c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,703
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 5, 2024 17:54:33 GMT
House of cards
“Hedge funds have built up complex trades worth more than $1 trillion based on US debt, funded by borrowing short-term from banks and selling to pension funds.
The trades are not bets on price. Rather, hedge funds are exploiting small gaps in market pricing to make money. The margins are small, but when the trades are so large it all adds up.
It is this sheer scale that has central bankers worried. The Bank of England noted last month that the trade had reached a new high, growing to $1 trillion from a previous record of $875bn. Officials warned that the trades could trigger a market meltdown in a worst case scenario.
Raphael Gallardo, chief economist at French asset manager Carmignac, says: “This is a risk that deserves watching. It represents something like 3pc of the total US debt.””
Telegraph
also…
Hunt’s Treasury broke the law by hiding ‘black hole’, OBR chief suggests
Former chancellor says timing of spending watchdog’s comments risks undermining impartiality
also in the Telegraph:
Scrap the pensions triple lock and make university free
As students are targeted as perpetual cash cows, the bill for pensioners continues to grow
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Nov 5, 2024 18:02:23 GMT
Very early, but first results from Clarke County Nevada, normally a Republican county x.com/JohnRSamuelsen/status/1853847683284496746'EDay Turnout - Clark County, NV 11/5/2024 - 9:00am Dem 8,758 (31.9%) +415 Rep 8,343 (30.4%) Other 1,0369 (37.7%) Total 27,470 The movement slowed a bit, but Dems continue to gain. A lot of voting left out there' Clark County is actually the strongest Democratic County in Nevada State - as pointed out by Jon Ralston. |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Nov 5, 2024 18:02:33 GMT
Danny . As so often, your post helps get to the nub of the matter. The purpose of the Olympics/Paralympics is to find the finest athletes in the world. A noble exercise and a spectacle. The purpose of education is to get individuals to achieve their capabilities to the highest level possible. To be clear, this is my opinion, based upon my values, which may or may not be shared by others. To identify the finest brains in the world, we have different spectacles, such as University Challenge and Who Wants To Be A Millionaire. Well no, it very often is not. Aside from basics like being able to write and count, just how many people really use knowledge they get at A level or degree? Sure, some specialise but most do not, and its getting worse. Last time I brought this up the response was, but universities teach people to think not just learn knowledge. Well, why on earth dont secondary schools do that anyway? (and some very much do, its totally possible) The specific job of A levels was to identify the brightest to go on to university. But it did the same job for any employer looking for clever people. Today a job advert is likely to say degree required, often regardless of subject. Heck, even teachers get drafted to teach other than the subject they did a degree in, it has just become a licence to apply for the job. This task of finding the most able candidates used to be done by A levels without everyone needing to waste three years going to university. GCSE exams are almost pointless nowadays, no one is going to be interested if you then go on to A and degree.
Athletics events do indeed sometimes give awards to people eg for just completing a marathon. But we are all interested in the winner, and employers are interested in the most capable candidates. Why do you think they were forced to creat the A* grade above A?
Having said that, I am not disagreeing that education should get the best out of everyone, but I disagree you will not do that in a competition against your peers. If something like covid happens, it affected everyone and so while exam results might show a relative drop you will still get the best at the top.
They don’t. Claiming that education is the presentation and transmission of established facts and knowledge is a fool’s errand, which leads straight into the blind alleys you so lucidly identify. This is because knowledge is mutable, always subject to scrutiny, criticism, test and evaluation. The purpose of learning and education is to develop the intellectual capacities central to these processes. A body of knowledge is necessary to develop these capacities (content is primary), but it is quite wrong to see the body of knowledge as an end in itself. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,703
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 5, 2024 18:04:03 GMT
Also, the latest from AEP (Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, who is thought to catastrophise a tad, but still…)
Gold’s mystery rally is a forewarning of fiscal ruin and global dystopia
Surge in demand could signal that the West’s adversaries are building their war chests
and to add to the alarm, for fans of air fryers:
“Researchers at Which? found that Chinese-made air fryers could be sending personal data to servers in China, raising privacy concerns.
Apps linked to these air fryers sought unnecessary permissions, including audio recording and precise location tracking.
Which? found that both Xiaomi and Aigostar smartphone apps, which are used to control the air fryers remotely, sent personal data to China.”
