So you knew about the lection system and that made up a spurious reason why people voted UKIP without any evidence at all And yet you were so utterly convenced that you shouted it out as if you were an expert Where have I gotten a 'tehcnical' aspect wrong? So an electoral system should be in place to filter out people YOU don't want. How democratic 'Steal teh breath of future adults' as you reveal you just sponge off your rich parents. Romanian universities are cheap because they pay their lecturers peanuts. You really are trying very hard to be offensive. I am not Thai. I am a Visting professor. Do you even know what a visiting professor is? Most rich American kids perhaps. Why should I cut out the 'self esteem' You claimed that I sponged off my parents at 21 too, with utterly no evidence. You claim that NATO stopped your 'enlistment' now please explain.
We are the junior partners in the coalition. I am not proud of the way our MPS reneged on the deal we had to supply votes for the boundaries commission and it may cost us very very dearly at the next election. Whoever we go in coalition with is going to cost a us votes. There was no way we could have propped Labour up after the Brown fiasco.
To be honest, that one doesn't worry me personally - I was never a fan of those boundary changes at all, and the Tories did block HOL reform, which they shouldn't have done, and in addition to that played a huge part in the sheer dishonesty of the anti-AV campaign. I don't think that one will cost us that many votes either, compared with the other issues of association with Tory policies that will. There I completely agree - I have always been very comfortable with the idea of this (mostly) genuine coalition and attempt at gaining a real meeting of minds and policies through the coalition agreement, rather than the kind of 'lib lab pact', 'rainbow alliance' that Labour were apparently trying to offer, and proud of the party leaders in having the courage to do the right thing, rather than the electorally easy thing, by sticking to the promise of trying to form a real coalition government whichever party was the largest. Aside from the Brown fiasco itself, that kind of coalition with Labour would have been a disaster. It's far from being a perfect government, of course, and far from being an easy alliance, but I do think that we've made the right decisions and done the best thing possible under the circumstances (and in that I also have to applaud the Tory leadership for their willingness to do the same - it's not exactly an easy or perfect situation for them either!). Although there are obviously many things that we wouldn't have wanted to do in an ideal world with a Lib Dem majority government, we have managed to get some of our most important policies (such as the raising of the tax threshold) implemented by this government, and we've certainly managed to moderate what a purely Tory government would have done a great deal (and that includes on the student fees issue, with the massive improvements in the payment terms that have sadly been fairly widely ignored by the public), and that's really all you can ask of minority partners in a coalition. Of course, our lack of close relationships with the media, and the clinging to the simplistic old 'straight left/right fight' model of politics, will see us squeezed at the polls for a while, but that's the inevitably price we'll have to pay for doing the right thing. It's obviously a worry electorally, but on a moral level my feeling is that if that is the way it has to be, so be it. I certainly think that we'll survive and rebuild from whatever losses we suffer at the next election, and probably gain from it in the long term in being seen as a party who are no longer 'irrelevant' and can have a serious part to play in government.
We have a major problem. There is no possibility of us getting into government without being in coalition. Even if we are in government neither of the two big parties will ever bring in PR because it destroys, forever, their ability to hold a majority government. All Government after that would have to be coalitions as they are in most European countries. We are always going to be a Junior partner and the best we can do is 'hold back' the excesses of the larger party. We may be able to push a few of our own. Opposing the boundary changes was cutting our nose to spit our face. The currrent boundaries massively favour Labour. I am a Liberal not a member of an alternative party just existing to be Labour lite or 'keep the tories out'. - - - Updated - - - We have also been really stupid with both Laws and Huhne. Laws should never have been allowed back, indeed he should have gone to jail, We should have known about Huhne years ago- bad whipping.
