|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On September 19 2019 19:40 Acrofales wrote:
I was against extensions when it seemed like May wasn't going to do anything useful with them and just push desperately for her plan that parliament didn't want. Now that Boris definitely doesn't want an extension, but there's some minor hope that parliament will do something with it, I'm in favour of just giving them a 12-month extension, even if Boris shows up and says "formally I am obliged to ask for an extension, but please please please don't give it to us"...
Considering how much contempt and distrust everyone amongst European leaders and decision makers have for Johnson, I would assume that would be one more reason for the EU to grant that extension. But from what I’ve read, he doesn’t even have the right to say anything like that for it would be considered contempt of parliament,
The EU was never gonna make any present to the UK, but I expect them to bleed Boris to death if given the opportunity.
|
He has to apply for an extension by Oct 19, but the EU expects reasoning and a plan.If Boris doesn’t provide a reason for the extension and a plan they could easily refuse to extend.
Unless he gives the reasoning he wants an election but all I keep hearing from him is leaving on Oct 31 deal or no deal.Remainers were smug two weeks back when they took over parliament but it was a false dawn for them, Time is rapidly running out.
|
On September 19 2019 23:22 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
He has to apply for an extension by Oct 19, but the EU expects reasoning and a plan.If Boris doesn’t provide a reason for the extension and a plan they could easily refuse to extend.
Unless he gives the reasoning he wants an election but all I keep hearing from him is leaving on Oct 31 deal or no deal.Remainers were smug two weeks back when they took over parliament but it was a false dawn for them, Time is rapidly running out.
The European Council will do the same as they did in March/April, talk straight over the PM's head to parliament. It doesn't matter what Boris writes in the letter, the granting of any extension is not meant for him but for HoC. And by Oct 19 the council will have a pretty good idea what they plan to do. There are constant talks going on between the opposition and the EU.
|
United States41983 Posts
Boris is a Prime Minister, not a President. His only personal powers are those ceded by the queen through tradition which are open to legal challenge and diminishing constantly (EU used to be foreign policy and within royal prerogative but that was stripped away three years ago, war used to be royal prerogative but Blair lost that one, and so forth). The rest of the PM’s powers come through his position as party leader of the most numerous party in Parliament, not from the actual PM title. Parliament rules, and the party leader rules Parliament.
Boris is the weakest party leader I can think of in the postwar years (and I can name all of them in that period). His majority is slimmer than Major’s and his party is more divided. He lacks the power to challenge Parliament on Brexit and impose a Leave against their will.
|
On September 19 2019 23:31 KwarK wrote:
Boris is a Prime Minister, not a President. His only personal powers are those ceded by the queen through tradition which are open to legal challenge and diminishing constantly (EU used to be foreign policy and within royal prerogative but that was stripped away three years ago, war used to be royal prerogative but Blair lost that one, and so forth). The rest of the PM’s powers come through his position as party leader of the most numerous party in Parliament, not from the actual PM title. Parliament rules, and the party leader rules Parliament.
Boris is the weakest party leader I can think of in the postwar years (and I can name all of them in that period). His majority is slimmer than Major’s and his party is more divided. He lacks the power to challenge Parliament on Brexit and impose a Leave against their will.
Agreed. How do you stack him against Theresa May, who's surely vying for last place?
|
Labour commits to abolish private schools as well as limiting universities to accept only 7% of new students from them. Seems to be from a playbook of how not to win an election.
I really dislike the idea of different education for wealthy people (I know not all of them are, just in principle), isn't the private school system in general an enormous boon to the UK though?
|
United States41983 Posts
On September 23 2019 23:32 schaf wrote:Labour commits to abolish private schools as well as limiting universities to accept only 7% of new students from them. Seems to be from a playbook of how not to win an election. I really dislike the idea of different education for wealthy people (I know not all of them are, just in principle), isn't the private school system in general an enormous boon to the UK though?
On the one hand people sending kids to public schools (what we call private schools in the UK) essentially subsidize state schools. They pay taxes for services they then don’t use. On the other it allows them to form elitist bubbles and denies parental involvement and other nonmonetary resources to state schools. Upper and middle class kids lift up schools but if they opt out then there becomes little political and social will to address issues. It is a problem that the political class are often old Etonians who have never met a normal working class person, but it’s also a problem that the reason those people have power is because Labour appear to be match fixing here.
There’s no good solution. Maybe slap another tax on public school fees so that a portion of it goes towards resources for nearby state schools? I’m not such a fan of scholarship programs because letting poor kids into public schools is still a form of privatization of education but those at least help limit the social bubble of public schools too.
|
Northern Ireland22207 Posts
i don't know why people think abolishing private schools and redistributing their assets to state schools is somehow going to lift every child up to a world-class education.
|
On September 24 2019 00:13 ahswtini wrote:
i don't know why people think abolishing private schools and redistributing their assets to state schools is somehow going to lift every child up to a world-class education.