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Nov 5, 2024 18:07:17 GMT
Times is paywalled so can't see if this is a selective school we are talking about (Grammar suggests it is). But also can't see the criteria used although clearly it's going to be a good school. I think you are right about different outcomes and inevitably a lot of this can simply be down to governing boards and Heads and school performance. However there can be a lot of other factors including catchment area, parents etc, and also there are different ways of measuring "success". A school can rarely make up the difference if the home life of the child is dreadful and if you're in a deprived area then the percentage of home lives being dreadful will be higher. Schools that appear good on the results can actually be coasting and have the luck of having a catchment area where the parents educate during leisure time and have the time to spend with their kids on homework. I think things like league tables for results can be dangerous in assessing whether a school is good or not and I'm not entirely sure what criteria you could use that does define a good school. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Nov 5, 2024 18:17:52 GMT
Labour's decision to raise Tuition Fees is likely to be another WFP moment with students likely to be alienated - and a complete contradiction of Starmer's pledge when running for the Labour Leadership. Good news for the Greens , Labour Left Independents and to some extent the LDs who now become less vulnerable regarding what the Coalition did to students.
|
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Nov 5, 2024 18:24:20 GMT
Predictions - presidential election 🔵 Economist - Harris 276 🎖️ 🔵 Five Thirty eight - Harris 270 🎖️ 🔵 Crystal Ball - Harris 276 🎖️ 🔵 Nate Silver - Harris 271 🎖️ 🔵 Split Ticket - Harris 270 🎖️ 🔴 Decision Desk HQ - Trump 275 Looks awfully like clustering from the pollsters to me.  If Selzer is right, there is going to be a lot of egg on their faces tomorrow. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 18:25:38 GMT
That's a little Reductio ad absurdum, similar to saying we know some perform above average so all can perform above average, it doesn't work in real life If you pour extra resources into a child's education they will on average do better But of course there will always be exceptions and that includes schools The issue, as with the NHS, is that we could get a better service by spending more. A choice for government. Which would require raising taxes. Is it better to buy expnsive drugs for those with altzheimers, or better education for the kids? And what about Russia roling over Ukraine? Was talking about this and another reason for varying state performance was suggested. ie apparently Hampshire schools are good, whereas sussex schools are bad. Sussex chooses to spend more on police, hampshire spends more on schools. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,703
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 5, 2024 18:27:58 GMT
Times is paywalled so can't see if this is a selective school we are talking about (Grammar suggests it is). But also can't see the criteria used although clearly it's going to be a good school. I think you are right about different outcomes and inevitably a lot of this can simply be down to governing boards and Heads and school performance. However there can be a lot of other factors including catchment area, parents etc, and also there are different ways of measuring "success". A school can rarely make up the difference if the home life of the child is dreadful and if you're in a deprived area then the percentage of home lives being dreadful will be higher. Schools that appear good on the results can actually be coasting and have the luck of having a catchment area where the parents educate during leisure time and have the time to spend with their kids on homework. I think things like league tables for results can be dangerous in assessing whether a school is good or not and I'm not entirely sure what criteria you could use that does define a good school. Some schools might be keener to exclude than others too. My partner tries not to do it in her school |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,380
Member is Online
|
Post by neilj on Nov 5, 2024 18:36:48 GMT
Times is paywalled so can't see if this is a selective school we are talking about (Grammar suggests it is). But also can't see the criteria used although clearly it's going to be a good school. I think you are right about different outcomes and inevitably a lot of this can simply be down to governing boards and Heads and school performance. However there can be a lot of other factors including catchment area, parents etc, and also there are different ways of measuring "success". A school can rarely make up the difference if the home life of the child is dreadful and if you're in a deprived area then the percentage of home lives being dreadful will be higher. Schools that appear good on the results can actually be coasting and have the luck of having a catchment area where the parents educate during leisure time and have the time to spend with their kids on homework. I think things like league tables for results can be dangerous in assessing whether a school is good or not and I'm not entirely sure what criteria you could use that does define a good school. Some schools are keener to exclude than others too. My partner tries not to do it in her school Funny you say that,15 years ago or so the best performing school in Telford was Thomas Telford School City Technology College It was a good school, over subscribed and parents were clambering to get their kids in there. To get in not only were children interviewed, but parents aswell Infringement of standards would result in expulsion The expelled kids would often end up in under subscibed State Schools who were obliged to take them But Thomas Telford was a high performing School according to the stats, while the schools obliged to take their rejects not so good |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,703
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 5, 2024 18:38:12 GMT
How Biden would have fared against Trump if he had never dropped outNew YouGov poll looks at how the actual president would have done if he hadn’t dropped out of the race in favour of Kamala Harris www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/joe-biden-donald-trump-yougov-election-b2641797.html“According to the 1,103 citizens YouGov surveyed between November 1-3, Trump would have been seven points ahead of his former rival in a race with Biden.