Happens to experts too. Otherwise economic crisis wouldn't happen, the Chernobyl disaster would have never happened and Michael Jackson would still be alive. Listen in Romania you don't find financially independent 21 year olds. That's just how it is here. Remember that we're talking about Romania not the UK. In Romania people work at 16 only if they were abandoned by their parents or neglected and malnourished (or extremely poor etc). I agree they are paid nickels. But those nickels still ensure that they have enough to eat, afford a good car and a comfortable home and also go on a little vacation every now and then. But why should they be paid like kings - the case of the UK? No. By the time I was old enough the army was no longer mandatory. My parents saw it as a waste of time and advised me against it. Times are changing. We no longer are in Churchill's time when the brave young must go and be ready in defence of the nation! Times are changing Sab.
It wasn't mandatory in my time either.We haven't had compulsory service since 1956. I chose to join the army. Your crap about NAto was just that ... No with a smillie. How clever. So I am a British lecturer visiting another country as a lecturer on their invitation. Now please explain how thismeans I have no identity. We are Paid like Kings? Last I heard of it. Pray tell me how much a British lecturer makes. If you are in Romania as you claim to be you can tell me who Petru Dumitriu was.
Army in my country was compulsory until 2003/2004 to the best of my knowledge. If UK abolished it in 1956 does it mean others should have done the same? And tell me why should I have volunteered for the army just because you did? Lol man I wasn't talking about you! It was just in theory that people should declare themselves as the ethnic group they are regardless of citizenship. Cut it out. UK lecturers do afford to buy themselves more things than Romanian lecturers. If that's not true then why don't you come here and work for a Romanian uni? You don't necessarily have to speak Romanian. We're even short of British native speakers for courses taught in English intensive. LOL Never heard of him. According to wiki he was a novelist. However both Petru and Dumitru are very common names here. He certainly isn't one of the big Romanian writers because otherwise I would have studied him in school at some point. I'm sure few Romanians, especially the young know him... If there's so many of us in the UK as some claim then go ask Romanians and see whether they know this writer. Maybe 1 in 10 does.
You aren't An american? I don't care what you did. You just told me that I was kept by my parents why I was 21 and you blamed Nato You have constantly declared Ihave no identity. I have an ethnic group -its called English. You said live like Kings...now how much do we earn?? Go find out, ask an older lecturer about him.Then come back to me I may go to romania. I have my reasons. Fund out then come back to me. You may have something interesting to tell them if you drop the 'know it all kid attitude.
American???? This is ludicrous........ If you come to Romania you will be able to meet me and see that I am me. And what know it all kid attitude? I just said I don't like or believe UKIP and you... you, it appears simply don't like other people to have an opinion!
Sab now I think I get it. Petru Dumitru must have been a friend of yours. From what sources i could find about him it seems he was active in continental Western Europe where you were too. It all of a sudden struck me that you sound like an Englishman who knows the truth about Romania, its history, its people and its less known recent past. You are the first English person on this forum to dialogue with me that way that all other English do not. I am really sorry if I was offensive towards you. Please accept my apologies. Usually I do not mean to insult anybody. It surely wasn't the case with you. It was just my way of joking. I'm not racist I can show dozens of quotes of mine throughout the forum where I support the full rights of the European minorities (not that you are one). They are welcome to stay. They do what all other citizens of EUrope do and add to GDP etc it's just that they will never feel like they fully belong to any part of Europe in the same way my children would if I'd start my family in Japan or even across the Danube, in Bulgaria, that's all I wanted to say.
You write like an American. All this 'they are paid nickels" why Nickels? That's American coinage. Your spelling and Grammar are American. You have spent time in the US, Clearly. I don't like it when people who have spent a single year in the UK telling me 1) I have no identity 2) I have spent my academic life subsidised by my parents 3) Libel a perfectly legitimate political party as being the same as the neo fascist BNP or NF 4) Lie that we ban political parties Petru Dumitruiu was the most prominent writer in Romania in the fourties and fifties. He escaped in 1960 to Germany after the state kidnapped his 2 year old daughter and he went went to live with his wife in Frankfurt Germany getting his daughter back due to public pressure 2 years later.
Maybe I watch too much Cartoon Network? Joking I just learnt most of my English from American movies. Ever thought about this possibility?
