Oh Dear - he's gone and trumped them all!

[RobinBHM]

Getting back to Trump......

Who wouldve thought a man that has appeared on a reality tv show, has his name in big gold letters on flash hotel buildings, has no political experience etc etc would be voted in as president.

Trumps appointments over the last days and his continuing use of twitter isnt very encouraging so far! I know, early days........

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

Trump clearly represents a vote for change ie a rejection of the Washington bubble and in that respect it's parallels with Brexit are palpable. But why the American people thought to elevate this obvious lunatic to such an exalted platform is completely beyond me. The Democrats must be kicking themselves with the benefit of hindsight!

 

[RossJarvis]

Trump clearly represents a vote for change ie a rejection of the Washington bubble and in that respect it's parallels with Brexit are palpable. But why the American people thought to elevate this obvious lunatic to such an exalted platform is completely beyond me. The Democrats must be kicking themselves with the benefit of hindsight!

It's very difficult assessing this if we're in the UK. In 2000 I thought the potential candidate G W Bush was an obvious psycho, then spent 3 weeks in Austin Texas, during this time I came to realise he was actually a sensible and very appropriate candidate. After a while of decompression back in the UK my views sort of went back to where I was before but modified. We are seeing something from a particular place in time and environment. If you are sensitive and you change that place you may actually see things differently.

Notwithstanding the above, Trump is quite clearly a nutter, so he's probably much like most presidents who have gone before.

In 1997 I actually voted for Blair, how the heck I never saw this Tory fifth columnist for what he was and is is beyond me :shock:

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

My Father was a morse code man with the Royal Signals in WWII and I'll never forget watching a war film with him one late Friday night. As a wet behind the ears teen I asked him what in his opinion caused the war and he replied: "ignorance son".

He then went on to teach, became a headmaster and finally went above the school system and into the LEA. His entire career was chosen out of the conviction he had that ignorance was the cause of the 2nd world war. This was against a backdrop of a large Yorkshire family of coal miners, steel workers and railwayman. He believed that educating people was the solution to the kind of ignorance that caused wars.

When I see Trump vomiting his rhetorical bile about building walls and excluding innocent citizens on the basis of which God they choose to worship, I think of my Dad, who dragged himself out of the groove his family circumstance had created, who witnessed real bloodshed on a truly shocking scale......and that word just echo's around my brain....ignorance......it just sums up Trump and everything he stands for. What have the American people done? An ignoramus leading the ignorant...we live in tumultuous times folks and that's for sure!

 

[RossJarvis]

When I was at school, some of our teachers had been in the services, and many had lived through the 2nd Great war. They believed in education, overcoming ignorance and truly enlightening minds. I've been out of working in education for 3 years now, unfortunately that attitude has gone with the people who believed in it. Go to school/college/university "learn how to win". Welcome to the new World!!!

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

I agree that "winning" has replaced "being". That's more American binary culture for you, you're either a winner or loser......what a staggeringly reductionist view!

 

[RossJarvis]

I agree that "winning" has replaced "being". That's more American binary culture for you, you're either a winner or loser......what a staggeringly reductionist view!

I think the problem is that education and lots of other things have moved the focus away from the "process" to the "result". When I was instructing in a workshop I tried to focus on the whole process. Both the process of making something and the process of learning how to do it. It takes a while to get the "feel" of tools, measuring equipment etc and mistakes aren't "wrong" they're just an intrinsic part of the process of learning.

The students often got very frustrated because they couldn't produce what they wanted straight away. The powers that be weren't interested in the process either, all they wanted was the certificate at the end and the cash prize for producing it. This is why the education system has moved from teaching people and giving "qualifications" to record achievement, to teaching people to get qualifications. Nowadays if someone waves a piece of paper (NVQ, GCSE, A'Level, degree etc) at you, it may just mean that they've learnt how to get that piece of paper. It's not a good guarantee that they know how to do anything else. In fact with NVQs (and I'm a "qualified assessor :shock: ) The whole process is designed around how to fill in the b****y folder and nothing to do with what's being assessed. In fact it's easier learning to use a Bridgeport Mill properly than it is to fill in the b****y folder.