Only 41 percent of survey respondents said they would have supported the president’s bid for a second term, compared to 48 backing Trump, if the original race had been run. That compares to 49 percent saying they will back Harris now with 46 for the Republican.
The number of ‘not sure’ or ‘would not vote’ responses stood at eight percent for Biden-Trump, more than double the three percent who answered the same way for Harris-Trump.”
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 18:38:14 GMT
Perfectly true, but the issue is that private schools are always much better resourced than state ones. That is the advantage that wealth buys. The fact that some are then beaten by state schools demonstrates that some are not delivering very good value for money, which is an entirely different issue. One of the things you are buying is a better class of co-student, who will not be disruptive, go round knifing people, etc. Thats something which certainly can be said about some state schools, but not others. A proportion of people sending their kids to private schools have literally been driven out of the state system by what has happened to their kids. Another chunk are literally having fees paid by the state. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,635
|
Post by steve on Nov 5, 2024 18:38:42 GMT
neilj "As only 13% of farms will pay any inheritance tax I can't see how it will reduce the number of average sized farms" Much like any other iht issues a considerable number of people think they are going to have to pay when they aren't actually going to. For those who inherit or expect to inherit a farm there's an increased temptation to dispose of the asset before they think they are going to be taxed on it. The opportunities to dispose of land are rather easier than disposing of an inheritance in the form of a dwelling.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 19:03:31 GMT
]Oh I'm very interested, but I am also well aware that to try and pretend if you have less resources you will be always better than a better resourced school is silly Private schools on average perform better than state schools on average because they are better resourced Yes there will be exceptions, but these are exceptions I would suggest that the well performing state schools may have a bit more money, but that isnt why they are performing well. It will be because they are selective so get better kids. And/or are in a good neighbourhood so get better kids and even some money from the parents group. Have a good reputation so its easier for them to recruit good staff (as well as good kids), who want better working conditions. Its because these factors combine to make it easier to educate their kids. Its arguable one way to get more successful state schools would be to allow parents more power to select schools, and schools to select kids, so that the kids more likely to behave all go to one school, which is likely to do much better in value added per child, and then dump the rest of the kids in an awful sink scholl for everyone else. Or more politely, recreate Grammars and secondary moderns. I have mentioned this before, I once asked a councillor banging on about how well the schools were doing, how the performance for all the town compared post comprehensivisation to pre, and he said he didnt know. Didnt know! |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 19:09:12 GMT
indeed exceeding the average is not statistically possible On an individual basis, it obviously is. And if soem schools start to rise in quality, then the average also rises. But as I said, all the factors are inclined to push schools down to the current average, with no way for the worse ones to move up. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 19:12:45 GMT
She should ask for it and do whatever is necessary and possible to remove the inequalities in outcomes for pupils. Yep...spend lots more money. The last lot had all this data and know exactly what was necessary to improve matters, they chose not to. Why? well obviously, you would have to raise taxes to pay for it. charge the rich more to educate the poor's kids. And in this context, charge the middle more to educate the poor's kids. Because those currently getting the best from the state system are the wealthiest. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 19:14:44 GMT
The barrel must be getting pretty thin by now, Mark Francois has been named shadow defence minister   Wasn't there a news item recently we no longer have any factory capable of making gun barrels? |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Nov 5, 2024 19:17:44 GMT
Perfectly true, but the issue is that private schools are always much better resourced than state ones. That is the advantage that wealth buys. The fact that some are then beaten by state schools demonstrates that some are not delivering very good value for money, which is an entirely different issue. One of the things you are buying is a better class of co-student, who will not be disruptive, go round knifing people, etc. Thats something which certainly can be said about some state schools, but not others. A proportion of people sending their kids to private schools have literally been driven out of the state system by what has happened to their kids. Another chunk are literally having fees paid by the state. Sorry if I seem to be picking on you today, Danny, but I do think those apocryphal stories are very damaging and based on nothing more than vivid imagination. By way of anecdote, my daughter went to what, on paper, might be considered two of the worst schools in the land. Primary had a damning ofsted and secondary was in special measures. The latter could only aspire to the heights of being bog standard. And one of her friends, not close fortunately, died following a knife attack (probably associated with drugs activity). But she loved both schools and still has good friends from each. And she went on to get good A levels and a place at Durham University, where she got a good degree, a postgrad studentship, and a distinction in her MSc. So I do get a bit tired of this fanciful nonsense. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Nov 5, 2024 19:18:25 GMT