He was my father in law. My wife is Romanian. I am really sorry if I was offensive towards you. Please accept my apologies. No problem at all. Kudos to you for apologising. Not many have the maturity to do so OK You would never be accepted in Japan. Nationality and Ethnicity are completely entwined. $th generation Koreans who speak perfect japanese are still denied citizenship
I really considered asking whether you are related to him! Wonder why I didn't proceed!! Darn! So his daughter is your wife. Hope you will also accept my friendship request. I also see that Petru is from Baziaș, Caraș-Severin County. The place where the Danube enters Romania. I was born in the same county , in Reșița, 1991. In 1996 my parents moved to Timișoara - the main city in the neighboring county of Timiș. In other words quite close to Baziaș. If you are going to visit any family or friends in Caraș I hope you will also stop by in Timișoara and maybe you will have the time for a coffee or a beer. That would be so great. I think you can use the Timișoara Airport. It is quite close to Caraș-Severin rather than Bucharest.
My Wife is his younger daughter. Born in germany a year after they fled Of course . If I can ever get time to go there. I remember Timisoara being important in the Revolution 20 years ago My Wife's mothers familly are from Cluj Napoca, though she calls it Klausenburg. My Mother in law was Hungarian in ancestry
So, if the university tuition fees policy was costed in the Lib Dems manifesto, why if that was the case did Nick Clegg say, "I shouldnt have committed to a policy that was so expensive when there was no money around"? I don't believe for a minute that the Lib Dems didn't know the state of the country's finances before the election any more than I believe the Tories surprised reaction either. I understand the realities of politics very well indeed. Politicians will say whatever plays well with their supporters or potential supporters in election campaigns then turn their backs on them afterwards. The Lib Dems talk of "fairness" leaves me cold. It isn't surprising mainstream party politicians, particularly, are faced with so much cynicism from the public. We each take our choice.
They did have some idea, of course, although it was worse than they thought (Labour had tried to hide the scale of the problem, of course, and the scale of the cuts they were going to make themselves (which weren't much different in many areas than those being made by the coalition), which they still conveniently avoid mentioning) and things were moving rapidly around the time of the election, but the difference was that a costed manifesto relies on various measures paying for each other. If you can't make the savings you plan in one area (or raise the money you plan to in one area), you can't use those savings (or that income) in another, and in a coalition you can't always rely on making the savings (or raising the money) you plan to because the other party will have their own ideas and priorities. What was unrealistic was not signing up to something that couldn't realistically be done had they got a majority of seats (unlikely, but that is what a manifesto sets out - what a party would want to do in government), but signing up to something that couldn't be guaranteed in the event of a coalition (which was certainly a foreseeable event!). They shouldn't have said 'we'll never vote for', because that was unrealistic in the context of a coalition deal with another party. The Lib Dems are minority partners in a coalition - they can't dictate all of the priorities for the government, and have to compromise (as do the Tories, of course). What they did do as part of that compromise on tuition fees, was significantly improve the repayment plan, so that those paying the new higher fees will actually pay back less per month than they would have done under the old system with the lower fees. That's quite important at a practical level, but hasn't exactly been widely acclaimed as a Lib Dem achievement in the media (surprise, surprise - maybe if they'd been involved in some horse loans or christenings, things might be a bit different on that!). ETA: You didn't complete that part of the quote from Nick Clegg, by the way (from the above source):
That would be very nice. It is a very special, historic city. The Austrians turned it into one of their anti-Ottoman strongholds starting with the end of the 17th century when they built a rather huge fort around this city. Perhaps they were trying to ensure that Vienna would never ever be under siege again. Yes all Transylvanian cities have German names. Mine, Timișoara, in old German is Temeschburg. This tradition must have begun with the Saxon colonization of Western Romania beginning with the 12th century and the other German speaking groups that arrived later. There's also indeed many many Hungarians in Western Romania. Every town has a Hungarian name too.
