[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[Peteinblack]

EG and Uckfield a much safer bet now for the Tories. I did the local election count a year ago and she and her team spent most of the time watching the Tory vote pile up in those wards while they lost control of everything else. Shortly afterwards she announced she was choosing the new seat. I've been in a brief exchange with Dave Rowntree, the Lab candidate for Mid Sussex, who is pointing to polling, boundary changes, previous GE results in the constituency etc as putting him ahead of the Tories - extraordinary if he pulls it off!

AKA the drummer with Brit-poppers Blur!

 

[Pevenseagull]

EG and Uckfield a much safer bet now for the Tories. I did the local election count a year ago and she and her team spent most of the time watching the Tory vote pile up in those wards while they lost control of everything else. Shortly afterwards she announced she was choosing the new seat. I've been in a brief exchange with Dave Rowntree, the Lab candidate for Mid Sussex, who is pointing to polling, boundary changes, previous GE results in the constituency etc as putting him ahead of the Tories - extraordinary if he pulls it off!

If he does, bonus points to the Tory commentator who squeezes 'This Is A Low' into their response.

 

[TomandJerry]

The British digger maker JCB, owned by the billionaire Bamford family, continued to build and supply equipment for the Russian market months after saying it had stopped exports because of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, the Guardian can reveal.

Russian customs records show that JCB, whose owners are major donors to the Conservative party, continued to make new products available for Russian dealers well after 2 March 2022, when the company publicly stated that it had “voluntarily paused exports” to Russia.

 

[A1X]

A link between Russian money and the Conservative Party?

Well I'll be.

 

[Peteinblack]

Oh good. More unresearched culture war BS

Sex education in English schools set to be banned before children are nine

Education secretary Gillian Keegan to announce guidelines for phased discussion of topics depending on pupils’ age

www.theguardian.com

From a Conservative Party/Government which:

a) claims that it is strongly opposed to banning things just because some people are offended (Cancel Culture)
b) keeps demanding less State interference in social affairs.

There really is no limit or end to the Tories' arrogance and hypocrisy.

 

[BrianB]

EG and Uckfield a much safer bet now for the Tories. I did the local election count a year ago and she and her team spent most of the time watching the Tory vote pile up in those wards while they lost control of everything else. Shortly afterwards she announced she was choosing the new seat. I've been in a brief exchange with Dave Rowntree, the Lab candidate for Mid Sussex, who is pointing to polling, boundary changes, previous GE results in the constituency etc as putting him ahead of the Tories - extraordinary if he pulls it off!

That splits the vote , chose one or t'other , then hopefully a better chance at the following GE for a vote from the heart not head ..

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The British digger maker JCB, owned by the billionaire Bamford family, continued to build and supply equipment for the Russian market months after saying it had stopped exports because of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, the Guardian can reveal.

Russian customs records show that JCB, whose owners are major donors to the Conservative party, continued to make new products available for Russian dealers well after 2 March 2022, when the company publicly stated that it had “voluntarily paused exports” to Russia.

Lord Bamford, who paid for Boris & Carrie’s wedding, put Johnson up, rent free in his mother’s flat, backed Brexit etc etc

Who is Anthony Bamford, the billionaire ‘super-donor’?

Brexit-backing JCB boss has helped determine course of British politics for more than a decade

www.theguardian.com

 

[Peteinblack]

Lord Bamford, who paid for Boris & Carrie’s wedding, put Johnson up, rent free in his mother’s flat, backed Brexit etc etc

Who is Anthony Bamford, the billionaire ‘super-donor’?

Brexit-backing JCB boss has helped determine course of British politics for more than a decade

www.theguardian.com

Yet these Tories harangue the rest of us about ending "the something-for-nothing society", and insist that we should all "pay our own way" in life rather than rely on hand-outs from others.

As always with the Tories, it's "Don't do as we do, do as we say."

 

[Pevenseagull]

The British digger maker JCB, owned by the billionaire Bamford family, continued to build and supply equipment for the Russian market months after saying it had stopped exports because of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, the Guardian can reveal.

Russian customs records show that JCB, whose owners are major donors to the Conservative party, continued to make new products available for Russian dealers well after 2 March 2022, when the company publicly stated that it had “voluntarily paused exports” to Russia.

JCBs are really good for digging a ditch

 

[Gwylan]

Universities have the worst of both worlds; operating as educational supermarkets in a neoliberal, competitive, free-market in which students are viewed as customers paying for a product (degree) supplied by service-providers (academics) ...