Indeed. I read an article probably 20 years ago which showed an A-level maths question which had been an O-level 20 years before that. It concerns me that although youngsters have and need other skills today, a reduction in basic maths and literacy will mean a greater reliance on AI and conventional internet skills in the future. Without sufficient education to question or analyse the computer's analysis we will end up being effectively controlled by algorithms, which ultimately means being controlled by mega-corporations. Your first sentence is nonsense. You never read any such article and it was never written. After this length of time I can't reference the exact article that I read, but this link (from 2016) says more or less the same thing - that A-level maths standards have declined since the 1960s although they had stabilised since the 1990s. Therefore for you to assume that no-one else could have come to the same conclusion and written about it, is what is nonsense. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 19:20:32 GMT
The increase of iht on farms will almost certainly reduce the number of average size farms and lead to an increase in the land ownership of those whose property in trust status means they won't pay it anyway and never earned their wealth in the first place. I'm totally not convinced. Small farms are dying out anyway. The economics dont seem to be there for someone to start from scratch to buy a farm and make a profit. But as I keep saying, I dont see that taxes are the biggest problem for inheriting a farm, its how you split an inheritance between two or more children and it stays viable. While a proportion of those with just one child will find the child doesnt want it anyway. The reason why these farms will not exist is because rich people like Clarkson or Dyson (or even JK Rowlings, who bought land and donated it to the community) have bid up the price of land. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Nov 5, 2024 19:22:00 GMT
Interesting -
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 19:25:11 GMT
Some solid evidence emerging that voting patterns have changed (in terms of when people vote) since 2020 by quite a lot. In Democratic Clark county, Nevada, where it's 9.30am, Democrat registered voters voting on the day are leading Republicans by an odd percent of so, whereas at the same stage in 2020 it was Republicans up by around 24%. This means nothing, as Republicans have a 40,000 early vote lead across the state. ITV just had an interview with a big black guy, whose job is a security guard. He said he voted by post so as to avoid potential trouble if he voted in person. He might not be the only one who thinks its wiser all round to move to early voting. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Nov 5, 2024 19:41:57 GMT
According to University of Florida more than 85,500,000 early votes have now been cast - which is over 53% of the total 2020 turnout.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 19:44:45 GMT
They don’t. Claiming that education is the presentation and transmission of established facts and knowledge is a fool’s errand, which leads straight into the blind alleys you so lucidly identify. This is because knowledge is mutable, always subject to scrutiny, criticism, test and evaluation. The purpose of learning and education is to develop the intellectual capacities central to these processes. A body of knowledge is necessary to develop these capacities (content is primary), but it is quite wrong to see the body of knowledge as an end in itself. Well we have to agree to disagree there. I gather historians are endlessly re-writing history in light of modern attitudes, but the sciences dont really work like that. There is a known formula how to make a pipe, computer technology doesnt change concepts as it expands, it builds on what is already known and implemented. Isaac Asimov had a dig at this when he talked about Trantor the galactic university, which had degenerated to academics endlessly writing about what past academics had written. I couldnt say now whether he was having a dig at modern trends in education, or because he was a scientist himself. He did contrast this with what was hapening in the breakaway universe, where new ideas were being developed. But it wasnt though endlessly dwelling on the past, but accepting the body of knowledge and expanding it. I went to a top university studying science: we did not spend our time second guessing what was already known. If there was cutting edge science moving forard, it wasnt because of questioning the existing body of work so much as genius in understanding its limitations and where to move forward.
This modern attitude that universities are about learning how to learn, not about knowledege, reminds me of the job of MPs. Which used to be to decide on new laws and how to govern, but increasingly has become to act as agony aunt to your constiuents and intervene for them with the local council (usually quite futilely). I also hve to question how ridiculous it is that people should only learn critical reasoning at university, not throughout their time at school so that they are already thoroughly educated in that subject before ever reaching a university. It all smacks of universities trying to justify their rather crazy position in the modern world, costing a fortune but for very limited improvement to their students, students career chances, or society in general.