I think the general line of thinking is that affluent parents tend to not let the schools their children attend have crappy educators and facilities. By not allowing affluent people to separate themselves, they have to improve the schools the other kids attend too.
EDIT: I suppose I should add that affluent people have the resources and political influence to make those improvements happen, not that less affluent parents don't also want high-quality schools
|
Norway28558 Posts
On September 24 2019 00:13 ahswtini wrote:
i don't know why people think abolishing private schools and redistributing their assets to state schools is somehow going to lift every child up to a world-class education.
who thinks that? :|
|
On September 23 2019 23:32 schaf wrote:Labour commits to abolish private schools as well as limiting universities to accept only 7% of new students from them. Seems to be from a playbook of how not to win an election.
Not a vote winner, divisive policy even among labour members.
Don’t talk about Brexit damaging the economy when labour now have 32 hour weeks at the same pay and four extra public holidays per year as policy? Anti competitive, hurts business.And they can’t agree on Brexit policy until after the election?
I agree, seems like they are trying to lose.
|
Apart from certain businesses profiting from 4 day work week compared to a 5 day work week.
Like this Glaswegian marketing firm calle pursuit marketing.
I've heard them talking about it on the radio a couple years ago (sadly no longer available, or i simply can't find it on mobile - it was a brainwaves episode) and the guardian hat a piece about other firms earlier this year as well.
It's not always black and white.
|
On September 24 2019 16:48 Artisreal wrote:
Apart from certain businesses profiting from 4 day work week compared to a 5 day work week.
Like this Glaswegian marketing firm calle pursuit marketing.
I've heard them talking about it on the radio a couple years ago (sadly no longer available, or i simply can't find it on mobile - it was a brainwaves episode) and the guardian hat a piece about other firms earlier this year as well.
It's not always black and white.
A four day week working 10 hour days is different to working 32 hour/4 day weeks and getting the same money as the 40 hour/4 day week.
|
Yes, won't you think of the shareholders! Imagine if some of the money they got went to more workers instead of another golden yacht.
|
Northern Ireland22207 Posts
Boris Johnson's suspension of parliament ruled unlawful in unanimous judgement.
"Up to the Speaker to decide what happens next"
|
So the prorogation was ruled unlawful. About time, I've missed parliament.tv as white noice while playing Path of Exile.
|
I'd say this is big but... Parliament isn't going to do anything no matter how much time you give them so...
I'm glad it got ruled unlawful tho, it was such an open display of undermining democracy that it should not have been allowed to stand.
|
Northern Ireland22207 Posts
On September 24 2019 18:53 Gorsameth wrote:I'd say this is big but... Parliament isn't going to do anything no matter how much time you give them so... I'm glad it got ruled unlawful tho, it was such an open display of undermining democracy that it should not have been allowed to stand.
I think there is a solid majority for compelling Boris to request an extension, and then without Brexit looming next month, a general election
|
On September 24 2019 18:56 ahswtini wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2019 18:53 Gorsameth wrote:I'd say this is big but... Parliament isn't going to do anything no matter how much time you give them so... I'm glad it got ruled unlawful tho, it was such an open display of undermining democracy that it should not have been allowed to stand. I think there is a solid majority for compelling Boris to request an extension, and then without Brexit looming next month, a general election They already passed the law requiring Boris to request an extension if no deal is reached by 19th Oct before they were prorogued.
|
On September 24 2019 18:02 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2019 16:48 Artisreal wrote:
Apart from certain businesses profiting from 4 day work week compared to a 5 day work week.
Like this Glaswegian marketing firm calle pursuit marketing.
I've heard them talking about it on the radio a couple years ago (sadly no longer available, or i simply can't find it on mobile - it was a brainwaves episode) and the guardian hat a piece about other firms earlier this year as well.
It's not always black and white. A four day week working 10 hour days is different to working 32 hour/4 day weeks and getting the same money as the 40 hour/4 day week.
Yes.
4 day, 8h each max.
More profit than 5 day at least 8 hr for the aforementioned company.
Average of 30ish percent productivity increase to the 5 day baseline. That means more total output in 4 days than in the 5 days before the 4 day work week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://images-ext-1.discordapp.net/external/kz_LQ_jPvADaOyr8ynY86jtp9fdOAng5TufdRUXnZFk/https/pbs.twimg.com/media/EFKbDAGWwAI87xU.png%3Alarge?width=400&height=200)