... but are being prevented from increasing their revenue by a government block on high-paying overseas students. If you compare yourself to a supermarket, it would like the government saying to Aldi that you can't take customers from Dyke Rd Avenue, the area around Preston Park and the best parts of Hove but can only take customers from Moulsecoomb, Whitehawk and Hangleton - we'd all think they'd gone barmy.

 

[golddene]

Would you be happy living on £9K a year? A very small private pension of £3500 takes you above the tax threshold so paying income tax.
That is below the minimum wage.

There are a few wealthy pensioners but they aren’t the norm and I can guarantee they aren’t women.

Quite agree TB, due to my birth date (1954) I qualify for the ‘new state pension’ this is topped up by the SERPs addition which now gives me an annual state pension of £13,300 which takes my income above the tax threshold of 12600, so tax is payable on my state pension on any amount above £12600, my wife who has had no income due to ill health for the last six years has recently reached state pension age (66) though we were expecting her to be eligible for state pension at age 60 but this age eligibility was introduced quietly, almost secretly, and she became what has been termed a WASPI woman and lost out on 6 years of state pension and as stated became too ill to work so has been living on my state pension along with my workplace pension which was deemed household income which disqualified her from obtaining any means tested benefits, the only thing I could get was 10% of her tax allowances to offset against my taxable income. The £1260 tax free allowance gained which comes down to 20% of this which is £252 annual gain. Now since the increase in state pensionall my personal allowances and with the 10% gained from my wife takes my state pension into the tax bracket, my company pension is now wholly taxed at source meaning what I thought I’d be getting £12930 per annum I actually receive £10344 with my tax liability being £2586 per annum and to confuse the issue further, my wife donating the 10% of her allowances now means she too will be liable for tax as her ‘new state pension’ is above her now decreased allowances due to her handing it to me to offset my liability !!! Maybe one day (2028) when they decide to increase tax thresholds with inflation again this may get sorted but I’m not holding my breath …..

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Quite agree TB, due to my birth date (1954) I qualify for the ‘new state pension’ this is topped up by the SERPs addition which now gives me an annual state pension of £13,300 which takes my income above the tax threshold of 12600, so tax is payable on my state pension on any amount above £12600, my wife who has had no income due to ill health for the last six years has recently reached state pension age (66) though we were expecting her to be eligible for state pension at age 60 but this age eligibility was introduced quietly, almost secretly, and she became what has been termed a WASPI woman and lost out on 6 years of state pension and as stated became too ill to work so has been living on my state pension along with my workplace pension which was deemed household income which disqualified her from obtaining any means tested benefits, the only thing I could get was 10% of her tax allowances to offset against my taxable income. The £1260 tax free allowance gained which comes down to 20% of this which is £252 annual gain. Now since the increase in state pensionall my personal allowances and with the 10% gained from my wife takes my state pension into the tax bracket, my company pension is now wholly taxed at source meaning what I thought I’d be getting £12930 per annum I actually receive £10344 with my tax liability being £2586 per annum and to confuse the issue further, my wife donating the 10% of her allowances now means she too will be liable for tax as her ‘new state pension’ is above her now decreased allowances due to her handing it to me to offset my liability !!! Maybe one day (2028) when they decide to increase tax thresholds with inflation again this may get sorted but I’m not holding my breath …..

Thank you for posting your experience. Many pensioners are like you, and quite a few are renting for various reasons. The very rich get away with not paying taxes, with money they can’t even spend on a lifetime but ordinary pensioners are being taxed. It’s a bad state of affairs.
There’s even talk of raising the pension age to 70.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Yes, there is so much bureaucratic nonsense in Higher Education - the 'educrats' have taken-over, and govern by 'strategies because they've never taught or written a scholarly book in their lives. Yet I would advise you to persevere with academia, because the current regime is unsustainable.

I've increasingly been tempted to take early retirement, but then think "why should I give up a career I've worked so hard for (and for which I am highly-respected by my students and academic colleagues, both at home and those who work in the same discipline overseas) because of the arrogant, incompetent, swaggering, 'suits' who try to micro-manage and endlessly audit us. If you go for a piss, they want to know what strategy or framework you used, and how your toilet visit provided 'value-added' to the university.

