In article , J G Miller
wrote:
On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 04:23:41 -0700, wrote:

It's like being made to buy the Dailey Worker.

Obviously you have never read the Daily Worker.

I'm wondering where you are all buying copies. So far as I know, a
newspaper called the 'Daily Worker' vanished many years ago. Have you not
noticed, or am I imagining that it became 'Morning Star'?... :-)

If you dislike the BBC so much Bill, I suggest you watch Ajazeera instead.
It's now on freeview. So enjoy! ;- Their program on Gaza yesterday was
very interesting. Even had an interview with Tory Plan B. My, how old he
looks now. Must be all that middle-east sunshine....

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember "
saying something like:

Why are we obliged to subscribe to this left wing organisation? It's
like being made to buy the Dailey Worker.

It offended you?
Good, it's doing its job.

On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 14:57:18 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 04:23:41 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

Last night the BBC TV news had an item about the cuts in the education
budget. The story was that the government had decided to cut millions
of pounds from the last government's proposed education budget, but no
mention was made of the fiscal reasons was given, so it sounded as if
they'd done it for their own reasons. This item was illustrated by a
series of shots showing abandoned school buildings, including some
that looked as if they had suffered mining subsidence and were about
to be pulled down.

At the end of Newsnight they showed the front pages of the papers. The
Times led with a report just out saying that the IPCC reports on
climate change (upon which many governments based their climate change
policies) have been shown to be alarmist and biased. Newsnight chose
to ignore this and commented on the picture story instead before
moving swiftly on.

The Now Show was even more blatantly leftist then usual.

Why are we obliged to subscribe to this left wing organisation? It's
like being made to buy the Dailey Worker.

You seem to be ignoring the extent to which the BBC and other news media
are "steered" by press releases and PR people from various
organisations. The story about the effects of cuts in the education
budget could not be ignored. It is part of the present government's
policy making. It is neither right nor left wing to report the possible
effects of the proposed cuts. The government is not proposing to do away
with publically funded education. It simply needs to reduce expenditure.
It is perfectly legitimate for the news media, including the BBC, to
report on the possible effects of various cuts. This will help to keep
the public informed (or not totally ignorant) about what is going on.

What it comes down to is "How big do the cuts need to be?" and "Where
can cuts be made least harmfully?".

When it comes to commenting on old school buildings or on the report
about the IPPC report it is no contest. Not only the viewers but the
ill-educated muppets in front of the TV cameras in the studio can
understand old school buildings but not the complexities of scientific
studies of climate change.


It's not really cuts to the education budget - it's cuts to the
building or capital budget.

What we are seeing is the result of local council's inability to spend
money on anything other than headline grabbing projects, i.e no
planned maintenance programmes are ever (it seems) put in place. But
we all see regularly local councillors opening some new buildingh or
other and basking in much sought after publicity - there's no
publicity for replacing a leaking roof!

The private sector seems to manage this - I don't see any reports of
Eton or any of the Oxbridge colleges falling down
--
Cheers

Peter

(Reply to address is a spam trap - pse reply to the group)

On 06/07/2010 17:46, Jim Lesurf wrote:
I suggest you watch Ajazeera instead.
It's now on freeview. So enjoy! ;- Their program on Gaza yesterday was
very interesting. Even had an interview with Tory Plan B. My, how old he
looks now. Must be all that middle-east sunshine....

I'm sure it was an unbiased report.

--
Wilf

On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 17:06:44 +0100, "Paul D Smith"
wrote:

The *alleged* fiscal reasons.

That we need billions of pounds of cuts is just a political view.
To say that's why they were necessary would be buying the Tories'
line. The truth is that they are taking advantage of the recession
to pretend that the country has to balance its books as if it were
an individual, and excuse the cuts in services that they couldn't
get away with otherwise. Unfortunately the BBC is so right wing
that it doesn't tell us that.

That's seems a great position - get big enough, run up debts and forget
about them. Just like credit cards, a county's debts cost money and the
higher the interest, the greater that extra cost is.

In the ideal world, we have no debts and all our income (taxes mainly) go
straight to services. In the exact opposite the people servicing our debt
up the interest rate and most of our taxes go on paying interest and very
little on services.

That doesn't even begin to address the issue of our aging population and the
fact that since its inception, the state pension has always worked on a "rob
Peter to pay Paul" basis with no investments being built up to support it.

Now I wasn't born with a silver spoon in my pocket, and there are times I've
run up a debt (mortgage and car) and there are also times when I SHOULD have
run up debt but didn't (I didn't tour Europe whilst a student) but at every
juncture I was ready and able to pay that debt. Sadly the Labour government
seem to have forgotten that last step - how quickly we solve this is a point
for much debate, but it has to be solved so that we can start using taxes to
pay for services, and not for ever increasing debt and interest payments.

You are right. However the tory cuts are bad for two main reasons:
- They are actually far too small to make a real difference.
- They are cutting the wrong things.

