked - they did what they were supposed to do. They doubled funding per student in real terms (when the rest of the public sector was facing austerity) and saw a big increase in student numbers - particularly working class and minority students (where Scotland is a sharp contrast). But they were always based on a lie because basically the repayments were pretty progressive - they only kicked in at a decent wage, they weren't really "debt" and they'd be written off after 30 years. So built in to tuition fees was the fact that a large proportion (well over 50%) would not be repaid ever. The universities got the money and the government would write a lot off eventually. The ONS (technically correctly but unhelpfully) basically said this is a loophole and a fiction that keeps debt of the government's books - so they're now counted as borrowing. The government has since made it far less progressive - it kicks in at a lower wages, only gets written off after 40 years, there's higher interest (collectively, this means women pay more than men). In part, that's because the alternative was to put a cap on numbers which would be even less popular - but you still see it circulating on the right about "shit degrees".

As you say, especially the more prestigious universities, have focused on expanding their international students because they pay a lot more (UCL for example earns more from funding grants, research grants and contracts and international students than from domestic tuition). The impact of tuition fees not increasing with inflation is mainly felt by lower tier universities who earn more money (up to about 50%) from domestic tuition and less from research, international students etc. Plus there have been impacts from marketisation.

It's unsustainable and a university is going to bust at some point, but the problem is none of the solutions are particularly attractive. You could put a cap on student numbers which'd be very unpopular with parents and young people (as I say, expansion has been demand driven and actually they're mainly doing vocational courses as you say). You could go back to funding universities from direct taxation - but this goes back to why tuition fees were created which is that there's limited resources and when universities have to fight for funding with the NHS or schools, they normally lose. You could have a graduate tax but you'd have the same issue because unlike tuition fees it would just go into general taxation and not be hypothecated for universities.

I think the best you can do is probably try to restore the proressiveness to the tuition fee system (with extra loans and grants for lower income students) - but that all of that probably needs to be linked to inflation. You probably need to have some level of protection of say, I don't know, two thirds of places on any course being for domestic students - in part so especially the prestigious institutions don't squeeze domestic students, but also so, say, a financial crisis in Asia doesn't lead to UCL collapsing. And I think without going back to a cap, there probably needs to be some degree of central planning on places and courses.

So the next election is projecting to go very badly for the Tories, but the idea they're going to win 6 seats and be the 4th or 5th party in Parliament seems unlikely.

Yeah this is based on one poll which had Labour 30 points ahead - 48% to 18%. Also you can't just plug numbers from a poll into a seat calculator - having said that the latest YouGov MRP had Labour on over 400 MPs v 150 for the Tories. It is looking very bad.

Having said all that I think it could go worse than expected for the Tories. Two factors that I think are potential concerns for the Tories are Sunak and the party base. Sunak doesn't perform well with the media or the public when he's challenged. He comes across very impatient, quite snippy and pretty dismissive - which I think, when you're already known as possibly the richest PM in British history, is not a great look. I think it's very possible that his campaign implodes in an unpredictable way and he ends up making Theresa May look like JFK. On the party front, in the last few years the Tories have lost about half of their council seats. Those councillors are the backbone of local parties (I think this was the best argument for Sunak going early) and a lot of Tory activists are angry at the government, they're unhappy. Many of those councillors and local activists will (rightly) blame MPs and the national government - see that leaflet I posted earlier. I think there's also a real possibility that the local parties just don't turn out to campaign - they don't door knock and canvass and get the vote out. Again, not sure on the impact that could have.

Although my default guess is that the polls will narrow as an election approaches and the Tories will recover a bit - I have no evidence that that's happening. But it is what normally happens - so, of course, it might not.

#15

Off the Record / Re: Israel-Hamas War 2023

Last post by Razgovory - Today at 06:21:10 AM

I'm more intrigued by the flip side, how conservatives embraced Jews/israel. From keeping them out of neighbourhoods and clubs to acceptance and support from the influence of a death cult.

As well as the evangelical nuttiness about prophecies and such it is worth considering Nazi policy for most of their existence wasn't just to kill the Jews but rather to send them elsewhere where they couldn't interfere with the Aryans. The famous Madagascar Plan one of the more well known surfacings of this.

The Madagascar plan was an extermination plan.  The survey done for the plan found that Madagascar could only support 10,000 people.  The rest would die.

#16

Off the Record / Re: Israel-Hamas War 2023

Last post by Razgovory - Today at 06:15:12 AM

"Swarthmore College's SJP chapter" doesn't seem like a major or important organization.

Names a bunch of Chapters.  I didn't put all of them out.

#17

Off the Record / Re: The Off Topic Topic

Last post by Sheilbh - Today at 05:49:54 AM

Surprised by Turkey - but I only really go to Istanbul which might be different. The rest is pretty much what I'd expect.

Feel like there's probably a strong benefit to getting those weight loss drugs on the NHS or other healthcare system. At least for the obese.

#18

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Josquius - Today at 05:06:17 AM

If Reform stand down things would suddenly be very different. Starmers nightmare   

Assuming they'd just have their votes added to the tories.
There'll always be a fascist party of the moment. If reform decide they're tories afterall then you'll get something else popping up and grabbing 3% per seat.

#19

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Richard Hakluyt - Today at 05:04:32 AM

If Reform stand down things would suddenly be very different. Starmers nightmare   

#20

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by HVC - Today at 03:58:47 AM

Wonder how badly labour can mess up their majority term