|
|
|
|
Post by colin on Nov 5, 2024 19:48:13 GMT
I'm not entirely sure what criteria you could use that does define a good school. Outcomes for pupils ? Academic ( obviously) plus other as agreed. |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Nov 5, 2024 19:48:58 GMT
Your first sentence is nonsense. You never read any such article and it was never written. After this length of time I can't reference the exact article that I read, but this link (from 2016) says more or less the same thing - that A-level maths standards have declined since the 1960s although they had stabilised since the 1990s. Therefore for you to assume that no-one else could have come to the same conclusion and written about it, is what is nonsense. Of course you can’t ’reference’ it! It does not exist, does it? It is just a product of warped ideas and wild imagination. The missing ‘link’ you provide is in any case irrelevant to my point, which is that you were pointing to hard evidence, i.e. that a former O level standard item was now being used at A level. Once we get to the article, we can take it apart, but we can’t do that because it exists only in your head!! |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,572
|
Post by pjw1961 on Nov 5, 2024 19:52:11 GMT
Looks awfully like clustering from the pollsters to me. If Selzer is right, there is going to be a lot of egg on their faces tomorrow. Just on Ann Selzer and her Iowa poll, she inevitably took a lot of abuse, including from Trump personally who said it was "a fake poll" by a "Trump hater" and described her as "one of my enemies". What she had to say about her methodology and how it differs from the likes of Emerson who polled Iowa and gave Trump a 10 point lead may interest some on here: “I’ve been shocked since Tuesday morning last week,” Selzer said. “So I’ve had the time for this to sink in because no one, including me, would’ve thought that Iowa could go for Kamala Harris.” Co-host Willie Geist specifically asked Selzer about Trump’s criticisms, inviting her to respond to the claim that her poll is just an outlier. “I give credit to my method for my track record,” Selzer said. “I call my method ‘polling forward.’ So I want to be in a place where my data can show me what’s likely to happen with the future electorate. So I just try to get out of the way of my data saying this is what’s going to happen.” “A lot of other polls, and I’ll count Emerson among them, are including in the way that they manipulate the data after it comes in, things that have happened in the past,” she continued. “So they’re taking into account exit polls, they’re taking into account what turnout was in past elections. I don’t make any assumptions like that. So it’s in my way of thinking, it’s a cleaner way to forecast a future electorate, which nobody knows what that’s going to be. But we do know that our electorates change in terms of how many people are showing up and what the composition is.” Selzer later added that the method she used to get these results hadn’t changed from that which she’d used in previous presidential elections that had shown Trump leading in Iowa. “This method is the same method that we used in 2016 to show Trump winning and 2020 to show Trump winning,” she said. “So he doesn’t like it now—it’s not the poll, it’s what the poll is saying.” www.thedailybeast.com/j-ann-selzer-pollster-behind-shock-iowa-poll-hits-back-at-trumps-attacks/. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Nov 5, 2024 19:55:09 GMT
Democracy around the world: UK - It's just over six hours until we get the first exit polls telling us who the nation voted for Hastings - It's just over six hours until everyone can fail to notice who this small seaside town voted for Russia - It's just over six hours before we confirm you've voted for President Putin with another huge majority Italy - It's just over six hours until we find out how long until we have to vote in the next election China - Don't wait up - we'll tell you who you voted for when you need to know USA - It's just over six hours until the lawyers start telling you who you really voted for I'm sure there are other examples..... Supposing Trump loses and the Supreme Court doesn’t hand him it anyway … is that the Trump nightmare done? Finally? Or will he be back? He was asked that this morning (our time) and said this would be his last campaign. However as he's an habitual liar who knows? |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Danny on Nov 5, 2024 19:55:38 GMT
Labour's decision to raise Tuition Fees is likely to be another WFP moment with students likely to be alienated - and a complete contradiction of Starmer's pledge when running for the Labour Leadership. Good news for the Greens , Labour Left Independents and to some extent the LDs who now become less vulnerable regarding what the Coalition did to students. I dont see what option there was given the funding structure currently in place, either that or let the universities start going bankrupt. However, what could change disaster into triumph would be some sort of reform of their funding, or the structure of student debt, so the students werent in the end paying so much. Behind this seems to be that universities are very expensive, despite cutting back on stuff like contact hours. If costs can be reduced, they need to be. If not, then we need to reconsider how this is all funde, or whether it makes sense for so many to go to university and whether we need to return to fewer students each subsidised more. Also, the funding was originally supposed to vary from univeristy to university, so that private sector demand would regulate fees. Prestige universities could and would charge more. Problem came when government had to fund loans for this which would never be repaid, so they end up with much (most?) of the bill anyway. The system is stuck still hobbled by the treasury, because bottom line is that the wealthy would pay and therefore obtain an advantage going to a better university by paying more. Loans are now so expensive as to be becoming prohibitive, we could easily end up with only the rich going to good universities. |
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on Nov 5, 2024 19:59:48 GMT
"ITV just had an interview with a big black guy, whose job is a security guard. He said he voted by post so as to avoid potential trouble if he voted in person. He might not be the only one who thinks its wiser all round to move to early voting."
Why not just say big guy, skin colour can be relevant in elections but not necessary for the above remark.
|
|
If Selzer is right, there is going to be a lot of egg on their faces tomorrow.