At present interest rates are very low so it is not as expensive to
service this debt as it would be normally. I'm not saying that it
should not be reduced but it is not as big a problem as it could be.

In my area all big school repairs are being cancelled (although you
can build a totally new school!). The Road Safety and the Children's
Services budgets are being reduced to zero, to name but a few.

And yet the government is ploughing ahead with Trident. It is an
obscenely expensive white elephant. An weapon that is out of date,
not controlled by us and that we can never use.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 08:35:35 +0100, Petert
wrote:

On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 14:57:18 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

On Tue, 6 Jul 2010 04:23:41 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

Last night the BBC TV news had an item about the cuts in the education
budget. The story was that the government had decided to cut millions
of pounds from the last government's proposed education budget, but no
mention was made of the fiscal reasons was given, so it sounded as if
they'd done it for their own reasons. This item was illustrated by a
series of shots showing abandoned school buildings, including some
that looked as if they had suffered mining subsidence and were about
to be pulled down.

At the end of Newsnight they showed the front pages of the papers. The
Times led with a report just out saying that the IPCC reports on
climate change (upon which many governments based their climate change
policies) have been shown to be alarmist and biased. Newsnight chose
to ignore this and commented on the picture story instead before
moving swiftly on.

The Now Show was even more blatantly leftist then usual.

Why are we obliged to subscribe to this left wing organisation? It's
like being made to buy the Dailey Worker.

You seem to be ignoring the extent to which the BBC and other news media
are "steered" by press releases and PR people from various
organisations. The story about the effects of cuts in the education
budget could not be ignored. It is part of the present government's
policy making. It is neither right nor left wing to report the possible
effects of the proposed cuts. The government is not proposing to do away
with publically funded education. It simply needs to reduce expenditure.
It is perfectly legitimate for the news media, including the BBC, to
report on the possible effects of various cuts. This will help to keep
the public informed (or not totally ignorant) about what is going on.

What it comes down to is "How big do the cuts need to be?" and "Where
can cuts be made least harmfully?".

When it comes to commenting on old school buildings or on the report
about the IPPC report it is no contest. Not only the viewers but the
ill-educated muppets in front of the TV cameras in the studio can
understand old school buildings but not the complexities of scientific
studies of climate change.


It's not really cuts to the education budget - it's cuts to the
building or capital budget.

What we are seeing is the result of local council's inability to spend
money on anything other than headline grabbing projects, i.e no
planned maintenance programmes are ever (it seems) put in place. But
we all see regularly local councillors opening some new buildingh or
other and basking in much sought after publicity - there's no
publicity for replacing a leaking roof!

The private sector seems to manage this - I don't see any reports of
Eton or any of the Oxbridge colleges falling down

I don't know about Eton, but the Oxbridge colleges have endowments
(investments and property). The wealthiest is Trinity College,
Cambridge. Wikipedia says:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity...llege_finances

Trinity is the wealthiest Oxbridge college[24] with an independent
financial endowment of approximately £621 million (as of 2005).

Of this amount approx. £75 million is part of the college's
Amalgamated Trust Funds, which is dedicated for specific purposes.

Trinity's land, including holdings in the Port of Felixstowe and the
Cambridge Science Park, is insured for approx. £266.5 million (this
does not include all fixed assets).[25]

In 2009, Trinity acquired a stake in The O2 Arena[26] in London;
under the terms of the deal the college receives rental and sales
income from the venue.

Other Oxbridge colleges are less wealth but the same principle applies.
They are "independently wealthy".

They also raise funds from alumni (former students) and well-wishers.
http://alumni.trin.cam.ac.uk/Page.aspx?pid=341

State schools, primary and secondary, are funded on an annual basis.
They are not expected to have massive investments. They will sometimes
raise money from the parents of pupils but not usually from former
pupils.

They funding mechanisms are totally different between the public and
private sectors.

--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 11:39:14 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:


What we are seeing is the result of local council's inability to spend
money on anything other than headline grabbing projects, i.e no
planned maintenance programmes are ever (it seems) put in place. But
we all see regularly local councillors opening some new buildingh or
other and basking in much sought after publicity - there's no
publicity for replacing a leaking roof!

The private sector seems to manage this - I don't see any reports of
Eton or any of the Oxbridge colleges falling down

I don't know about Eton, but the Oxbridge colleges have endowments
(investments and property). The wealthiest is Trinity College,
Cambridge. Wikipedia says:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity...llege_finances

Trinity is the wealthiest Oxbridge college[24] with an independent
financial endowment of approximately £621 million (as of 2005).

Of this amount approx. £75 million is part of the college's
Amalgamated Trust Funds, which is dedicated for specific purposes.

Trinity's land, including holdings in the Port of Felixstowe and the
Cambridge Science Park, is insured for approx. £266.5 million (this
does not include all fixed assets).[25]

In 2009, Trinity acquired a stake in The O2 Arena[26] in London;
under the terms of the deal the college receives rental and sales
income from the venue.