<cough> Nick Clegg said the such an expensive policy was wrong when there was "no money around". So even if you really do believe the Lib Dems didn't know how bad the deficit was, their policy was still unrealistic. Well given that the Lib Dems voted with the Tories to triple tuition fees, "improving" the repayment plan was the very least they owed the students who vote for them. Nick Clegg's mealy mouthed excuses mean nothing to me. I knew they would to you, which was why I included a link to the quote in full. Nick Clegg never said that under his plan we'd have been funding any EU students tuition fees in full if his ending tuition fees plan had been actioned. That's kind of relevant when judging the merits of this policy, don't you think? Does the country need 50% of people to have a university education? Wouldn't it have been better to restrict university entrance to the brightest of students, on academic, engineering, science and medical courses, and fully funding them so that graduates don't leave university with debts (plus interest) it will take them decades to repay if ever? (Student debts outstanding for longer than 30 years are written off, if they are not sold on, as the coalition has indicated might happen.) Then again maybe it's better to have large numbers of people at uni if they would otherwise make youth unemployment statistics look even worse!
That's an issue that's been ongoing for a couple of decades, and exactly why free university and the old grants became unaffordable. I certainly agree that there are currently too many students, and too many pointless qualifications (pretty much any degree subject ending with the word 'studies' is something to be somewhat suspicious about!). I'd be wary, though, about the idea of going too far the other way, and rolling the clock back to the time when there were too few students - having a well educated workforce is obviously important, and now that we've come to the point of so many students we should be careful of placing 'restrictions' on numbers that might end up being unfair to some talented individuals. I'd be even more wary of restricting courses to those that seem 'most important' (i.e. science, engineering, and so on) - a rounded academic base is important, and so is study purely for the sake of advancing knowledge. What is really more important is ensuring rigorously high academic standards in all subjects, and ensuring that young people who would be better suited to more vocational qualifications and training (which are also important for society, of course) aren't being pushed into university because they think they just need a degree to be remotely successful at anything at all in life, and choosing subjects which seem at the time to be 'soft options' (and sometimes probably are, in some ways at least) because they aren't really happy with, or best suited to, academic study. Giving false hope is another issue that needs to be avoided, of course - to take one example, how many graduates to we pump out every year with a degree in 'Media Studies'? Thousands. How many of those people are hoping to go on to a career somewhere in 'the media' as a result? Very few, although alot of them seem to think they will. There simply aren't the openings there for anything like that number, even if a Media Studies degree was what was wanted for employment in the media (which it very often isn't anyway). The increase in numbers of graduates doesn't seem to have reduced the academic snobbery that exists in some areas, either - quite the reverse if anything, it has spread it beyond the areas where it used to exist. People are being asked to have degrees in order to apply for employment where a degree is completely and utterly irrelevant and unnecessary, and that devalues both degrees themselves, and those who are really much better suited to those particular roles but don't have the relevant irrelevant piece of paper to their name. These days it's almost as if people without degrees are immediately considered somehow 'stupid', and only fit to work at the most menial and undemanding of tasks, which is quite obviously a completely ridiculous situation. Not only that, but some people are being appointed to posts to which they aren't really suited, and at which they aren't really much good, on the basis of a qualification that actually has no relevance to the task. These are real problems that we have to face up to somehow.
Media studies is uselss for getting into 'media'. The degree to get into media is English. Media stidies is utterly useless. Personally I think we should get rid of most undergraduate programs and go to a working whilst studying system for your B.A or BSc for instance you want to become a teacher. I think schools should have accomodation for student teachers on site If you are accepted into a teacher training programme then you start work at 18 as a Classroom assistant, playground patroller etc and then at 3,30 you do a couple of hours a day studying primary education or an academic subject+ teaching theory to get a PGCE. If you want to study an arts subject -like History then you should demonstrate your commitment by doing an Open University degree or an evening degree in your local Tertiary education establishment. Places like Oxford and Cambridge should be reserved for people doing masters and above
Imagine that at Oxford they even have a theatre undergraduate degree... ...theatre... exactly what is needed now. In any country I would make this an optional, extra module, next to English. I would make it a self-standing subject from MA level onwards only. While at the University of York I went to the Theatre Departmant to see some of their undergraduate productions. Many of them are not even talented.