I too increasingly find ways of disengaging from this white noise of managerial nonsense; sending my (insincere) apologies to many of the endless committee meetings and Away-Days, not volunteering for extra activities, 'initiatives' or membership of yet another 'working group' or 'curriculum review', and only replying to university or management emails if I get a follow-up or reminder (most of the time I don't).

I focus on what I enjoy, and am deemed to be good at; teaching, and research (currently working on my 19th book) - which is what being an academic should be about, and why I entered the profession. Problem is that in the 1990s, the 'qualitocracy' began colonising academic registry, and spewing endless jargon-filled documents, form-filling, box-ticking, and report-writing.

It is sometimes claimed that "Those who can, do, and those who can't, teach', to which I always add "and those who can't teach become university managers."

In my Department/Faculty, 60% of student fee income is siphoned-off by management to: a) pay for yet more parasitic managers, and b) cross-subsidise Departments which struggle to recruit students (STEM, basically) but are politically or reputationally too important to close. So we are constantly told that there is no more money for extra staff to teach the increased student numbers, but somehow we can always afford a new Director of Arse-Wiping, Assistant Dean of Paper-Clips, and a pro-Vice Chancellor of Photocopying - all of whom then impose yet more idiotic paperwork on overstretched, burnt-out, academic staff.

Universities have the worst of both worlds; operating as educational supermarkets in a neoliberal, competitive, free-market in which students are viewed as customers paying for a product (degree) supplied by service-providers (academics), but at the same time, managed like the former Soviet Union with its stupid 5-year plans and top-down targets, impenetrable layers of faceless bureaucracy, constant micro-management and monitoring of subordinates, endless command-and-control from the centre, but complete lack of accountability by senior managers who instinctively blame front-line staff for everything which goes wrong.

Yet we know what happened to the old Soviet Union in 1989-90, so my advice to any aspiring young academic would still be to hang-on in there, and don't let these managerial bastards deter you. They cannot be allowed to win, and they won't be around for ever.

My best advice is don't retire. Do what you know to be right and have a bit of fun with the lunatics when the chance arises.

Here is some correspondence from today with some bits redacted for obvious reasons:

Them: "We are preparing Period 2 marksheets by downloading available exam marks. We noticed that marking hasn’t been completed, or marks have not been uploaded to (our platform), for (course code) (Question X) & (course code) (Question Y).
In case helpful, please find attached guidance on marking.*
There are 294 marksheets being ratified at academic sub boards in period 2, and your support will ensure students can progress and graduate.
Please don’t hesitate to be in contact if you are experiencing delays with marking. Thank you for your time."

Me: "Hi X. The marking is incomplete because the people marking those questions haven’t marked them yet. I think the first marker is (name) so I am ccing. In case I am wrong, you have a list of markers and second markers that I sent you (I had to upload all the details to a web page - i took me 2 hours). It would make sense for you to check this and chase them direct rather than come through me (same applies to other courses and organizers.) You won’t be able to collate marks if we don’t get the marking done….and we are the only people who can do the marking whereas you are equally if not better placed to do chasing. Seems like a plan! Thanks for sending me the marking guides. I’ll take an hour off this afternoon to give them a good thorough read."

Them (their boss this time): "
Hi (me). Thank you for your email. We really appreciate your engagement with this. With 181 exams and 294 modules being ratified at P2 academic sub boards we are a little reliant on module organizers liaising with their markers. Additionally, we think conversations around marking are best placed between academics and we can be updated on progress. Thank you kindly."

Me: "Thanks (them). I am happy to receive multiple emails as you find that various folk have not done their marking, go through my files to find out which is the unmarked question and look up who the markers are if I can’t remember, and then send an email to the marker, but please note that doing this will take me away from my marking, which may therefore be late.
Regards"

It all went quiet after that. The guide to marking (*above) is a seven page document that includes a statement that is my responsibility as module organizer (MO), (and this module is just one course on a large programme), is responsible for ensuring all the other academics who set and will mark questions get their marking done on time. This is how they justify checking what questions aren't marked then telling me, rather than contacting the responsible marker directly. I think the reason is that other academics who are not running the module but teach and mark on it just ignore chase emails from the academic centre. The assumption, presumably, is my colleagues won't ignore me. Ho, ho, ho.