Other Oxbridge colleges are less wealth but the same principle applies.
They are "independently wealthy".

They also raise funds from alumni (former students) and well-wishers.
http://alumni.trin.cam.ac.uk/Page.aspx?pid=341

State schools, primary and secondary, are funded on an annual basis.
They are not expected to have massive investments. They will sometimes
raise money from the parents of pupils but not usually from former
pupils.

They funding mechanisms are totally different between the public and
private sectors.

I agree with you that the funding of Eton and Oxbridge is completely
different from that of state schools.

However the point I was making was that there appears to be little, or
no, preventative maintenance or rolling repair schemes set up - you
don't need to be funded in the same way as Eton and the Oxbridge
colleges are to put such schemes in place

Take for example Swansea - it's leisure centre closed a few years ago
because the electrical wiring was deemed to be unsafe - no maintenance
had been carried out on ther building since it opened in the 1970's.
It basically had to be re-built after a public outcry at its closing.
Or how about Swansea Guildhall - a Grade 1 listed building - suddenly
the council discovers it has to spend millions to bring it up to
standard - What a surprise, little or no routine maintenance carried
out on a 80 yr old building. As for schools in Swansea - they appear
to need many millions spent on them to rectify problems that haven't
been dealt with in the past electrical wiring unsafe, leaking roofs,
ill fitting windows etc

There is no publicity for any councillor when money is spent on
repairing windows/roofs/boilers/electrical wiring and I suggest that
is the problem
--
Cheers

Peter

In article , Mark
wrote:


However the tory cuts are bad for two main reasons: - They are actually
far too small to make a real difference. - They are cutting the wrong
things.

I agree with your second point, but not your first - unless the
'difference' you had in mind was that you wanted things to become much,
much worse. :-)

The difficulties with what they are doing fall into two catagories.

Firstly, they are cutting 'public expenditure' without taking into account
the extent to which that 'public expenditure' outlay then flows into the
pockets of the 'private sector'. State workers who lose their jobs can't
then spend their salary to buy goods and services from the 'private
sector'. So the income by that route to private business, enterprise, etc,
falls. And cuts to procurement by the state mean less of paid for items
procured from the 'private sector'. Yet at the same time Tory Plan C (oh, +
Plan N) assumes that the 'private sector' will come to the rescue by
employing people to produce/sell/etc... And of course, welfare costs may
rise due to increased enemployment and other social reasons - e.g. due to
cuts in education meaning less employable workforce to compete with other
countries.

Secondly, as you say, the cuts are clearly based more on ye olde tory dogma
than on an understanding of economics. It would be more effective to pick
items like 'trident' which tend to be a mix of poor
money-per-person-employed efficiency and buying in from abroad. But it is
quicker and more in line with tory dogma to attack the public sector.

There was a hilarious interview with Pickles a couple of days ago where he
blythly insisted that 30-40 percent cuts to local social services, etc,
would not 'affect the vulnerable'. I'd be interested to know which
particular individuals he had in mind here. He somehow didn't say. And the
reality is that the main costs in local social services tend to be for
those who need fairly continual care at home, etc, due to profound illness
or age or disability.

BTW Bill, I think you missed the C4 news item on this. You haven't had a
BBC-style moan about them daring to mention examples like an MS sufferrer
who fears the effects cuts may have on the service she needs to live. Or
perhaps looking at possible examples like this are only 'left wing bias' if
they are on the BBC?... :-)

The sad thing is that the 20s and 30s showed quite clearly that cutting
simply leads into a 'begger my neighbour' downward spiral for all the
countries. Only a mix of Keynes and WWII (massive expenditure) broke that
spiral. But then many economists hate Galbraith as he writes so clearly
about a topic they love to obfuscate. ;-

The reality is that we were on our way to reducing the debts anyway
*without* all the extra cuts. But the more we cut now, the more we disable
our ability to develop our way out of the problems. Quite funny when just a
day or two of Tory Plan C claiming "the books are worse than we thought!" a
official and independent examination showed "no, they weren't". The result
was, predictably, government bluster. :-)

Still, at least they have Murdoch in their pocket... or do I mean that the
other way around? Either way, we'll all be told what to believe. And the
city and bankers win whatever as they just bet on the outcomes their Tory
Plan C pals will deliver for them.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 11:39:14 +0100, Peter Duncanson
wrote:

State schools, primary and secondary, are funded on an annual basis.
They are not expected to have massive investments. They will sometimes
raise money from the parents of pupils but not usually from former
pupils.

In fact state schools, in a lot of cases, are not permitted to 'save
up' for large projects since underspend in any year is liable to be
'clawed back' by the local authority.

They funding mechanisms are totally different between the public and
private sectors.

Indeed.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 11:56:29 +0100, Petert
wrote:

There is no publicity for any councillor when money is spent on
repairing windows/roofs/boilers/electrical wiring and I suggest that
is the problem

I would have though differently since many of the people benefiting
from any repairs (i.e. parents) would also be eligible to vote for the
said councillor.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.