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

That's horrible isn't it? All badges and no common sense....horrible. If I counted the times I say to my boys....first principles, it would be a very large number!!

 

[RossJarvis]

That's horrible isn't it? All badges and no common sense....horrible. If I counted the times I say to my boys....first principles, it would be a very large number!!

This months new phrase from me is that we live in a post-competent culture.

Speaking of first principles, one reason I dropped out of college was because I couldn't work out the height of an equilateral tetrahedron from first principles. Everyone else said "just stick the correct formula in".

 

[MIGNAL]

Not just education, pretty much everything. NHS waiting lists, crime figures, unemployment figures etc. I don't believe any of them. My friend was a teacher in a comprehensive school for 10 years. He left the profession. He frequently told me that it wasn't about teaching subjects but about results. Didn't matter how you got there, by what sleight of hand, just make the figures look good.

 

[RossJarvis]

Not just education, pretty much everything. NHS waiting lists, crime figures, unemployment figures etc. I don't believe any of them. My friend was a teacher in a comprehensive school for 10 years. He left the profession. He frequently told me that it wasn't about teaching subjects but about results. Didn't matter how you got there, by what sleight of hand, just make the figures look good.

Most people don't believe me when I tell them how bad it was where I worked (outright fraud really) After going off with stress, it was possibly the threat of whistle blowing that got me finally stabbed in the back.

It would be nice to think it's not everywhere but the Scottish half of me is a bit pessimistic about that

 

[Jacob]

Not just education, pretty much everything. NHS waiting lists, crime figures, unemployment figures etc. I don't believe any of them. My friend was a teacher in a comprehensive school for 10 years. He left the profession. He frequently told me that it wasn't about teaching subjects but about results. Didn't matter how you got there, by what sleight of hand, just make the figures look good.

it's Tory policy in general - supposedly to lead to "efficiency" by quantifying targets - but has turned into a mass persecution of these institutions with "blame " culture - "failing" schools, hospitals, deliberately demoralising and denigrating the staff - leading to pressure for privatisation.
The failure is with the Ministries responsible, not with the demoralised people on the ground, and privatisation will be or already is, a disaster. But you could get rich quick if you can get in there!

 

[RobinBHM]

Not just education, pretty much everything. NHS waiting lists, crime figures, unemployment figures etc. I don't believe any of them. My friend was a teacher in a comprehensive school for 10 years. He left the profession. He frequently told me that it wasn't about teaching subjects but about results. Didn't matter how you got there, by what sleight of hand, just make the figures look good.

it's Tory policy in general - supposedly to lead to "efficiency" by quantifying targets - but has turned into a mass persecution of these institutions with "blame " culture - "failing" schools, hospitals, deliberately demoralising and denigrating the staff - leading to pressure for privatisation.
The failure is with the Ministries responsible, not with the demoralised people on the ground, and privatisation will be or already is, a disaster. But you could get rich quick if you can get in there!

Just the Tories to blame then?

Quotes from the kings fund:

'Targets will be remembered as one of the defining features of Labour’s approach to health policy since 1997'

'what was different about Labour's approach to targets in the NHS (and across the public sector more generally) was the volume of targets and the vigour with which they were performance-managed from the centre.'

 

[Jacob]

Not just education, pretty much everything. NHS waiting lists, crime figures, unemployment figures etc. I don't believe any of them. My friend was a teacher in a comprehensive school for 10 years. He left the profession. He frequently told me that it wasn't about teaching subjects but about results. Didn't matter how you got there, by what sleight of hand, just make the figures look good.

it's Tory policy in general - supposedly to lead to "efficiency" by quantifying targets - but has turned into a mass persecution of these institutions with "blame " culture - "failing" schools, hospitals, deliberately demoralising and denigrating the staff - leading to pressure for privatisation.
The failure is with the Ministries responsible, not with the demoralised people on the ground, and privatisation will be or already is, a disaster. But you could get rich quick if you can get in there!

Just the Tories to blame then?

Quotes from the kings fund:

'Targets will be remembered as one of the defining features of Labour’s approach to health policy since 1997'

'what was different about Labour's approach to targets in the NHS (and across the public sector more generally) was the volume of targets and the vigour with which they were performance-managed from the centre.'