The reason marking is late is we doubled student intake during covid because we did not anticipate A-level grade inflation and did not up the entry requirement. Add in the new complicated marking (see below), the need not only for second marking, but blind parallel marking, and a need for the final mark to fit on a 2-5-8 framework (no 63% or 74%) AND a need for all marks that differ between the two markers to be resolved by a meeting and discussion, no taking averages, because the average of 52 and 55% is 53.5 %, rounded up to 54% and that is not on the 2-5-8 framework, and you can guess the rest. We have this marks framework apparently because a student (not on my degree course I hasten to add) complained they got 53% and a mate got 54% and they cant understand how the marks differ, and someone decided we had to be able to explain. Oh, we can't explain. So let's use a sort of digital marking scale that leaves out some values. I bit like measuring the height of humans by rounding the measurement up to the nearest 4 inches**. Instead of telling the student to pull up his nickers and make me a cup of tea, the 'college teaching and assessment sub-committee' spent countless hours devising this new system, and forcing all departments from History to Nursing to use it.

Oh and there has been so much exam misconduct (students downloading answers onto exam hall laptops) I am also spending hours dealing with all of that.

I could go on, but it's late. Sufficed to say we WILL be late with marks this year because I am not compromising the integrity of my marking, and if the wankers kick off they will find it will blow up in their faces. Or would, were in not the fact that they have written all these documents that explains that the buck stops with the academics.

**I am now officially six feet four.

 

[Bodian]

Peer faces year’s ban from Lords bars for bullying two people while drunk

Kulveer Ranger resigns Tory whip after committee also recommends suspension from House of Lords for three weeks

www.theguardian.com

 

[Randy McNob]

We're all in it together

 

[chickens]

We're all in it together

I don’t like “wealth envy” as a rule, but surely it’s obvious to all, regardless of political persuasion, that this level of inequality is harmful to society?

Are there defenders of this? Not just the wealth to afford Rolls Royces, multiple stately homes, and the staff to maintain them (which I’m absolutely fine with) but the wealth to buy countries, subvert democracies and ensure that legislation, economic textbooks and education is bent to your will. Ensuring a friendly environment where “moar tax cuts” is seen as a better outcome than funded public services?

 

[BLOCK F]

I don’t like “wealth envy” as a rule, but surely it’s obvious to all, regardless of political persuasion, that this level of inequality is harmful to society?

Are there defenders of this? Not just the wealth to afford Rolls Royces, multiple stately homes, and the staff to maintain them (which I’m absolutely fine with) but the wealth to buy countries, subvert democracies and ensure that legislation, economic textbooks and education is bent to your will. Ensuring a friendly environment where “moar tax cuts” is seen as a better outcome than funded public services?

Well, regardless of the rights or wrongs of huge wealth, I’m glad Uncle Tony has a few bob!

 

[beorhthelm]

I don’t like “wealth envy” as a rule, but surely it’s obvious to all, regardless of political persuasion, that this level of inequality is harmful to society?

someone owns shares in company their family built up. what actually is the harm? and where would that be, they do their trade mostly in US and India.

as we have a hugely wealthy benefator owning BHA, hope some careful thinking in answers.

 

[Pevenseagull]

someone owns shares in company their family built up. what actually is the harm? and where would that be, they do their trade mostly in US and India.

Infosys made their biggest ever financial investment (£1.5billion) into BP two months before Sunak announced surprise expansion on north sea oil and gas licences.

 

[Goldstone Guy]

someone owns shares in company their family built up. what actually is the harm? and where would that be, they do their trade mostly in US and India.

as we have a hugely wealthy benefator owning BHA, hope some careful thinking in answers.

Ok, I'm not an economist but my understanding of what's happened is as follows: the harm is the massive and rapidly growing difference in wealth between the rich/ultra-rich and the rest of us, fuelled by the action of the ruling classes - ultra-low interest rates and money printing driving up asset prices (property, shares, commodities) which are mainly owned by the rich. Inflation won't affect them - if you've got a few billion it doesn't matter if a loaf of bread doubles in price. If everything you earn goes on rent, bills and food then it does matter. Yes I know raising interest rates hurts normal people with mortgages and most of the damage was done before Sunak came to power. Add to that their policies of under-funding and general screwing up public services (in this country at least) which the lower and middle classes rely on. If Rishi gets ill you can guarantee he won't use the NHS (although there'll probably be some cringeable staged publicity stunt of him going for a test at his local hospital).

And I've just read Pevenseagull's post above - no idea if it's true but then again I'm 100% certain if I look into it I'll find out it is true. The difference with TB is that he doesn't dictate rules and policies which increase his wealth (and makes others worse off).