New Labour very timidly followed the tory lead. Partly intimidated by neo-liberal nonsense but also trying to attract the middle ground. But that is history!
BTW the NHS was founded by Labour. It wouldn't be here otherwise.

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Actually, the birth of the NHS was rather more cross-party. The first suggestion was by Beveridge (a liberal) in 1942, in his report on social justice. The actual proposal of a National Health Service was set out by Willink (a conservative) in a White Paper of 1944. The actual implementation was by Bevan (labour) in 1946. The NHS came into operation in 1948.

The wartime government was one of national unity - and all parties agreed that the post-war settlement must be more socially just than had previously been the case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Willink

 

[Wildman]

As the voting got down to two candidates I thought damn there goes the neighborhood but you know what, a man does not become a multi billionaire by being stupid no matter what the dissenters think. He has powerful views but who is to say they are not what is needed at this point in time. I remain to be convinced yet not totally against the man, after all he won the election, the people got what they voted for and the policies were quite clear when they voted so I guess it is what the masses wanted. Only time will tell. The same applies to the Brexit vote. it makes me laugh when people quote post brexit, we are still part of the corrupt system that is Europe until we leave. How the hell the EU can force us to keep paying is only a matter of weak kneed politicians. A hard break and take it from there. We did not pull their coals out of the fire to be treated like this it is time the ungrateful scrotes realised that.

 

[Jacob]

Actually, the birth of the NHS was rather more cross-party. The first suggestion was by Beveridge (a liberal) in 1942, in his report on social justice. The actual proposal of a National Health Service was set out by Willink (a conservative) in a White Paper of 1944. The actual implementation was by Bevan (labour) in 1946. The NHS came into operation in 1948.

The wartime government was one of national unity - and all parties agreed that the post-war settlement must be more socially just than had previously been the case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Willink

This is good if you want to get up to speed on NHS history

"There was a fierce battle to get it established.

In 1946 the Doctors voted 10:1 against.

The Tories voted against the formation of the NHS 21 times before the act was passed, including both the Second and Third reading.

Some of the claims ("Hitlerian coercion", "first step to turn Britain into a National Socialist economy") are so harsh as to make GOP look restrained.

To say that in 1946 must have been almost unbelievably emotive."

 

[thetyreman]

Actually, the birth of the NHS was rather more cross-party. The first suggestion was by Beveridge (a liberal) in 1942, in his report on social justice. The actual proposal of a National Health Service was set out by Willink (a conservative) in a White Paper of 1944. The actual implementation was by Bevan (labour) in 1946. The NHS came into operation in 1948.

The wartime government was one of national unity - and all parties agreed that the post-war settlement must be more socially just than had previously been the case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Willink

execution is all that matters, not denying the idea is important, but labour actually made it a reality.

 

[Jacob]

Actually, the birth of the NHS was rather more cross-party. The first suggestion was by Beveridge (a liberal) in 1942, in his report on social justice. The actual proposal of a National Health Service was set out by Willink (a conservative) in a White Paper of 1944. The actual implementation was by Bevan (labour) in 1946. The NHS came into operation in 1948.

The wartime government was one of national unity - and all parties agreed that the post-war settlement must be more socially just than had previously been the case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Willink

execution is all that matters, not denying the idea is important, but labour actually made it a reality.

...against stiff opposition from all directions and very much to the credit of Aneurin Bevan and Attlee

 

[Peter Sefton]

'Targets will be remembered as one of the defining features of Labour’s approach to health policy since 1997'

'what was different about Labour's approach to targets in the NHS (and across the public sector more generally) was the volume of targets and the vigour with which they were performance-managed from the centre.'[/quote]New Labour very timidly followed the tory lead. Partly intimidated by neo-liberal nonsense but also trying to attract the middle ground. But that is history!
BTW the NHS was founded by Labour. It wouldn't be here otherwise.[/quote]

From my memory of working in education it was very much a labour thing, (if we can measure it we can improve it) we were told, the trouble was all the effort went into measuring and testing at the cost of education delivery.